cummins 1981 age on arrival and immigrant second language learning in canada

Age on Arrival and ImmigrantSecond Language Learning in

Canada: A Reassessment1

JIM CUMMINSThe Ontario Institute for Studies in Education

1. INTRODUCTION

The popular notion that younger children are better second language (L2)learners than older children, or as expressed by Penfield and Roberts (1959),that there is an optimal prepubertal age for L2 learning, has often beensupported by contrasting the native-like fluency of young immigrant L2 lear-ners with the obvious non-native L2 proficiency of many adult immigrants. Inthe present paper this popular notion is challenged on the grounds that'language proficiency' is not a unitary construct; specifically, some aspects oflanguage proficiency, such as reading skills, are strongly related to cognitiveand academic development, whereas others involving such basic interpersonalcommunicative skills as oral fluency and phonology, are less related to cogni-tive and academic development. Because of older children's greater cognitivematurity, we would expect them to display an advantage over younger chil-dren in acquiring those aspects of L2 which are strongly related to cognitiveand academic skills. However, no advantage would necessarily be predictedfor older learners in acquiring aspects of L2 which are unrelated to cognitivematurity. First the recent literature on this issue will be reviewed and thendata from one of the lesser-known studies, that of Ramsey and Wright (1974),will be reanalysed in the light of these hypotheses.

j

2. RECENT STUDIES ON AGE AND L2 LEARNING

Studies relating age to second language (L2) learning have consistentlyshown a clear advantage for older learners in mastery of L2 syntax andmorphology as well as in the literacy-related L2 skills (e.g., vocabulary, read-ing comprehension) measured by conventional standardized tests (Appel,1979; Burstall, Jamieson, Cohen and Hargreaves, 1974; Ekstrand, 1977;Ervin-Tripp, 1974; Fathman, 1975; Genesee, 1979, Skutnabb-Kangas &Toukomaa, 1976; Snow and Hoefnagel-Hohle, 1978).

The findings are less clear in aspects of L2 proficiency directly related tointerpersonal communicative skills, such as oral fluency, phonology and list-ening comprehension (Asher & Garcia, 1969; Asher & Price, 1967; Ekstrand,1977; Fathman, 1975, Oyama, 1976, 1978; Seliger, Krashen & Ladefoged,1975; Snow & Hoefnagel-Hohle, 1978; Walburg, Hase & Pinzur Rasher,1978). For example, Oyama (1976, 1978) reported an advantage for youngerimmigrant learners (6-10 years old on arrival) on both productive phonology

Applied Linguistics, Vol. 11, No. 2

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C

entre on September 13, 2012

http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/

JIM CUMMINS 133

and listening comprehension tests whereas Snow and Hoefnagel-Hohle (1978)found that older learners performed better on measures of these skills.Ekstrand (1977) reports that oral production was the only variable on whicholder immigrant learners did not perform significantly better than youngerlearners.

Krashen, Long and Scarcella (1979) suggest that the apparent inconsisten-cies can be resolved by distinguishing rate of L2 acquisition from level ofultimate attainment. Specifically, 'adults and older children in general initiallyacquire the second language faster than young children (older-is-better forrate of acquisition), but child second language acquirers will usually be super-ior in terms of ultimate attainment (younger-is-better in the long -run)'(p. 574). Genesee (1978) similarly concludes that older children and adults aremore efficient L2 learners but the greater amount of time available to youngerlearners may give them an advantage in the long run.

The distinction made by both Krashen et al. (1979) and Genesee (1978)between rate of L2 acquisition and level of ultimate attainment is useful inclarifying the research findings. However, one is struck by the fact that it isonly on measures of interpersonal communicative skills that older learnersfailed to demonstrate a consistent advantage over younger learners. Thesemeasures generally involved ratings and self-reports of pronunciation, fluencyor general L2 proficiency. In one study (Oyama, 1978) a listening comprehen-sion test was used to assess L2 proficiency.

This trend in the research findings suggests that measures of syntax,morphology, and literacy-related skills assess a different dimension of langu-age proficiency from measures of basic interpersonal communicative skills. Inparticular, the fact that older learners are most obviously distinguished fromyounger learners by their greater cognitive maturity implies that measures ofsyntax, morphology and literacy-related skills assess a cognitive dimension oflanguage proficiency, while measures of basic interpersonal communicativeskills may be less sensitive to cognitive differences between individuals.

