Lecturer: Dr.

Rohianna
Joycelyn

Introduction: What is bilingual education

(BE)?
2. A Comparison Study Between Two Countries
(Singapore & Europe)
- How were the BE systems implemented?
- What are the issues highlighted in any
studies?
3. Conclusion
4. Questions
1.

Brisk (2005, p.8) defines BE as the use of two

languages as media of instruction
BE covers a variety of language educational
practices (C.Baker, 2006; Cummins, 2000;
Dicker, 2003; Lotherington, 2004)

C.Baker (2006) distinguishes strong and weak

forms of BE (also Lotherington, 2004) *next
slide

Introduction
In 1966 BE policy making EL as L1
BE in Singapore has unique features (Yip et al,
1990, p. 14-24)
EL is used as medium of instruction; other
languages like Malay, Tamil and Mandarin are
taught and learned as a language subject

After 26 years of implementation of BE, EL is

very much the language used for education,
law, admin, business and etc
EL progressively becoming the preferred
language of personal communications, social
interactions and cultural expressions (Loke,
1994)

Trilingual Education Programme in Luxembourg

(reported in Baetens Beardsmore & Lebrun,
1991):
Luxemburger: Mother tongue, national language
and first pri sch year
German: one of the languages of government
admin, Year 1 language subject and progressively
replaces Luxemburger as language education in
pri sch
French: language for social interaction and gov
admin, introduced as subject in grade 2 to prep
for language edu in sec sch. Progressively
replaces German in sec sch.

European Schools Multilingual Programme (in

Baetens Beardsmore, 1979, 1980; Baetens
Beardsome & Swain, 1985; Housen & Baetens
Beardsome, 1987; Baetens Beardsmore &
Kohls, 1988)
Students can choose to enroll into curriculum
in their dominant language and choose either
English, French or German as their L2
European children become competent in 3
languages they are educated in, also pick up
4/5th language from peers (positive attitudes
towards multilingualism)

3 main differences between Singapore BE and Luxembourg

and European Schools multilingual programmes

(B)
(A)
Pscholinguistic
perspective: Language
and Cognitive
development

Educational linguistic
perspective:
language/s of
education in bilingual
development and the
second language as a
language subject

(C)
Sociolinguistic and
socio-pschyological
perspectives:
environmental factors
and language attitudes

Europe: children are educated initially or totally

in their mother tongue/L1
Singapore: depends on home language (if its
EL as L1)
Psycholinguistic significance: Home-school
language transition (Swain, 1978) and the
potential cognitive and academic benefits or
disadvantages that transition may bring
(Cummins, 1979, 1987, 1991)

Ideally, childrens first sch lang should be home lang to

ensure home-sch transition else children may not be
able to benefit the development interdependence
between children L1 and L2 (Cummins, 1979, 1991)
there maybe threshold levels of linguistic competence
which a bilingual child must attain both in order to
avoid cognitive disadvantages and allow the potentially
beneficial aspects of bilingualism to influence his
cognitive and academic functioning (Cummins, 1987,
1991)
Canadian French Immersion Programme (Lambert,
1980; Genesse, 1981; Swain & Lapkin, 1982; Cummins
& Swain, 1986) showed that earlier the immersion is,
the more lingusitc, cognitive and academic advantages
the children will enjoy

Europe: children use all 3 chosen languages

in the learning of their content subjects
throughout their school years
Singapore: use only EL as medium of learning
of all content subjects, learn the other
language as a language subject only; not for
learning of content subjects or as language of
education

Impt to use lang. as a medium of learning

content subjects as they provide meaningful
contexts for lang., cognitive, and intellectual
development in that lang. and for internal
manipulation of thought and external
manifestation of inner thought (Vygotsky, 1962)
Content subjects provide rich context for
context-embedded and cognitively-demanding
thinking and communicative activities (Cummins,
1979, 1987, 1991) that are necessary for lang.
development

Europe
Success due to both curricular and extracurricular factors (Housen & Beatnes
Beardsmore, 1987; Baetens Beardsmore &
Kohl, 1988) and immediate pertinence
Baetens Beardsmore & Kohl, 1988)
Short-term payoffs: opportunities of using
the languages for social interactions
Long-term payoffs: good job prospects for
multilinguals

Singapore
BE system doesnt always produce effective and
competent bilinguals (Newman, 1988)
Due to socio-psychological factor involved with
social attitudes and perception Singaporean have
towards 4 languages (EL high value, others
low/no value)
Singaporeans identify themselves more on the
basis of nationality than of ethnicity (Chew,
1980, 1983; Ward & Hewstone, 1985)
Motivation: mastery of EL commands high social
status and respect from the community (cf.
Kwan-Terrys 1991, 1982-83 survey)

Singapore BE is compatible with Singapores

socio-political and socio-economical
rationalism and is different from enrichment
programme (i.e. Canadian Immersion
Programme) and maintenance programme
(i.e. European to maintain their ethnic
languages)
Singapore BE is more to a nurture/nurturing
programme, nurturing people according to
various abilities (i.e. linguistic and cognitive)