Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract:
This study looks at the difference in academic performance between bilinguals
and monolinguals to determine if there is an advantage in being bilingual. Using
a sixth form sample in a cross-sectional study, students were asked to complete
a survey on their GCSE grades, then the gathered data was compiled to find that
there was no significant statistical difference between the academic
achievements at GCSE of bilinguals and monolinguals.
Keywords: bilingualism, monolingualism, GCSE, survey
Introduction and Literature Review:
The picture emerging from these studies is a complex portrait of interactions
between bilingualism and skill acquisition in which there are sometimes benefits
for bilinguals, sometimes defects, and sometimes no consequence at all.
Bialystok & Feng
Bilingualism is a complicated and hotly debated topic that looks at how this
ability affects other areas of life. The ability to speak more than one language
impacts on many areas of life, particularly education as the increased free
movement within the EU has led to many students studying in their second or
even third language in the UK. Bilinguals can be balanced, where the proficiency
in language is equal in both languages, or more proficient in one language than
another.
Many people have questions about bilinguals, considering the impact on speech
development in young children, to the ability to concentrate and solve problems.
If there is an advantage to being bilingual, then what advantages are there over
being monolingual? Bialystok (2009) (Bialystock, Craik, Green, & Gollan, 2009)
found that bilinguals may have a smaller vocabulary and take more time to
retrieve individual words, and generate fewer words when asked for words in a
particular category or semantic field. The executive function is a command
system that directs the attention processes that we use for planning, solving
problems and performing various other mentally demanding tasks. These
processes include ignoring distractions to stay focused, switching attention
willfully from one thing to another and holding information in mind like
remembering a sequence of directions while driving. (Bhattacharjee, 2012).
Much research has gone into the role of bilingualism and its effect on numerous
areas of development such as neurology. ANT (attention network task) test:
monitoring skills,
response selections,
response inhibition (the selection of appropriate responses,
and inhibition of inappropriate responses given context and goals
(Mostofsky & Simmonds, 2008)) of language.
It is concluded that bilingual children show more efficient use of their neural
systems (Raluca, 2012).
Many studies support a causal link between bilingualism and strong cognitive
reserve, with higher recovery rates of normal mental functions and can slow the
deterioration rate of Alzheimers, and protect against cognitive decline
(Bialystok, Craik, & Luk, 2012), for up to 4 extra years (Daily Mail, 2015) (Jha,
2011).
Other research shows advantages in cognitive control tasks, greater mental
flexibility; the ability to think more abstractly, more independently of words,
providing superiority of concept formation (Baker, Chapter 7: Bilingualism and
Intelligence, 1996) in a quote from Peal and Lambert (1962). (Bak, VegaMendoza, & Sorace, 2014) finds similar results, showing that performance of
early bilinguals tend to outperform monolinguals on attention tests.
Not all research shows this, with the suggestion that the differences in resolving
of cognitive conflict are not due to the differing linguistic abilities, when
socioeconomic factors (parental occupation, personal occupational status,
educational level) are taken into account (Ladas, Caroll , & Vivas, 2015). The
meta-analysis noted that there was an anomaly in the SES with the bilinguals
appearing from a comparatively higher socioeconomic status compared to the
monolingual sample, which may contaminate the previous studies with a highly
influential confounding factor.
The advantages found in previous research may affect the academic
achievement and the measurement of IQ in the bilinguals. Many studies show
differing results, without a firm conclusion found. This led to investigation into
the relationship between bilingualism and academic achievement (the
measurement of IQ) as it has not yet come to a conclusion.
Past Research and how it relates:
Past research was formed of three initial stages, first the detrimental, neutral and
finally additive effects to bilingualism and the way it affected individuals.
Negative research, approximately between 1920 and 1960, showed that
bilingualism was negative, inhibiting abilities- Simon S. Laurie stated that for
someone to live in two languages equally well would result in intellectual and
spiritual growth would not thereby be doubled but halved (Sharma, 2009) (Baker
& Jones, Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education, 1998) (Grosjean,
2010) and being bilingual the brain effort required diminishes childs power of
learning other things that ought to be learnt from Otto Jesperson, an esteemed
linguist (Grosjean, 2010) (Sharma, 2009). These studies were generally criticised
2
for being unrepresentative and being biased in the approach to find their
hypothesis and cultural expectation supported.