This position is supported by a large body of research showing high cor-relations between general intellectual abilities and many measures of languageproficiency (e.g., oral and written cloze, dictation, literacy skills; see Oiler,1979, for a review). Verbal intellectual abilities tend to show higher correla-tions with these language proficiency measures than do non-verbal abilities.For example, Strang (1945) reported correlations of .41-.46 between non-verbalabilities and reading and of .8O-.84 between verbal abilities and reading.However, in a first language context it is clear that not all aspects of languageproficiency are related to intellectual abilities. For example, with the exceptionof severely retarded or perceptually impaired individuals, everybody acquirescommand of LI phonology and basic syntax (Chomskian competence) regard-less of IQ or academic aptitude. Thus, in everyday situations there is littleapparent difference between academically gifted and less bright children interms of oral fluency, phonology or command of basic grammatical structures.However, there are large differences in ability to manipulate language inacademic and formal test situations.

A similar distinction between cognitive/academic language proficiency(CALP) and basic interpersonal communicative skills is apparent in severalstudies of L2 acquisition. Genesee (1976), for example, tested anglophone

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


134 IMMIGRANT SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

students in grades 4, 7 and 11 in French immersion and 'core' French pro-grams in Montreal on a battery of French language tests. He reported thatalthough IQ was strongly related to the development of academic Frenchlanguage skills (reading, grammar, vocabulary, etc.), it was, with one excep-tion, unrelated to ratings of French oral productive skills at any grade level.The exception was pronunciation at the grade 4 level which was significantlyrelated to IQ. Listening comprehension (measured by a standardized test) wassignificantly related to IQ only at the grade 7 level.

Ekstrand's (1977) data from an immigrant language learning situation showa similar trend: IQ (as measured by the PMA R Factor) correlated .41-.46with reading comprehension, dictation and free writing and .22-.27 with list-ening comprehension, free oral production, and pronunciation. The distinc-tion between CALP and interpersonal communicative skills is also consistentwith the findings of Skutnabb-Kangas and Toukomaa (1976) that althoughparents, teachers and the children themselves considered Finnish immigrantchildren's Swedish to be quite fluent, tests in Swedish which required cogni-tive operations to be carried out showed that this surface fluency was notreflected in the cognitive/academic aspects of Swedish proficiency.

In summary, this analysis suggests that older L2 learners acquire L2 syntax,morphology, and literacy skills more rapidly than younger learners becausethese aspects of language proficiency are closely related to cognitive skills.The inconsistent findings in relation to interpersonal communicative skillsmay reflect several factors: first, as suggested by Kxashen et al. (1979), severalstudies showing advantages for younger learners did not distinguish rate ofacquisition from ultimate level of attainment; second, measures of these skillsmay assess cognitive skills to varying degrees. For example, ratings or self-reports are less likely to assess cognitive skills than are formal tests of listen-ing comprehension or oral production. In any formal test situation,cognitively-based test-taking skills are likely to exert some influence.

3. THE RAMSEY AND WRIGHT STUDY

A potential problem with the preceding interpretation of the researchfindings lies in the results of the Ramsey and Wright (1974, also Wright andRamsey, 1970) study of over 1,200 immigrant students in the Toronto schoolsystem who were learning English as a second language (ESL). The data weregathered as part of a survey involving 25% of the Toronto system's grade 5, 7and 9 classrooms. Ramsey and Wright (1974) reported that students whoarrived in Canada at age 6 to 7 or younger suffered no academic handicap onmeasures of English language skills in relation to grade norms for the Tor-onto System, but for those who arrived at older ages there was a clear negativerelationship between age on arrival (AOA) and performance on standardizedmeasures of English proficiency. This negative relationship appears to beinconsistent with other studies which used criterion measures of L2 CALP.

