Advertisement

Assessment and Curriculum for Heritage Language Learners: Exploring Russian Data

  • Olga Kagan
  • Anna KudymaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Educational Linguistics book series (EDUL, volume 37)

Abstract

This study analyzes data from the questionnaires and online tests administered to 94 heritage speakers of Russian who took placement tests at UCLA between 2013 and 2016.

The online test assesses all four skills, allowing an evaluation of learners’ grammatical competence, knowledge of vocabulary, and ability to handle pragmatics. We make recommendations for curricular design based on the integrative nature of the test.

This study focuses on second-generation students, namely, those born in the United States to at least one Russian-speaking parent, as these students comprise over 50% of our test-takers. We also illustrate the findings by closely analyzing the background and performance of four second-generation students who are representative of the range of heritage language learners in our program.

While this study is based on Russian data, we anticipate that its conclusions will apply to other heritage languages and heritage language programs, in particular to less-commonly-taught languages.

Keywords

Heritage students Heritage language learners Second-generation Placement test Assessment Curriculum 

References

  1. ACTFL. (2012). Proficiency guidelines: Speaking, listening, reading, writing. Retrieved from https://www.actfl.org/publications/guidelines-and-manuals/actfl-proficiency-guidelines-2012
  2. Andrews, D. (1998). Sociocultural perspectives on language change in diaspora. Soviet immigrants in the United States. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  3. Carreira, M. (2016). Supporting heritage language learners through macrobased teaching: Foundational principles and implementation strategies for heritage language and mixed classes. In M. Fairclough & S. M. Beaudrie (Eds.), Innovative strategies for heritage language teaching: A practical guide for the classroom (pp. 123–142). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Carreira, M., & Kagan, O. (2011). The results of the National Heritage Language Survey: Implications for teaching, curriculum design, and professional development. Foreign Language Annals, 44(1), 40–64.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01118.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davidson, D., & Lekic, M. (2013). The heritage and non-heritage learner in the overseas immersion context: Comparing learning outcomes and target-language utilization in the Russian flagship. Heritage Language Journal, 10(2), 226–252.Google Scholar
  6. Fairclough, M. (2012). A working model for assessing Spanish heritage language learners’ language proficiency through a placement exam. Heritage Language Journal, 9(1), 121–138.Google Scholar
  7. He, A. W. (2016). Heritage language learning and socialization. In P. A. Duff & S. May (Eds.), Language socialization, encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 1–12). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Isurin, L. (2011). Russian diaspora: Culture, identity, and language change (Vol. 99). New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kagan, O., & Dillon, K. (2006). Russian heritage learners: So what happens now? Slavic and East European Journal (50th Anniversary Issue), 50(1), 83–96.  https://doi.org/10.2307/20459235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kagan, O., & Dillon, K. (2009). The professional development of teachers of heritage language learners: A matrix. In M. Anderson & A. Lazaraton (Eds.), Bridging context, making connections: Selected papers from the fifth international conference on language teacher education (pp. 155–175). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition.Google Scholar
  11. Kagan, O., & Dillon, K. (2010). Russian in the USA. In K. Potowski (Ed.), Language diversity in the USA (pp. 179–194). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kagan, O., & Friedman, D. (2003). Using the OPI to place heritage learners of Russian. Foreign Language Annals, 36(4), 536–545.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2003.tb02143.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lo Bianco, J., & Peyton, J. K. (Eds.) (2013). Special issue on language vitality in the U.S. Heritage Language Journal, 10(3).Google Scholar
  14. Martin, C., With Swender, E., & Rivera-Martinez, M. (2013). Assessing the oral proficiency of heritage speakers according to the ACTFL proficiency guidelines 2012—speaking1. Heritage Language Journal, 10(2), 73–87.Google Scholar
  15. Montrul, S. (2010). Dominant language transfer in adult second language learners and heritage speakers. Second Language Research, 26(3), 293–327.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310365768 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Montrul, S. (2013). How “native” are heritage speakers? Heritage Language Journal, 10(2), 15–39.Google Scholar
  17. Polinsky, M. (2006). Incomplete acquisition: American Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 14, 161–219. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/24599616 Google Scholar
  18. Polinsky, M. (2008). Heritage language narratives. In D. Brinton, O. Kagan, & S. Bauckus (Eds.), Heritage language education: A new field emerging. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Polinsky, M., & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Compass of Language and Linguistics, 1(5), 368–395. Retrieved from http://scholar.iq.harvard.edu/files/scholar/uploads/11/Offprint.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rumbaut, R. G., Massey, D. S., & Bean, F. D. (2006). Linguistic life expectancies: Immigrant language retention in southern California. Population and Development Review, 32(3), 447–460.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2006.00132.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwartz Caballero, A. M. (2014). Preparing teachers to work with heritage language learners. In T. G. Wiley, J. K. Peyton, D. Christian, S. C. K. Moore, & N. Liu (Eds.), Handbook of heritage, community, and Native American languages in the United States: Research, policy, and educational practice (pp. 359–369). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Sohn, S.-O., & Shin, S.-K. (2007). True beginners, false beginners, and fake beginners: Placement challenges for Korean heritage speakers. Foreign Language Annals, 40(3), 407–418.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2007.tb02866.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Swender, E., Martin, C. L., Rivera-Martinez, M., & Kagan, O. E. (2014). Exploring oral proficiency profiles of heritage speakers of Russian and Spanish. Foreign Language Annals, 47(3), 423–446.  https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Valdés, G. (1989). Teaching Spanish to Hispanic Bilinguals: A look at oral proficiency testing and the proficiency movement. Hispania, 72, 392–401.  https://doi.org/10.2307/343163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Valdés, G. (2000). Introduction. Spanish for native speakers, Volume 1. AATSP professional development series handbook for teachers K-16. New York, NY: Harcourt College Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Zemskaya (2001). Земская, Е. А., & Гловинская, М. Я. (2001). Язык русского зарубежья: Общие процессы и речевые портреты (Vol. 53). Вена. [Jazyk Russkogo Zarubezhja [Language of Russian emigration]. Moscow/Vienna: Wiener Slawisticher Almanach.].Google Scholar
  27. Zyzik, E. (2016). Toward a prototype model of the heritage language learner. In M. Fairclough & S. M. Beadrie (Eds.), Innovative strategies for heritage language teaching: A practical guide for the classroom (pp. 19–38). Washington DC: George Washington University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Slavic, East European and Eurasian Languages and CulturesUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations