Oral communications between preschool staff and children with Icelandic as their second language and children with Icelandic as their first language

Abstract

Icelandic research repeatedly demonstrates that children whose first language is other than Icelandic (Ice2) make little progress in their Icelandic language skills over the preschool years, even though they remain in school most of their waking hours five days a week (Aneta Figlarska et al., 2017; Hjördís Hafsteinsdóttir et al., 2022; Kriselle Lou Suson Jónsdóttir et al., 2018). Later, during the compulsory school years, the gap in the vocabulary skills of Icelandic first language learners (Ice1) and Ice2 peers tends to widen with each passing year (Sigríður Ólafsdóttir et al., 2016). Moreover, the larger the Icelandic vocabulary Ice1 and Ice2 children possess in grade four, the faster progress they make in reading comprehension throughout the middle school years.

Studies reveal that well-facilitated playtime in preschools, with rich mutual oral communication between adults and children, can effectively support children’s language development (McCarthey, 1984; Connor et al., 2006; Huttenlocher et al., 2002; Wasik & Bond, 2001; Wasik et al., 2006). The higher number of words and the more sophisticated words preschool teachers use in oral interactions with children the larger vocabulary the children develop (Aukrust, 2007; Aukrust & Rydland, 2011; Bowers & Vasilyeva, 2011; Buac et al., 2014; Dickinson & Porche, 2011; Kim & Yun, 2019). The impact is even greater in the case of children whose first language is other than the school language, or who only have poor language communication at home. For instance, the research by Bowers and Vasilyeva (2011) demonstrated that English vocabulary growth of preschoolers, with English as a second language, was positively related to the total number of words produced by teachers in discussions with children during play time (Bowers & Vasilyeva, 2011). Dickinson and Porche (2011) found in their study that preschool teachers’ use of sophisticated words in their discussions with children raised in poverty, predicted the children’s reading comprehension when they were in fourth grade of compulsory school. In her study, Paulick (2019) found large differences in the language used by preschool teachers, in communication with children. In quality classrooms the teachers were talking more, with a higher number of words and more sophisticated words, than in lower quality classrooms. Likewise, in the quality classrooms, more open questions were used in discussions with children. Open questions are particularly effective as they are likely to boost sustained verbal interactions and mutual discussions between adults and children (Romeo et al., 2018). Positive impacts of adult-child language oral interactions have emerged when preschool activities have been recorded for 15 minutes, several times (Huttenlocker et al., 2002) and during a whole school day (Connor et al., 2006).

The current study compared adult language use in oral communications with Ice1 and Ice2 children, during free choice time in an Icelandic preschool. Verbal communications were recorded three times: the first 15:30 minutes, the second 13:36 minutes, and the third 27:16 minutes. Only two of the four participating adults had a university degree as preschool teachers, which is in fact a higher proportion than in a typical situation in Icelandic preschool settings (Hagstofa Íslands [Statistics Iceland], 2021). Three Ice2 children and 11 Ice1 children participated, aged five to six. One Ice2 child was born in Iceland and started preschool at age one and a half, another was three years-old when he moved to Iceland and started in the preschool, and the third Ice2 child had only been a few months in the preschool as his family just recently moved to Iceland. The communications were recorded, and two types of analysis conducted: On the one hand, to understand the range and volume of language the Ice2 and Ice1 children were being exposed to, words per minute were calculated as well as the total number of utterances, and the frequency of words (Jóhanna Thelma Einarsdóttir et al., 2019), On the other hand, utterances were coded, to identify the type of talk teachers used in communication with the children, in the following categories: a) directives, b) information, c) closed questions, d) open questions, and e) explicit word instruction. Findings revealed that the Ice1 children were exposed to more than a two times higher number of words per minute, and more than a two times higher number of utterances, as well as words of lower frequency than the Ice2 children. Moreover, open questions and explicit vocabulary instructions were only provided to the Ice1 children. This study could provide an incentive to consider how Icelandic language support for the benefit of Ice2 preschool children can be improved. Increasing the volume and sophistication of words used by adults in discussions with Ice2 children, as well as giving them frequent mutual sustained interactions, including open questions, may be a valuable means to give this group of children opportunities to make effective improvements in their Icelandic language skills. Well-facilitated playtime in preschools can support Ice2 children’s Icelandic language development, a prerequisite for their later educational progress in Icelandic schools.