The present reanalysis of these data was undertaken because the originalanalysis did not investigate the possible effects of length of residence (LOR) inCanada. Also, the original research reports present data only in terms ofstandard scores. In other words, the comparison between older and youngerL2 learners is based on the rapidity with which students approached grade

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 135

norms in English proficiency. Thus, the Ramsey and Wright findings do notnecessarily contradict those of other studies since most of the other studieshave compared older and younger learners in terms of absolute (raw) scores.It is possible that older learners may learn more L2 in absolute terms but stillbe further behind grade norms in comparison to younger learners. Based onthe data presented in Wright and Ramsey (1970) and Ramsey and Wright(1972) it is possible to compare the progress of older and younger learners interms of both standard and absolute scores with LOR controlled.

4. MEASURES OF ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

The language tests administered in the Toronto Board of Education surveyon which the Ramsey and Wright study is based, consisted of a group-administered Picture Vocabulary Test (PVT) derived from the Ammons Pic-ture Vocabulary Test (see Ramsey and Wright, 1972) and a six part test ofEnglish Competence (ECT) developed by the Board for the survey. "Differentprocedures were employed in constructing the ECT in comparison to thePVT and most other norm-referenced standardized tests (see Wright, 1969).The ECT was an experimental test developed by the Toronto Board with theaim of assessing basic 'competence' in a Chomskian sense. Thus, items weredesigned such that native speakers should obtain a near-perfect score.The PVT, on the other hand, was intended to distribute native speakersaccording to a normal curve.

The ECT was designed in this way in an attempt to solve some of theproblems of testing English as a second language. Vocabulary used in the testwas limited to the most frequently used words and it was intended thatperformance on the ECT would be uncorrelated with intelligence. However,as Wright (1969) acknowledges 'the ECT is far from perfection' (p. 32). Exper-ience with the tests showed that they 'were tapping only some aspects ofperformance and were thus not even close to sampling competence' (Wright,1969, p. 4). The experimental nature of the ECT should be borne in mindwhen interpreting the present results. However, the fact that there is relativelylittle variation among native speakers in performance on the ECT (seeTable 1) makes it of interest to discover how long it takes immigrant studentsto attain this level of native-like proficiency.

4.1. The PVT. (Picture Vocabulary Test)Detailed information on the PVT is presented in Ramsey and Wright

(1972). The students were required to associate a spoken word with one offour pictures. There were 50 items in the test. Scores were distributed from 1to 50 with a mean score for the total sample of 32.49 and a standard deviation(SD) of 6.82. In addition, there was a consistent increase in mean score acrossgrades 5, 7 and 9 accompanied by a fairly stable variance. Test-retest reliabi-lity based on a one-week interval with 37 Grade 7 students produced aPearsonian r of .89.

4.2. The ECT. (English Competence Test)The ECT consisted of six parts. Parts I to III were designed to test aspects

of auditory perception and were prerecorded on tape. Parts IV to VI tested

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



vocabulary and idiom comprehension and were in printed form. An attemptwas made to limit the vocabulary in all parts of the test to the first 500 wordsin the Lorge-Thorndike Count. Detailed information on the ECT is availablein Wright (1969).

Part I: Sound Discrimination. This subtest consisted of 45 items involvingminimal pairs, i.e., words that sound alike except for one phonemic difference,e.g., pit:bit. The two stimulus words were said with an interval of approxi-mately one second between them and students had to mark on the answersheet whether the two words were the same or different. For example:

Example 1: coat — coat S Q D p

Part II: Sound Recognition. First one word was presented and approxi-mately two seconds later two more words were presented one of which wasthe same as the first word. The students' task was to indicate which of thelatter two words was the same as the first. For example:

Example 1: poor — power poor A D

The fact that the response word(s) were written on the answer sheets inParts I and II, raises the question of whether reading skills might have beenassessed in addition to auditory skills in these subtests.

Part III: Intonation. This subtest was designed to test whether studentscould discriminate differences in intonation on hearing a given utterance.Students first heard an utterance after which they head two more utteranceswhich gave two possible interpretations of the first utterance. These twoalternatives were presented on paper as well as on tape. The correct choicewas to be indicated by darkening the box adjacent to A or B. For example:

I want to go home. A • Home is where B • It's I who wantI want to go. to go home, not

him.