Moving from the negative views on the detrimental effects of bilingualism,
research began to take a more neutral approach in the 1940s, with Pintner and
Arsenians (Baker, Key issues in bilingualism and bilingual education, 1949) study
of Yiddish and English speaking participants, showing no effects of either positive
or negative variations in both verbal and non-verbal IQ. Bialystok and Feng
(2001) (Grosjean, 2010) compile a meta-analysis, finding that there are some
negative, and some positive effects from being bilingual.
Studies similar to these continued until Peal and Lamberts study (Baker, Chapter
7: Bilingualism and Intelligence, 1996) , claiming to have found a strong
correlation between many positive factors, including beneficial developments in
the area of IQ, particularly that there is a positive transfer between the
bilinguals two language facilitating the development of verbal IQ. The
performance of bilinguals was significantly better than the monolingual
counterparts (Peal, Lambert, & Wallace, 1962).
Modern studies continue to show a range of responses, with more studies
showing that executive functions improve and cognitive ageing is halted,
Bilingually schooled students, after 47 years of such instruction, outperformed
in all subjects their mainstream NES peers who were educated monolingually
in English. (Han, 2012) This is supported by findings from English as a Second
Language studies (Tellier, 2013), with children who speak both Bengali and
English tending to be high achievers (Khatkar, 2010), bilingualism is linked with
enhanced achievement and cognitive giftedness (Baker, Key issues in
bilingualism and bilingual education, 1949)
Contribution to Society:
The research found in this study will contribute to the understanding of the
impacts of bilingualism, and whether it is beneficial or not. Further understanding
into this topic is important to help individuals, families and particularly
educational institutions develop understanding and policies in facilitating and
encouraging of learning other languages. Should the results be conclusive,
showing that bilingualism does have a positive effect, a different approach to
bilingual education may be advantageous. Parents with concerns about the
impact of being bilingual on their child, or the delayed development will be given
more understanding into how their home environment can give their children the
best possible start in school.
Investigations into how IQ is affected by bilingualism through further study can
offer useful insights into the way that bilingualism does affect society, and then
be applied in devising methods in which practical methods can be implemented
in schools or at home to improve intelligence and knowledge.
Research Question:
Is there a difference between academic achievements of bilinguals and
monolinguals?
Research Objectives:
The objective of this study is to find out if there is a difference in the academic
achievement in GCSE level grades of bilinguals and monolinguals through use of
a survey to ascertain if there is a significant difference or not.
Hypotheses:
Hypothesis: There will be a difference between the academic achievements in
GCSE level grades of bilinguals to monolinguals.
Null Hypothesis: There will be no difference between the academic achievements
in GCSE level grades of bilinguals and monolinguals, and any difference found
will be due to chance.
Methodology:
Measures:
Quasi-Measures: two groups, based on their linguistic abilities, either
multi/bilingual or monolingual
Independent Variable: Whether participants are bilingual, or monolingual
Dependent Variable: the academic achievement shown at GCSE levels in grades
Data Type and Statistical tools:
The survey gathered quantitative data, from a sample of 24 participants. The
data was ordinal, with each grade without differentiation between the strengths
of the grades (i.e. high A, low C), with a value of 1 to 8 being assigned to each
grade. The same survey was given to all students.
Mann-Whitney was used to calculate the difference between the grades of
bilingual and monolingual participants. The mode, median, range, and
percentage of students gaining each comparative grade (see appendices 5, 6
and 7 and results).
Context:
Sample
The sample was taken from the sixth form of Catholic school, featuring a mix of
multi-ethnic students of both genders. All participants had taken GCSE within 3
years of taking the survey. The survey was sent to 211 participants, 24 of whom
returned the survey. It was an opportunity sample, based on the sample
available at the time. The sample was composed of unbalanced bilinguals, being
more proficient or attaining complete fluency in only one language, and having a
high level of proficiency in another.
