Free English Language Essays - Bilingualism and Intelligence: The Link of Negativity
Introduction
In her article about bilingualism in the children of immigrants, Tanya Golash-Boza points out, "from the founding of the country until well into the twentieth century, school officials in the United States enforced a strict English-only policy" (2005). This meant that children were often not allowed to communicate in their native tongues to each other. This held for the classroom as well was for the playground. Thus, children who spoke a language other than English were given the very clear message that speaking their own language must somehow be wrong. The fact that they were forbidden to express themselves freely during their leisure or recreational time served to underscore this message.
This is one of many examples of the negative associations that often come hand in hand with bilingualism. Some of the associations, like this one, are evident and out in the open. Others, however, are more insidious. As Golash-Boza put it, "the implication is that although we purport to celebrate multiculturalism, it appears that there continue to be disadvantages associated with nonconformity to Anglo culture" (2005). This "nonconformity to Anglo culture"—or bilingualism—is often portrayed negatively and often linked with traits such as lower intelligence. This paper will examine bilingualism within this context. First, it will explore the research that has been done over the years to trace the sense of discrimination that has been a part of the bicultural experience. Then it will analyze the discrimination in order to not only understand, but offer ways to overcome, this obstacle in multicultural communication that is deleterious to all of society.
Discrimination in Cognitive Development Research
Cognitive development is defined as the series of transitions that take place in a child's cognitive abilities and processes. Cognitive performance in children has to do with the development stages of those children. According to Piaget, one of the integral components of cognitive development is classification (Inhelder & Piaget, 1959). In the infancy stage, children begin noticing similarities and differences in the world around them. Soon they are able to form graphic collections. Eventually they are able to sort things by using a single characteristic, such as color, and as they continue to develop, they are able to classify objects in increasingly complex ways. This is known as hierarchical categorization.
Hierarchical categorization in children is a topic that has been extensively studied. It is generally thought that along with the ability to categorize in hierarchical ways, children develop language skills, and that the two are closely linked. Once language begins to play a part in the research, it naturally follows that the "language" in question be defined. The assumption is often that there is only one language involved, but this is often not the case when bilingual children are involved. The inclusion of children who speak more than one language might be seen, in a best-case scenario, as a learning tool for researchers, who might view it as a key into language acquisition processes in general. At the very least, one might expect researchers to treat and to assess bilingual children fairly—that is, the same way they treat and assess monolingual children. However, more often than not, there is a sense of negativity attached to bilingualism.
Takakuwa asserts that there has been a negative connection between bilingualism and cognitive development for many years—perhaps as far back as the nineteenth century, but that this began to change in the 1960s (Takakuwa 2000). "Bilingualism was said to hamper children's development of intelligence and to lead children to psychological confusion," he writes. He cites the studies of Laurie (1890), Saer (1923), and Smith (1923) to support this. According to these studies, the scores of bilingual children were consistently lower on verbal intelligence than the scores of monolingual children. However, in the area of nonverbal intelligence, each group of children scored the same. Despite the results of the nonverbal portion of the testing, the conclusions that were drawn overwhelmingly stated that bilingualism has a harmful influence on children.
Landmark Study: Peal and Lambert
In the 1960s, the tide began to turn. Views towards bilingualism and its effect on intelligence began to undergo a change. According to Takakuwa, this was primarily due to a study that was conducted in 1962 by Peal and Lambert This study was considered a landmark in bilingual research. According to Takakuwa, "Peal and Lambert's (1962) study is often considered to be a turning point in how bilingualism is viewed in the sense that, after their study, bilingualism was seen as having a cognitive advantage" (2000). In fact, in much of the literature, even in contemporary studies of bilingualism, the ground-breaking efforts and findings of Peal and Lambert are mentioned. However, although they are considered by some to be a turning point in the evolution of attitudes towards bilingualism, later research will show that this shift was short-lived.
In the study itself, the researchers tested French Canadian children at ten years of age, and results of assessments done with bilingual children were compared with the assessments of monolingual children within the same age bracket. The findings were surprising: the bilingual children completed the testing with higher scores than the monolingual children did. To many, this seemed to suggest that bilingualism might actually have some beneficial effects on a child's cognitive development. The researchers themselves asserted that it was possible that bilingual children have "greater mental flexibility" than their monolingual counterparts (Peal & Lambert 1962).
Reinforcement: the Work of Ianco-Worrall and Others
Peal and Lambert's study was not the only one to elicit unexpected findings in the assessments of bilingual children and their monolingual counterparts Ianco-Worrall's research also resulted in some surprising findings, concluding that children who were bilingual had a better aptitude for recognizing semantic relationships between different words (1972). Additionally, in 1985, Diaz and Padilla conducted research that demonstrated that bilingual children were better at classifying than their monolingual counterparts.
The Work of Cummins
The research done by Cummins in the late 1970s suggested that the process here was much more complex than it originally seemed. Cummins developed what he called a "threshold level of competence" (1986). His theory was that children who are bilingual must reach a certain level of threshold competence before they are able to continue in their cognitive development. Higher thresholds of bilingual competence would be required for this to happen.
However, the possibility that bilingual children might actually have an edge over monolingual children of the same age seems difficult for many to accept. It is as though people do not want to acknowledge that bilingualism may in fact give children a cognitive advantage. Takakuwa goes on to point out that even with the evidence clearly proving that bilingual children have increased abilities and skills, the prevailing theories tend to disregard this: "More recent research on bilingualism has shown that there is an opposing view that bilingualism has a positive effect on children's cognitive development" (Takakuwa 2000). He cites the work of Bialystok (1988), Day and Shapson (1996) and Home (1987) to support this.