The rationale for presenting the choices on paper in addition to on the tapewas to give the students as many cues as possible to minimize difficulty inunderstanding the choices. However, the disadvantage of this procedure isthat good readers were likely to have an advantage over poor readers andnon-readers. The reading and vocabulary component of this test is likely to beespecially significant among the immigrant population. In addition to thereading component, the test is also likely to assess verbal comprehension andmemory skills since students need to comprehend and retain the meaning ofthe first utterance while the secondary utterances are being processed. Thecomplexity of this task suggests that among the immigrant group it may beprimarily assessing CALP rather than intonation.

Part IV: Vocabulary (Contentives). In this subtest students had to choosethe item from column B which best described each of the items in column A.Students had five minutes to do the twelve items.

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 137

A1. a musical sound2. send the football to another player3. to watch4. trade, work or occupation5. to give up one's turn in a game of cards6. not at the centre7. unit of an army8. two spaceships coming together9. to be moved to a higher grade

10. two people coming face to face11. buying and selling12. a short letter

A.B.C.D.E.F.

B

sidepasscompanynotebusinessmeeting

Part V: Vocabulary (Functors). Students were required to choose the itemfrom column B which was appropriate for each of the items in column A. Thetime limit was three minutes.

A B1. I don't agree you.2. Take the book the torn pages.3. He is board ship.4. She talks a lot nonsense.5. second thoughts, I stayed home. A. on6. He led her her arm. B. by7. He went no hat on. C. with8. In the morning, birds are up six. D. of9. He is the Member Parliament.

10. I was down a fever.11. Switch the lights.12. He is free pain.

Part VI: Idioms. In this ten item subtest students were required to chooseone of four alternative meanings for each idiom.

Example — What is the meaning of.. . ?

1. I haven't seen him for ages.A. I haven't seen him for some time.B. I haven't seen him since he was four.C. I haven't seen him for a few hours.D. I haven't seen him since the meeting at which he spoke for ages.

The means of the PVT and ECT subtests for the ESL immigrant and totalsamples are presented in Table 1. It should be noted that the total sampleincludes the ESL immigrant sample.

5. DESIGN AND REANALYSIS

Of the total sample of 5,386 grade 5, 7 and 9 students, 1,210 were bornoutside Canada and had learned English as a second language. This immi-grant sample was broken down by Wright and Ramsey (1970) according to

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



Table 1

Means of Language

1

Test

PVT (max: 50)ECT I (Sound

Discrimination,max: 45)

ECT II (Sound 'Recognition,max: 45)

ECT III(Intonation,max: 24)

ECT IV(Contentives,max: 12)

ECT V (Functors,max: 12)

ECT VI (Idioms,max: 10)

: Proficiency Measuresand Total

Grade 5

ESLmmigrant

Mean*

24.8

38.2

37.6

15.8

7.4

7.9

3.6

Total

Mean

27.9

40.2

40.0

16.6

8.5

9.8

4.7

SD

5.3

4.4

5.5

2.8

2.3

2.3

2.0

for Grades 5,Sample (N =

7 and5,386)

Grade 7

ESLImmigrant

Mean

30.4

40.6

41.2

18.5

9.7

10.3

5.5

9, ESL

Total

Mean

32.8

41.6

41.8

19.0

10.4

11.1

6.7

SD

5.1

2.6

2.8

2.6

1.7

1.4

1.9

. Immigrant (N =

Grade 9

ESLImmigrant

Mean

33.7

40.6

41.3

19.2

10.4

10.5

65

1,210)

Total

Mean

37.0

41.5

42.0

19.8

11.1

11.4

7.8

SD

6.2

19

2.9

2.1

1.4

1.3

1.8

* SD's for the ESL Immigrant subgroup were not available.

Table 2

Age on Arrival and Length of Residence of Non-English Speaking Immigrant Sample (N = 1210)(Adapted from Wright and Ramsey, 1970, Tables 2, 3, and 4)

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.