Assessment of Academic Performance
The assessment of academic performance is through the grade achievement at
GCSE, an objective qualification standard used by the government. GCSE grades
operationalised IQ (the dependent variable). Exam results were compiled and
given a score based on the grade achieved, on a scale of 1 to 8, with the highest
grade being given the highest score- the higher the collective score, the higher
the academic achievement.
MODE
Grades of all
participants
Individual
participant
scores
Bilingual
A (30.23256%)
Difference
Grade
multimodal
MEDIAN
72.5
RANGE
56
Average Number of GCSEs
10.5
Average Number of Points
78.761904
per average number of GCSE
Results and Findings (and comments):
Monolingual
B (40.47619%)
No mode
4
cc. 0.9167
3.73320735
57.5
52
9.583
75.02869665
Results
The hypothesis aimed to find a significant statistical difference between the
academic achievements of bilinguals and monolinguals, which was not found so
the null hypothesis was accepted. The observed value was 57, while the critical
value of U at p0.05 was 37. The U value was 57, and the U value was 87.
All participants passed more than 7 GCSE grades at grade D or above, with a
range from D to A*, with an average of 10.5 GCSEs for bilinguals, and 9.583 for
monolinguals.
The data grades were compiled, to find that the sum of bilinguals grades were
827, and monolinguals grades were 719 (see appendix 3). Applying the Mann
Whitney Test of Difference (see appendix 4-7) shows that the difference was not
significant, with a region of rejection at 20.
Bilinguals tend to show a higher percentage of participants gaining the A* grade
compared to 19% with monolinguals at 8.3% gaining the A*grade. The range is
greater within bilinguals is greater, with 6% of bilinguals attaining a D grade
compared to only 2% of monolinguals.
The histograms (appendix 5 and 6) and pie charts (appendix 5 and 6) show that
there are no similarities with the spread of grade attainment, with very different
rates of achievement.
5
Conclusions:
The null hypothesis is accepted any difference that is found in the academic
achievement of bilinguals and monolinguals is due to chance, and there is no
significant advantage in education or intelligence for bilinguals over
monolinguals.
Further studies will be required to understand the relationship between
bilingualism and intelligence, and see what practical applications may be
required to further understanding of its complicated relationship.
Discussion and Recommendations: (a critical analysis and evaluation):
All ethical and practical considerations were taken to ensure the accuracy of this
survey. However, without consideration of factors such as individual differences
and approaches to work, cultural influence and socio-economic factors, the
results are inconclusive and cannot be generalised to other areas.
The data was gathered using a survey, featuring a Likert scale of objective
quantitative ordinal data. There was no bias in the use of statistical tests, and
results have been analysed in context.
Based on the sample size, and the study within the school, the majority of
participants would have studied GCSE within the same school, standardising
their education at GCSEs. There may have been some anomalies, with external
students transferring in that may have contributed to the acceptance of the null
hypothesis. External to the school, students may have studied for GCSEs and
moved into the sixth form, but there are unlikely to be many transfer students in
the sample that would significantly affect the results.
Participant variables may call into question the accuracy of self-report data in a
survey as a valid measurement of a representative population of the area,
especially a voluntary survey where the sample may be biased to students who
are more motivated to respond to information or opportunities being given to
them. If this is the case, the students who replied may be predisposed to
succeeding with higher results in their examinations, or care less about school.
The mode of grades for bilinguals was an A grade (39%), while monolinguals had
a mode of a B grade (39%). Monolinguals had a more even distribution of grades
through the range, whereas bilinguals tended to have more extremes at A* and
D grades when compared to monolinguals.
Because intelligence quotient was operationalised by the measure of GCSE
grades, the results of this study are not holistic of the many types of intelligence
that are suggested by Dr Roger Highfield, quoted in the Telegraph as saying
when you come to the most complex known object, the human brain, the idea
that there is only one measure of intelligence had to be wrong. (Collins, 2012).
The single measure of reasoning cannot reflect the multiple types of intelligence,
or fluid intelligence that researchers are now suggesting.
