The Language Proficiency of Early and Late Learners in EFL Education

Introduction

The paper to be discussed in this commentary is entitled 'From early starters to late finishers? A longitudinal study of early foreign language learning in school', published in Vol. 67 of A Journal of Research in Language Studies in 2017. It (hereafter 'the paper') is a longitudinal one on early-stage foreign language learning in the school setting. It investigates English as a foreign language (EFL) instruction based on age, dividing students into early stater (ES) and late starter (LS) and observing the ongoing effects of foreign language learning. Age is an important concept within the discipline, and the textbook (Mahootian, 2020, p.14) (hereafter 'the textbook') has made a clear distinction between early bilingualism and late bilingualism in the broad sense. The former generally refers to the exposure to a foreign language at the age of about five or six years that coincides with LS (6-7 years old). However, the paper examines foreign language acquisition in a school setting that is more in line with the latter definition. Both ES and LS from late bilingualism according to the textbook. The paper finds some results worth noting, and suggests that a certain degree of advantage in LS seems to contradict the long-standing belief of earlier language learning is better. This provides concrete explanations for the possible advantages of late bilingualism (Mahootian, 2020, p.14) mentioned in the textbook.

The specific questions to be addressed in this commentary are the general research and policy on foreign language acquisition and age, and what is the differences between ES and LS presented in the paper and how to explain the cognitive advantages of late bilingualism referred by the paper's author?

Literature Review about early FL education

1. Study on Early Language Learning

The paper argues that language learners who start early are considered to have a significant advantage for several years. In other words, the textbook points Today is in an "era of positive bilingualism" (Macher, 2017, p.65). The widely accepted explanation is that their early start behavior promotes the quality and efficiency of language learning, while this temporal lead positively affects other factors of language learning such as intercultural competence. One understanding is that the amount of language input and frequency of practice is critical to language learning. Ahead of time, increased learning opportunities lead to better language acquisition. However, DeKeyser (2020) suggested that there are other factors affecting the effect of this reinforcement. Also, some linguists believe in the existence of "critical or sensitive periods" for language learning. At this time, higher-quality language knowledge is acquired more lastingly （DeKeyser and Larson-Hall, 2005). This change is especially effective for phonetics and grammar. , Considering this concept has attracted some attention, my suggestion for the textbook is that complement this conjecture when discussing the age of foreign language education.

The literature review of the paper demonstrates that linguists who are interested in whether early learners have an advantage over late learners in foreign language learning have conducted extensive research on this subject matter, but the results are varied and fail to offer a definitive answer to the preceding argument. Like that, the two textbooks did not give a direct answer to who has the advantage of early and late learners in FL education. The advantages of multiple periods are acknowledged discretely using some empirical experiments. They inspire subsequent related research statements. The possible advantages of starting foreign language learning early are manifold, not only in terms of language ability but also in terms of confidence and other academic achievements. As early as 1979, the tendency of early foreign language learners to acquire stronger language skills was already supported by Krashen, Long, and Scarcella (1979). Specific advantages have been carefully analyzed by subsequent studies, for example, with regard to improved oral proficiency due to increased confidence in using the target language (Harley, 1986), and concerning morphology and syntax (Harley and Wang, 1997). However, a considerable number of studies on the age of foreign language acquisition argue against this view to some extent. They observe that the advantage of early learners disappears after a certain period. An experiment on the effects of early-stage French lessons in England and Wales examined the language ability of three groups of students and concluded that the advantage of the early group did not retain by the age of 16, except in the domain of listening (Burstall, Jamieson, Cohen and Hargreaves, 1974). Similarly, a study involving 1000 students with English as a foreign language found that after two years of English instruction, the gap between late starters and early starters was narrowed, despite the fact that the gap was significant one year earlier (Genelot, 1997). Overall, there are conflicting findings regarding the age of onset of second language acquisition and language proficiency of bilinguals. Abilities are usually measured in these studies by focusing on a limited number of skills or tasks, thus making it difficult to draw uniform conclusions on the earlier onset.

2.Language policy on the younger age of English education

The relationship between politics and language is addressed in the textbook (Macher, 2017, p.78). The state sets policy goals by exercising its power, among which language planning is one of them. This paper is prompted by the German policy of bringing forward the age of learning English. There is a long-standing belief in the field of foreign language learning that "the earlier, the better" as pointed out by the paper. Practical evidence has been provided by an empirical survey in which respondents from 19 countries believed that learning a foreign language early in primary and preschool education is positive and promotes higher levels of language proficiency (Pufahl, Rhodes, and Christian, 2000). The impact of this belief can be recognized in the official government language policies of multiple countries and regions. Europe is a major region of concern for language research in early language learning, and the Council of the European Union has put forward the ambitious "2+1" proposal (2002), which expects Europeans to acquire the ability to speak more than two foreign languages (Chen, 2012). According to the findings of the Council of Europe's Executive Agency Education, Audiovisual and Culture (EAECC) in 2008, foreign language education in Europe from 1984 to 2007 showed a trend toward lowering the age of foreign language education (Chen, 2012). In the U.S., the Foreign Language Assistance Program (FLAP), part of the National Security Language Program, promotes the establishment of consistent foreign language education programs from kindergarten through college by providing a three-year subsidy (Chen, 2012). Drawing from these country profiles, the dominant trend in international foreign language education is toward younger age groups.

Experimental study 

1. Experimental findings

The main research objective of the paper is to investigate the sustainability of starting English as a Foreign Language (EFL) instruction in the early stage of grade 1 classes compared to grade 3 and its effect on the English language proficiency of students in grades 5 and 7. In addition, the study also investigated the individual differences (ID) of the learners. The experimental design is as follows. German participants were divided into two groups one cohort of early starters (ES; age 6-7 years) beginning EFL in the second half of the first school year (N=2498), and one of the late starters (LS: age 8-9 years) commencing EFL in Year 3 (N=2632). To assess language proficiency, the Receptive language proficiency was measured by the researcher.