AOA

0-12-34-56-78-9

10-1112-1314-1516-18

A.N

318793584442726607

Grade 9LOR

15131197531

B.N

3159582836672802

Grade 7LOR

131197531

C.N

55624247969405

Grade 5LOR

1197531

MeanLOR

12.61 U9.57.24.42.52.41.0

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 139

AOA (see Table 2). No information was gathered on LOR in the Torontosurvey. However, given the grade level of the student and the AOA, it ispossible to approximate LOR. For example, if we assume that the average ageof grade 5 students is 11 years, then those who arrived in Canada at AOA 0-1have an LOR of approximately 11 years; those who arrived at AOA 2-3 havean LOR of 9 years, etc. It is possible to work out the average LOR for eachAOA group by weighting the LOR by the N across grade levels. It is clearfrom Table 2 that LOR decreases linearly as AOA increases.

The data presented in Table 2 also show how LOR and AOA can bedisentangled. It can be seen, for example, that the groups in cells Cl, B2 andA3 have the same LOR (11 years) but different AOA. Data presented in graphform by Wright and Ramsey (1970) for the different AOA groups in grades 5,7 and 9 on the PVT and ECT subtests allow the standard scores of the groupswhich have the same LOR but different AOA to be compared (e.g., Cl, B2,A3; C2, B3, A4, etc.). These comparisons are presented in Figs. 1-7.

Standard scores are based on the deviation of absolute (raw) scores fromthe grade mean of the total sample. Thus, given the grade mean and grade SDand standard scores of the different groups it is possible to work out theabsolute scores. The grade means and SD's for the PVT are presented inRamsey and Wright (1972) and those for the ECT were obtained from therecords of the Research Department, Toronto Board of Education. Theprocedure can be illustrated by taking group C3 in Table 2 (LOR 7,AOA 4-5) as an example. The standard score of this group on the PVT is-.30; the grade 5 PVT SD is 5.31 and the mean is 27.85; therefore the PVTabsolute score is 26.3. The absolute PVT and ECT scores of the differentgroups are presented in Figs. 8-14.

Grade mean

Unit - 0 . 5normaldeviatesbelowgrademean ~ ' •"

- 1 . 5

-2 .0

LOR. 11 LOR.9

LOR.7

LOR 1

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15

AOA

Fig. 1. Age on arrival (AOA), length of residence (LOR) and picture vocabulary test(PVT) scores

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



LOR:9LOR 11

Grade mean

Unitnormaldeviatesbelowgrademean

0

- 0 . 5

-1.0

- 1 . 5

- 2 . 0


LOR.5

LOR 3

LOR 1

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15

AOA

Fig. 2. English Skills I

1 0u

-0 .5

- 1 . 0

-1 .5

- 2 . 0

LOR:,^__ y \

LOR-9 LOR 7 L 0 R 5 V > - i

• ^*

L0R.3

-

-

i i I i i

^

LOR 1

I i i

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15

AOA

Fig. 3. English Skills II

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 141

+ 0.5

Grade mean


0

- 0 . 5

- 1 . 0

- 1 . 5

-2 .0

LOR.9

I I

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 4. English Skills III

+ 0.5h

Grade mean


- 0 . 5 r-

-l.Or-

-1.5 h

-2 .0 r-

12-13 14-15

Fig. 5. English Skills IV

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



Grade mean 0

- 0 . 5


-1.0

- 1 . 5

-2 .0

- 2 . 5

LOR.3

LOR I .

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 6. English Skills V

Grade mean 0

Unitnormal - 0 . 5deviatesbelow

- 1 . 0

- 1 . 5

-2.0

-2.2

LOR 1

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9

AOA

10-11 12-13 14-15

Fig. 7. English Skills VI

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 143

40 -

35

Raw scores

30

25

20i

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15

AOA

Fig. 8. Age on arrival (AOA), length of residence (LOR) and PVT raw scores

42

41Raw scores

40

39

38

37

36

35

34

LOR: 11LOR:7 LOR.5

LOR:3

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 9. English Skills I

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



42

41Raw scores

40

39

38

37

36

35

34

33

20 -

19 -Raw scores

18

17

16

15

14

12

11Raw scores

10

9

8

7

6

LOR: 11

LOR:1

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 10. EngUsh Skills II

LOR: 11

i

LOR.9

i

LOR:7

i

/

LOR:5

t

/

LOR:3

1

/

LOR:1

i i I

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 11. EngUsh SkiUs III

LOR: 11LOR-9

LOR.-1

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 12 EngUsh SkiUs IV

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 145

Raw scores

Raw scores6

5

4

3

2

LOR: 11 LOR:9

I ILOR:1

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 13. English Skills V

LOR: 11 LOR:9 LOR:7

0-1 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 10-11 12-13 14-15AOA

Fig. 14. English SkiUs VI

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

6.1. Approaching Grade Norms as a Function of AOA and LORIt is clear from Figs. 1-7 that LOR has a substantial effect on the rate at