Takakuwa thoroughly analyzes the research and the conclusions that were drawn in his well-researched article. His first point of contention regards methodology. He discusses that there were methodological controls in place. These controls included socioeconomic status, gender, and age group. However, Takakuwa does not believe that this is sufficient, since "selection according these criteria does not guarantee that the variables of children's families and other background factors such as student motivation and parental attitude are controlled" (2000).
Takakuwa's next argument is one of defining terms. He asserts that there are such a wide variety of definitions for the concept of "intelligence." He also claims that tools for measuring intelligence are inconsistent. I.Q. is one way of measuring intelligence, but even this is a matter of dispute. Therefore, if intelligence cannot be reliably or accurately measured to the satisfaction of all researchers, the data loses much of its impact. The term "cognitive development" is also one that has a wide number of definitions. According to Takakuwa, "cognitive development" may mean one thing in one study, and something completely different in another. If the ways in which cognitive development cannot be relied upon either, one may wonder about the validity of any of the conclusions that are drawn from this research.
Differences and Discrimination
The way we act, the way we think, the way we reason: all of these activities are performed within the framework of the culture in which we live. We must recognize this in order to understand that there are other ways of behaving in the world, and that our way is not necessarily the only way—or the right way. As Chamberlain explains
"Without the ability to see that our behaviors and thinking patterns are culturally bound, we will always have the perspective that our way of thinking and doing is the right way, or the norm, and the different behaviors of others will be viewed as deviant" (2005).
This near-sightedness, or inability to see past one's own existence, is a major cause of the breakdown in communication between and among cultures. Ignorance leads to a fear of things not known. Therefore, an unknown, or "foreign" language, may be likely to pose a threat to those who are not conversant in it. In addition, those who speak this strange language also become objects of suspicion. This hostility happens in all kinds of places and at all levels of society. It also happens frequently in the places where it can do the most damage, such as in educational settings. Schools are where children gather to learn from trusted elders how to proceed in life. If negative attitudes are projected by these respected and revered authority figures, it affects all children, monolingual and bilingual alike. Unfortunately, this does happen, even in a society that supposedly celebrates multiculturalism. Chamberlain has noted that "cultural differences between educators and culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students can have negative effects on the education of CLD learners" (2005).
The "Hidden Curriculum"
When educators and authority figures in the school system bring these attitudes and ingrained beliefs with them, there is every chance that it will seep into the workplace and affect those around them. They develop expectations for all students, regardless of cultural backgrounds—yet do not clearly communicate these expectations. Often, these expectations are so deeply ingrained that those who have them may be unaware of it themselves. Yet, these attitudes come across with a negativity that can range from subtle to outright. This is what Chamberlain refers to as the "Hidden Curriculum," hidden because they are "not clearly articulated or posted for all to see" (2005).
This means that bilingual students may begin their education at a disadvantage because they do not know what the expectations are, since they are not made known. What these students do come to know—quickly and intuitively—is the feeling that they are somehow lacking, that their own language is inferior, that they are somehow judged and condemned simply for having this additional knowledge.
Conclusion
In earlier times, children who spoke a language other than English were given the very clear message that speaking their own language must somehow be wrong. The fact that they were forbidden to express themselves freely during their leisure or recreational time served to underscore this message. Are things any different these days?
The opinion of this writer is that they are not: the discrimination is, perhaps, more subtle, but it is still very much present. The fact that it is subtle makes it all the more insidious. Change will come through education and increased self-awareness on the part of educators in the school systems, and on the part of individual members of society as a whole. If, as Golash-Boza put it, "we purport to celebrate multiculturalism," the disadvantages of "nonconformity" will have to be reassessed and seen as advantages that will enrich education, not detract from it.
There is now plenty of reliable research and literature available to prove what has been placed in doubt by the insidiousness of discrimination. The longitudinal study done by Fantini is one such work. From birth to ten, the child's contact to words in both Spanish and English were recorded by this father/researcher, and the results provide a compelling sociolinguistic analysis of the complexity of language acquisition. In addition, there are books, such as that by Arnberg, that address the issues unique to the bilingual child. These issues are more along the lines of how to deal with the giftedness of bilingualism than they are about the negative aspects—a sure sign that the tides are turning once again, and for the betterment of all.
Arnberg, L. (1987). Raising children bilingually: The pre-school years. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Chamberlain, Steven P. (2005). Recognizing and responding to cultural differences in the education of culturally and linguistically diverse learners. Intervention in School & Clinic, March 2005 v40 i4:195–212.
Cofresi, N., & Gorman, A. (2004).Testing and assessment issues with Spanish-English bilingual Latinos. Journal of Counseling and Development. Winter 2004 v82 i1: 99–107.
Cummins, J. (1986). Language proficiency and academic achievement. In J. Cummins & M. Swain (Eds.), Bilingualism in education (pp. 138-162). New York: Longman.
Fantini, A. (1985). Language Acquisition of a bilingual child: A sociolinguistic perspective. San Diego: College Hill Press.
Golash-Boza, Tanya. (2005). Assessing the advantages of bilingualism for the children of immigrants. International Migration Review, Fall 2005 v39 i3:721–753.
Ianco-Worrall, A. D. (1972). Bilingualism and cognitive development. Child Development, 43, 1390-1400.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1964). The early growth of logic in the child: Classification and seriation. (E. A. Lunzer & D. Papert, Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1959).
Peal, E., & Lambert, W. E. (1962). The relation of bilingualism to intelligence. Psychological Monographs, 76, 1-23.
Takakuwa, M. (2000). What's wrong with the concept of cognitive development in studies of bilingualism? Bilingual Review, Sept-Dec 2000 v25 i3:225–238.
