Research into instructed third-age language learning has shown that older adults are as capable as their younger counterparts to learn a new language (see, e.g., Gabryś-Barker, 2018; Ramírez Gómez, 2016). A logical next step is to establish the merits of specific approaches to teaching and learning. Moreover, given that cognitive abilities do not operate in a vacuum (Kliesch & Pfenninger, 2021), it is desirable to look beyond experimental outcome measures and take into account participants' views of their learning experience.
In the field of second language (L2) learning and teaching, there is ongoing controversy about whether a monolingual context that makes exclusive use of the target L2 or a multilingual context that draws on all languages known to learners is most beneficial. Existing studies with younger participants which compared a monolingual with a multilingual approach found either superior performance by groups taught multilingually (Brown, 2021), or no differences between groups (Hopp & Thoma, 2021).
No study to date has addressed the question of whether one or the other approach might be more advantageous for third-age learners while also adding learners' own views into the equation. We will report the perceptions of 10 older adults who are a sub-sample from a larger project which compares a monolingual with a multilingual approach to teaching beginners' Italian to L1 speakers of German and English (N = 46, age range 60-81) via a 10-week online course with the first author as their teacher. The participants were pre- and post-tested for L2 proficiency and metalinguistic awareness, completed a test of language learning aptitude and a questionnaire about their language learning beliefs.
The sub-sample took part in think-aloud and stimulated-recall protocols aimed at eliciting their thought processes while resolving a small number of multiple-choice tasks. Subsequently, the participants were interviewed about their views and perceptions of the language course they experienced (either monolingual or multilingual), with a focus on perceived advantages and disadvantages as well as the strategies they drew on to handle the learning tasks.
Data collection is currently underway. Analysis of the qualitative data arising form the interviews and verbal protocols will allow us to triangulate complementary evidence from participants' actual performance and their reflections on that performance. We expect this to yield novel insights into the benefits and drawbacks of the two approaches used in the study while at the same time doing justice to inter-individual differences.
References:
Brown, A. (2021). Monolingual versus multilingual foreign language teaching: French and Arabic at beginning levels. Language Teaching Research. DOI: 10.1177/1362168821990347
Gabryś-Barker, D. (Ed.). (2018). Third age learners of foreign languages. Multilingual Matters.
Hopp, H., & Thoma, D. (2021). Effects of plurilingual teaching on grammatical development in early foreign‐language learning. Modern Language Journal, 105(2), 464-483.
Kliesch, M., & Pfenninger, S. E. (2021). Cognitive and socioaffective predictors of L2 microdevelopment in late adulthood: A longitudinal intervention study. Modern Language Journal, 105(1), 237-266.
Ramírez Gómez, D. (2016). Language teaching and the older adult: The significance of experience. Multilingual Matters.