which immigrant students approach grade norms. This effect is evident on allseven measures of English skills up to about LOR 5, after which the curvetends to flatten out close to the grade mean. This effect of LOR is largelyindependent of AOA. For example, on the PVT the standard scores of the10-11 AOA group at LOR, 1, 3 and 5 are -1.25, -.95 and -.70 respectively(see Fig. 1). Possibly because of the distributions, the effects of LOR on ECTsubtest performance is not always linear. In other words, there are severalinstances where an AOA group which has spent less time in Canada performsbetter than one which has been in Canada longer. For example, on ECT IV(Fig. 5) at AOA 6-7 and 8-9 the LOR 5 group performs better than theLOR 7 group. This type of 'cross-over' effect is not surprising at higher LORvalues when scores are close to grade norms, since by this time LOR hasceased to have a major effect Cross-over effects are observed in only two out

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



of a possible 14 comparisons between LOR 1 and LOR 3 at AOA 10-11 and12-13 (ECT III, Fig. 4, and ECT VI, Fig. 7). Thus, in general, there is a clearoverall trend for LOR to exert a significant effect on English performance upto LOR 5.

By contrast, when LOR is controlled, AOA appears to have relatively littleeffect on the rapidity with which grade norms are approached. For example,in Fig. 1 (PVT) there is a linear decrease in PVT standard scores with increas-ing AOA on only one of the six comparisons (LOR = 5). The only apparentpattern is that on the PVT and on the ECT Vocabulary and Idiom com-prehension measures (Parts IV, V, VI) the AOA 6-7 group performs closer tograde norms than the AOA 8-9 group at both LOR 5 and 7. Thus, the AOA6-7 which Ramsey and Wright (1974) suggested might be a critical age onarrival does appear to have some importance in terms of progression towardsgrade norms. However, the negative relationship which they reported betweenAOA and performance after AOA 6 is clearly due primarily to LOR ratherthan to AOA.

6.2. 12 Acquisition as a Function of AOA and LOR.The data presented in Figs. 1-7 show that with the exception of the 8-9

AOA group (in comparison to the 6-7 AOA group) older learners makealmost as rapid progress towards grade norms as younger learners. Onewould expect, however, that in order to do this the older learners would havelearned more in absolute terms than the younger learners (compare, for exam-ple, the LI vocabulary of a 12 year old with that of a six year old). Thisexpectation is confirmed in Figs. 8-14 which present the absolute PVT andECT scores for the groups.

The pattern which emerges for the PVT is typical of that which emerges forECT III-VI and thus the findings for these tests can be discussed primarilywith reference to Fig. 8 (PVT). Two findings emerge very clearly from Fig. 8(as well as Figs. 11-14). First, within each LOR level there is a linear increasein absolute PVT scores with AOA; second, within each AOA level there is alinear increase in absolute PVT scores with LOR. It is also possible to comparethe rates at which students of different ages acquire vocabulary. For example,those who arrived at 14-15 acquire more English vocabulary (as measured bythe PVT) in one year than those who arrive at 4-5 acquire in 7 years (27.1 vs26.3). The AOA 14-15 group, however, is 1.6 unit normal deviates below thegrade mean compared to .30 for the AOA 4-5 group (see Fig. 1). The consist-ency of the finding of superior performance by older learners can be seen inthe fact that on the PVT and ECT III-VI tests, a younger group performsbetter than an older group on only one out of a possible 90 comparisons withLOR controlled (18 possible comparisons per test). This single occurrence ison ECT VI, LOR 1 where the 10-11 AOA group scores slightly higher thanthe 12-13 AOA group.