Saer (1923) (Baker, Key issues in bilingualism and bilingual education, 1949)
found no real difference in the Binet Scale between urban bilinguals and
monolinguals in primary school. However, in Rhythm Tests, he found that
bilinguals were found to be almost 2 years behind in their results and ability to
differentiate between rhythmic beats. He concluded that bilinguals were
confused and at a disadvantage, especially in light of further testing at the
Aberystwyth University College of Wales, where rural monoglots were shown to
have a superior IQ than the rural bilinguals.
These findings suggest that there have been significant detrimental effects of
bilingualism on abilities of the mind, and on IQ. As Jones (1993) stated later: The
quality of the research is not as important in this respect as its adverse effect on
the opinion of educators of the timel because this (and its unfortunate label
bilingual handicap) was the period which coloured the attitude of the public
towards bilingual education for future decades (.translated from the original
Welsh) (Lewis, 2013).
However, (Baker, Key issues in bilingualism and bilingual education, 1949)
discusses W.R. Jones findings in Wales, looking at the neutral effect of
bilingualism on nonverbal IQ if social class made allowance for. Jones (1959)
found that (Baker & Jones, Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education,
1998) (Bialystok, Craik, & Luk, Bilingualism: Consequences for the Mind and
Brain, 2012) there was no difference of non-verbal IQ with control of the SES n
Wales.
Pintner and Arsenians (Baker, Bilingualism and Intelligence, 1996) findings
suggest that the IQ of bilinguals and monolinguals were comparable, without any
difference between Yiddish-English speakers and monoglots.
It is questioned whether the test attempts to measure biculturalism or
bilingualism. Because of the impact of cultural values in approaches to
education, and the attitudes towards education that are affected. For example, it
may be culture rather than the bilingualism that explains why Chinese pupils are
the highest attaining students at GCSE, 17.5 percentage points above the
national average (Education D. o., 2014).
Research suggests that the if there was a difference in the achievement in favour
of bilinguals, that it may be as a result of a difference in intelligence, shown as
the performance of bilinguals was significantly different to monolinguals,
particularly in the areas general intelligence and reading (Bak MD, Nissan PhD,
Allerhand PhD, & Deary MD, 2014). However, Bialystok (Ossola, 2014) is quoted
stating that her work does not support the concept that bilinguals are smarter
than monolinguals, but that the executive function simply differs in use.
Past research cannot conclusively prove the holistic effects of bilingualism on
individuals, which leads to further research. Increasingly, there is suggestion that
bilingualism does give advantages in terms of neurological growth at a cellular
level (Three areas of the cerebral cortex and hippocampus increased in size after
Appendices:
10
Section 1
Started school at St. Albans in Year
GCSE Results
Core Subjects
Grade
Mathematics
No
Bilingual
s
1
76
Rank
Monoling
uals
80
4
11
Rank
1
2
3
78
59
42
53
5
9
75
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
46
75
82
55
65
90
83
43
827
2.5
2.5
50
10
11
14.5
14.5
16
17
19.5
21
23.5
165
42
66
90
54
82
89
39
72
719
U=87
U= 57
Appendix 5: Grade Percentage Pie Charts
U value accepted
12
6
7
8
12
13
18
19.5
22
23.5
135
A*; 19.38
D; 6.2
C; 15.51
C
B
A
A*
A; 30.23
B; 28.68
C; 33.33
D
C
B
A
A*
B; 40.48
13
A*
A*
Appendix 6: Histogram
Appendix 7: Median, Mode, Range, Significance Levels, Critical Value
and Region of Rejection
Bilingual
75
75
42
Monolingual
60
42
51
0.05
Median
Mode
Range
Level of
Significance p
Critical value of
57
U
Critical Value of
87
U
Region of
15
Rejection
Two-tailed
37
results
Appendix 8: Mode, Median, Mean and Range of Student
14
MODE
Grades of all
participants
Individual
participant
scores
MEDIAN
RANGE
Average Number of GCSEs
Average Number of Points
per average number of GCSE
Bilingual
A (30.23256%)
Difference
Grade
Monolingual
B (40.47619%)
multimodal
No mode
72.5
56
10.5
78.761904
57.5
52
9.583
75.02869665
4
cc. 0.9167
3.73320735
10
11
12
Total
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
Scor
e
M
Scor
e
B
M
1
4
5
25
1
6
1
7
3
15
3
18
6
42
12
4
20
4
24
2
14
1
8
11
5
30
4
28
3
24
12
2
12
2
14
8
64
12
1
8
42
75
66
82
90
1
5
7
42
1
5
3
18
1
7
3
24
1
4
2
10
6
36
1
7
1
8
11
1
4
8
40
3
18
3
15
5
20
8
2
54
65
12
62
6
42
1
5
55
6
36
4
28
4
24
5
35
6
48
12
90
11
69
3
24
4
24
12
83
7
39
3
15
1
8
9
43
1
5
4
24
5
35
1
8
11
20
28
37
34
39
13
25
7
129
115
16
72
827
719
References:
Bibliography
Ali, S., Haider, Z., Munir, F., Khan, H., & Ahmed, A. (2013). Factors Contributing to
the Students Academic Performance: A Case Study of Islamia University
Sub-Campus. American Journal of Educational Research, 283-289.
