Page 8 - ELG2210 Oct Issue 482

RESEARCH NEWS .

By Gillian Ragsdale
Factors such as immigrants’ first
language and general educational
background predict success on
second language test scores,
according to a study by Ann-
Kristin Gujord at the University
of Bergen in Norway.
Learning the host country’s
language not only supports
employment and social goals, but
is also increasingly a requirement
for citizenship. This study
collected test results (Norskprøve
2 scores from 2009 and 2010) from
over 10,000 immigrants to Norway
to find out which factors could
predict better – or worse – scores
on a test of Norwegian language
(writing, reading and listening, but
not including speaking).
The information collected PHOTO ANDY BARBOUR/PEXELS
when learners took their test
included years of prior education,
country of origin and first
language, knowledge of English,
hours of instruction in Norwegian,
years of residence in Norway,
general use of Norwegian, age Immigrant language testing
and gender.
It is well-documented that the
to second languages is steeper is not a level playing field
learning curve from some first
than others and this was one
of the factors Gujord wanted
to examine. This was made Many factors determine which learners will find it
somewhat complicated, however, easier to acquire a host country’s language
as there were 167 languages
among the learners – 105 of
which were spoken by less than often have components focusing Younger learners tended to example) who have very little, if
10 people. on different skills – and, in this score better and females had a any, previous formal education
To clarify the analysis, the case, only the written component small advantage over males. and who may not be literate in
languages were split into just two scores were analysed. Although The effect of residency in their first language (from the 2005
groups: Germanic (so related to Polish is a Slavic language, it Norway was only evident after Literacy Education and Second
Norwegian) and non-Germanic. uses a lightly modified Roman four years – at five years, resident Language Learning for Adults
Having a Germanic first language alphabet. Consequently, it does learners were 14% more likely forum these have been termed
proved a positive factor in the not seem realistic to equate the to pass the test. There was very LESLLA learners).
analysis, making learners 21% challenges of reading and writing little impact at one to two years Overall, this study highlights
more likely to pass all three parts Norwegian within the non- of residency. This may link to challenges facing today’s immigrants
of the test. This advantage was Germanic group. The possible the apparent lack of influence as countries increasingly require
second only to English proficiency, advantages for Polish speakers of the scores on general use of language proficiency scores to obtain
where moving from beginner to could have been examined, Norwegian. When indicating, for citizenship, as this disadvantages
advanced level improved the especially by including the example, whether they had social those with little formal education,
likelihood of passing Norwegian speaking test scores, where contact with Norwegians ‘never’, especially non-Europeans, many of
by 25%. having a Germanic vs non- ‘seldom’, ‘weekly’ or ‘daily’: 45% whom may be arriving as refugees.
Since the test scores used were Germanic first language might be responded ‘never’ or ‘seldom’. In these cases, there needs to more
from the written component, it expected to have greatest impact. Prior education of 10 years or appropriate ‘catch up’ language and
would be interesting to see the Countries of origin, also being more increased the probability general educational provision. But
impact of first language script, very diverse, were grouped into of passing by 12% but, curiously, we might also ask – should anyone
ie, Latin vs non-Latin. The non- two regions: Europe and outside increasing hours of instruction running for their life be asked to
Germanic group included the Europe. Coming from a European in Norwegian had a small but pass an exam in order to be given
four largest language groups, country was the next largest significant negative influence on sanctuary?
having more than 500 speakers: advantage, increasing the chance test scores. Gujord suggests that
Polish, Persian (ie, Farsi), Thai of passing by 17%. Gujold partly this may be due to the policy REFERENCE
and Arabic. attributes this to differences which gives more instruction to n Gujord, A-K, H (2022), ‘Who
Measuring typological distance, in quality of education, but those with less prior education. If succeeds and who fails? Exploring
ie, how different two languages the effect could be reframed so, it is likely that formal second the role of background variables in
are, is notoriously difficult and as Latin vs non-Latin script language instruction needs to be explaining the outcomes of L2 language
controversial. Typical lan- (predominantly Asian and better adapted to the needs of tests’. Language Testing, DOI:
guage tests, such as this one, African learners). adult learners (some refugees for 10.1177/02655322221100115
8 October 2022