With the exception of ECT III (Intonation) all these tests were designed tomeasure aspects of English vocabulary skills. However, the 'Intonation'findings are not surprising in view of the likelihood that this test is measuringreading and/or verbal comprehension and memory skills. These findings areconsistent with the results of previous studies in showing that older L2 lear-ners, whose LI CALP is better developed, acquire L2 CALP more rapidly

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 147

than younger learners. The fact that the four ECT subtests which appear tomeasure CALP show an almost identical pattern of results to the PVT addsweight to this conclusion.

The pattern of findings for ECT I and II (Sound Discrimination andRecognition) is similar to that of the other measures as far as LOR 1 andLOR 3 are concerned. Older learners perform better than younger learners,and students in Canada for three years perform much better than those inCanada for only one year. However, unlike the other measures this patterndoes not continue at higher LOR levels where the effects of both AOA andLOR diminish considerably.

It is somewhat difficult to interpret the results for these two tests since theirvalidity as pure measures of auditory perception is open to question. Correla-tions between the different measures would have facilitated interpretation butunfortunately these were no longer available. However, the superior perfor-mance of older learners at LOR 1 and 3 suggests either that there is a cogni-tive component to these tests (deriving from the small reading aspect of thetests or from a general 'test-taking' ability dimension) or alternatively, thatolder learners have an advantage in rate of acquisition of auditory perceptualaspects of L2 in addition to cognitive aspects.

The pattern of findings in Figs. 8-14 raises the question of why AOAshould be related to performance at higher LOR levels. For example, whyshould the AOA 2-3 group consistently perform better than the AOA 0-1group? To attribute the difference to the greater cognitive maturity of L2learners who arrive at older ages seems far-fetched at younger AOA levels.The question can be resolved if we recall that within each LOR level studentswho are in grade 9 at the time of testing always form the oldest OAO group,those in grade 7 the middle AOA group and those in grade 5 the youngestgroup. Thus, at higher LOR levels (over LOR 5) when students are perform-ing close to the grade mean, the performance differences between AOAgroups probably reflect cognitive differences between grades 5, 7 and 9 stu-dents at the time of testing rather than the cognitive nature of the L2 acquisi-tion process. However, at lower LOR levels (LOR 1-5) when the L2acquisition process is still incomplete, the differences between AOA groups inL2 cognitive/academic performance reflect differences in thecognitive/academic skills which older and younger students have brought tothe task of acquiring L2.

Additional support for the hypothesis that performance on the PVT andECT III-VI tasks reflects cognitive developmental level comes from the factthat, within LOR levels, differences between grades 5 and 7 scores (low andmiddle AOA) tend to be greater than differences between grade 7 and 9 scores(middle and high AOA). This flattening out of the curves of L2 proficiencybetween ages 13 and 15 in comparison to between 11 and 13 reflects thesimilar decrease in rate of cognitive growth during the adolescent years.

CONCLUSIONS

The reanalysis of the Ramsey and Wright data is consistent with virtuallyall previous studies in showing that older learners acquire cognitive/academicL2 skills more rapidly than younger learners. Older learners also appeared to

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from



have an advantage in acquiring L2 sound discrimination and recognitionskills but these findings should be treated cautiously due to the questionablevalidity of the tests.

The finding that it takes at least five years, on the average, for immigrantchildren who arrive in the host country after the age of six to approach gradenorms in L2 CALP has important educational implications. In many schoolsystems ESL assistance is given to immigrant children only during their firsttwo years in the host country. The present data suggest that, from an educa-tional perspective, this figure is arbitrary and may not reflect the needs of ESLchildren.

A second implication is that psychological or educational assessment ofimmigrant children in L2 within their first five years in the host country islikely to seriously underestimate their potential academic abilities. In manyschool systems formal testing of immigrant students is not carried out duringthe first two years in the host country. Again, however, the figure of two yearsis arbitrary and does not reflect immigrant children's rate of L2 CALPacquisition.

Finally, it should be noted that the present findings are not necessarilygeneralizable outside the Canadian social context, and even within thatcontext may not hold for particular immigrant groups. A complex array ofsocial, educational, affective and cognitive factors determine L2 acquisition byimmigrant children and differences in these factors and their interactions willbe reflected in differences in patterns of L2 acquisition. This is illustrated bythe fact that Skutnabb-Kangas and Toukomaa (1976) report that Finnishimmigrant children who were either born in Sweden or who arrived beforethe age of 8 reached a plateau in Swedish language proficiency considerablybelow Swedish norms. These findings differ markedly from those in the pre-sent study where children who arrived before the age of six tended to performat grade norms in L2 proficiency.