Bak MD, T. H., Nissan PhD, J. J., Allerhand PhD, M. M., & Deary MD, I. J. (2014,
June 2). Does Bilingualism Influence Cognitive Ageing. Anals of Neurology,
pp. 959-963.
Bak, T. H., Vega-Mendoza, M., & Sorace, A. (2014). Never too late? An advantage
on tests on auditory attention extends to bilinguals. frontiers in
psychology, 1.
Baker, C. (1949). Key issues in bilingualism and bilingual education. In C. Baker,
Key Issues in B ilingualism and Bilingual Education. Avon, Philadelphia:
Multilingual Matters.
Baker, C. (1996). Bilingualism and Intelligence. In C. Baker, Foundations of
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (p. 122). Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto:
Multilingual Matters.
Baker, C. (1996). Chapter 7: Bilingualism and Intelligence. In C. Baker,
Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (pp. 116-127). Bristol,
Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Baker, C., & Jones, S. P. (1998). Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Bilingual
Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Limited.
17
19
21
http://www.forbes.com/sites/naomirobbins/2012/01/04/a-histogram-is-nota-bar-chart/
Sacks, D. (2015, August 17). How to Improve Your Survey Email Invitations.
Retrieved October 09, 2015, from surveygizmo:
http://www.surveygizmo.com/survey-blog/how-to-improve-your-surveyemail-invitations/
Sharma, D. (2009, July 29). Attitude and aptitudes: Myths, facts, and
controversies about the bilingual mind. London, London, England.
Retrieved November 14, 2015, from http://www.yumingschool.org/wpcontent/uploads/2011/07/Attitudes-and-aptitudes.-Myths-facts-andcontroversies-about-the-bilingual-mind.pdf
Sorman, A. (2014, March 31). 5 Ways to Get the Survey Data You Want. Retrieved
October 09, 2015, from SurveyMonkey Blog:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/blog/2014/03/31/5-best-ways-to-getsurvey-data/
(2013). Developing a Measure of Metalinguistic Awareness for Children Aged 811. In A. Tellier, The Metalinguist Dimension in Instructed Second
Language Learning. University of Essex: Bloomsbury.
therapy. (2015). Retrieved from Dictionary.com:
http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=therapy&ia=luna
v.3.0, O. f. (2010). SOC2010 volume 3: the National Statistics Socio-economic
classification (NS-SEC rebased on SOC2010). Hampshire: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Why Being Bilingual Can Actually Make You Smarter. (2015, November 13).
Retrieved 20 11, 2015, from How life Works:
http://www.howlifeworks.com/lifestyle/How_You_Can_Learn_a_Language_in
_only_10_Days_464
Willis, J. (2012, November 12). Bilingual Brains- Smarter & Faster. Retrieved
November 19, 2015, from Psychology Today:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/radical-teaching/201211/bilingualbrains-smarter-faster
Woumans, E., & Duyck, W. (2015). The bilingual advantage debeate: Moving
toward different methods for verifying its existence. Universiteit Gent, 3.
Zheng, J. (2011, June 08). How Many Days does it Take for Respondents to
Respond to Your Survey? Retrieved October 09, 2015, from SurveyMonkey
Blog: https://www.surveymonkey.com/blog/2011/06/08/time-to-respond/
22