(Received June 1980)NOTES

1 Preparation of this paper was made possible by a grant to the Ontario Institute for Studiesin Education by the Canadian Ethnic Studies Committee of the Multiculturalism Directorate fora Visiting Professorship in Third Language and Multiculturalism Studies.

I would like to thank Dr. E. N. Wnght of the Toronto Board of Education for his very helpfulsuggestions in relation to the secondary analysis of the data and for making available additionalinformation on the psychometric properties of the tests.

REFERENCES

AppeL R. 1979. The acquisition of Dutch by Turkish and Moroccan children in twodifferent school models'. Unpublished research report. Institute for DevelopmentalPsychology, Utrecht.

Asher. J. J. and Garcia, R. 1969. The optimal age to learn a foreign language'. ModernLanguage Journal, 53, 334-341.

Asher, J. and Price, B. 1967. The learning strategy of the total physical response: someage differences'. Child Development, 38, 1219-1227.

Burstall, C , Jamieson, M., Cohen, S. and Hargreaves, M. 1974. Primary French in theBalance. Slough: NFER.

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


JIM CUMMINS 149

Ekstrand, L. H. 1977. 'Social and individual frame factors in L2 learning: comparativeaspects'. In T. Skutnabb-Kangas (Ed.) Papers from the first Nordic conference onbilingualism. Helsingfors: Universitetet

Ervin-Tripp, S. 1974. 'Is second language learning like the first? TESOL Quarterly, 8,111-127.

Fathman, A. 1975. 'The relationship between age and second language productiveability'. Language Learning, 28, 245-253.

Genesee, F. 1978. 'Is there an optimal age for starting second language instruction?'McGill Journal of Education, 13, 145-154.

Genesee, F. 1979. 'A comparison of early and late immersion'. Unpublished manu-script, McGill University.

Krashen, S., Long, M. A. and Scarcella, R. 1979. 'Age, rate and eventual attainment insecond language acquisition'. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 573-582.

Oiler, J. W. 1979. Language tests at school: A pragmatic approach. New YorkLongman.

Oyama, S. 1976. 'A sensitive period for the acquisition of a non-native phonologicalsystem'. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 261-285.

Oyama, S. 1978. "The sensitive period and comprehension of speech', Working Paperson Billingham, no. 16, 1-18.

Penfield, W. and Roberts, L. 1959. Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Ramsey, C. A. and Wright, E. N. 1972. 'A group, English-language vocabulary know-ledge test derived from the Ammons full-range picture vocabulary test'. Psychologi-cal Reports, 31, 103-109.

Ramsey, C. A. and Wright, E. N. 1974. 'Age and second language learning'. TheJournal of Social Psychology, 94, 115-121.

Seliger, H. W., Krasher, S. D. and Ladefoged, P. 1975. 'Maturational constraints in theacquisition of second language accent'. Language Science, 36, 20-22.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. and Toukomaa, P. 1976. Teaching migrant children's mothertongue and learning the language of the host country in the context of the socio-cultural situation of the migrant family. Helsinki: The Finnish National Commissionfor UNESCO.

Snow, C. E. and Hoefnagel-Hohle, M. 1978. 'The critical period for language acquisi-tion: Evidence from second language learning'. Child Development, 49, 1114-1128.

Strang, R. 1945. 'Variability in reading scores on a given level cf intelligence testscores'. Journal of Educational Research, 38, 440-446.

Walburg, H., Base, K. and Pinzur Rasher, S. 1978. 'English acquisition as a diminish-ing function of experience rather than age'. TESOL Quarterly, 12, 427-437.

Wright, E. N. 1969. Testing some English language skills: Rationale, development,and description'. Research report # 62, Toronto Board of Education.

Wright, E. N. and Ramsey, C. 1970. 'Students of non-Canadian origin: Age on arrival,academic achievement and ability'. Research report #88, Toronto Board ofEducation.

at University of B

ath Library &

Learning C



ownloaded from


cummins 1981 age on arrival and immigrant second language learning in canada

Documents