Elementos del concepto “patrimonio contable” a los efectos de la causa de disolución por pérdidas.

Research supports the point of view that teaching in a child’s first language is effective for early literacy acquisition (Fafunwa et al., 1989; Heugh et al., 2006; Thomas & Collier, 2002; Yohannes, 2009). In this section, we present the various mechanisms by which mother-tongue instruction improves student outcomes and note what characteristics of literacy programs are necessary to ensure that the benefits of mother-tongue instruction accrue to students.

One influential hypothesis supporting the use of mother tongue for early learning is the interdependence hypothesis (Cummins, 1979). This hypothesis posits that the development of additional languages is partially a function of language development in the mother tongue and that a certain degree of proficiency in the mother tongue is necessary to avoid reading difficulties. The idea is that a child does not have two separate places to store language, but rather has a single underlying language proficiency. The most efficient way to influence that proficiency is in a mother tongue. This is because children can more easily be taught comprehension strategies orally, and early, in a language whose lexicon and syntax they already know and vocabulary they understand. The more comprehension and vocabulary knowledge they build, the more text they understand, which aids in fluency (accurate, quick reading, with expression).

Research has demonstrated many benefits to mother-tongue instruction. For example, studies have shown several skills that transfer across languages, such as reading comprehension strategies (Royer & Carlo, 1991) and phonemic awareness and word reading skills (August & Shanahan, 2006). Brock-Utne (2007) highlighted that mother-tongue instruction increases the potential for students to interact with parents around content. Through expanded use of the mother tongue, students integrate school-acquired knowledge with prior knowledge and develop vocabulary through interaction with peers, family, and teachers. In contrast, students use international languages such as English less frequently in informal communication outside of school.

The benefits cited above notwithstanding, other research supports the view that children learning in any language, no matter their mother tongue, can learn to read with comprehension, relatively quickly, with proper support. Research in Canada by Chiappe and colleagues (2002) showed, in a comparison of children from diverse language backgrounds receiving high- quality bilingual instruction alongside native English speakers subjected to the same instructional standards, that both groups were easily able to acquire basic literacy skills. The trajectory of growth in early reading skills was similar whether the child was a second-language learner or a native English speaker. Some abilities—such as manipulating and remembering English—were more difficult for these second-language learners.

However, “their limited exposure to English does not inhibit their acquisition of basic literacy skills…[and]… the same underlying skills, alphabetic knowledge, spelling and phonological processing were strongly related to literacy acquisition in English” (Chiappe et al., pp.111–112). For decoding and phonological awareness, which predict later reading ability, an individual’s reading ability rather than status as second-language learner has been found to be more important (Chiappe & Siegel, 1999). Furthermore, a Canadian study of word reading revealed little difference between monolingual English speakers and second-language learners (Limbos & Geva, 2001).

A review of research on second-language learners by the US-based National Literacy Panel concluded that literacy instruction in non-mother­ tongue languages can be successful (August & Shanahan, 2006). However, the panel reported that successful programs manifest several important features, including language-rich environments, heavy use of text, focus on oral

language development, and teachers with a strong command of the language of instruction. Unfortunately, although some evidence indicates that, with proper instruction, second-language programs that do not include mother-tongue elements can be successful, all the examples cited are from Western contexts, and none is from sub-Saharan Africa.

The preponderance of the evidence suggests that mother-tongue programs bring added benefits but also that the design of those programs is important. For instance, if children are taught with methods that simply use a new language rather than teaching how that language functions in comparison with the mother tongue, children’s ability to gain literacy skills can be jeopardized, and students may “never develop accurate speaking and writing” skills (Garcia, 2009, p. 231). Depending on language use, development of literacy can also take varying amounts of time. For instance, although children may develop

functional language for social situations within a year, achieving academic literacy has been estimated to take 5 or more years for second-language learners (Cummins, 1979).

Transitioning to full use of second-language instruction before students have sufficient capacity in that language can block them from learning basic concepts that are key to comprehension (deep understanding that leads to the ability to use and transfer ideas). Thondhlana (2002) argued that to use English effectively, students in Zimbabwe had to reach a “threshold level,” described by Cummins (1979), at which they were sufficiently fluent to be able to process new concepts and expand their understanding. The study by Thondhlana suggested that if instruction was in the second language rather than the first,

and if pedagogy in the second language was weak, then students focused on

rote memorization rather than on the cognitive processes that encourage comprehension and synthesis. This means that the children’s ability to think critically and solve problems was significantly lessened in both languages.

Some of the literature goes even further to claim that there can be a negative effect on comprehension in other subject areas when teaching is not conducted in a mother tongue. In a study comparing the data from Ethiopia’s 2000 and 2004 Grade 8 National Assessment examinations from four regions that had adopted mother tongue as the LoI policy and six of seven regions that had not, Yohannes (2009) found that the regions that used mother tongue in the content areas of science and mathematics outperformed the regions that used English. Interestingly, the scores on English did not differ between those regions that used it as an LoI and those that taught it as a subject. Furthermore, a study by Marsh et al. (2000) in Hong Kong showed that teaching in English as opposed to a mother tongue had positive effects on English proficiency but negative effects on other subjects, such as mathematics, history, and science.

Evaluating the quality of an LoI policy without looking at the larger learning context is difficult. Apart from the language that the teacher uses in the classroom, many other factors affect the ability of a child to learn to read. For example, both word-level skills and comprehension depend heavily on effective instruction, including method, intensity, and duration.

In that regard, Krashen’s (1982) hypothetical model of second-language learning has influenced designers of effective second-language instruction. A key characteristic of this model is that students need comprehensible input (in what Vygotsky [1962] termed the “zone of proximal development”) by receiving messages orally or through reading materials that they can understand, if they are to make progress in language acquisition. Another

requirement based on Krashen’s model is for the classroom to be a low-anxiety environment, as anxiety can act as a barrier to receiving these messages. The need for the language to be both understandable and taught in a low-stress environment implies a carefully timed, structured, and scaffolded language program and appropriate pedagogy.

The content of early literacy instruction is also critically important. The US- based National Reading Panel identified components of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension as being essential (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000). The quality of teaching must be high—i.e., focused on learning, not simply memorization. Bunyi (2005) identified the emphasis on memorization as a problem in both mother-tongue and non-mother-tongue classrooms in Kenya.

These findings translate into a need for a carefully designed curriculum, instructional materials and lessons that use effective pedagogy, and an education system that enables teachers to spend time on reading instruction. Without this careful planning and execution, second-language teaching can fail.

Despite diverse perspectives on the importance of mother-tongue

instruction, there are points of convergence. One is that if children are literate in their first language, they will find it easier to learn to read in a second

language: acquiring decoding skills3 _{in a first language facilitates decoding}

skills in learning other languages4 _{(August & Shanahan, 2006). Another}

is that because reading is profoundly social and cognitive in nature, and situated in a particular context, the resources the child has developed prior to schooling around aspects of language such as structure, phonology, and vocabulary should be considered in any reading program (Genesee, 1994). The major difference is the degree of importance the study accords the role of the language of instruction in the effectiveness of an early reading curriculum. Unfortunately, not enough in-depth scientific research on LoI and reading performance has taken place in low-resourced environments to draw general conclusions about the degree of importance of language of instruction in relation to other factors, including teaching method and materials.

3 _{Decoding is the act of using skills such as sound-blending and sound-symbol matching to turn} letters and groups of letters into understandable words.

4 _{This is with regard to alphabetic languages. For example, decoding skill in English may aid in} decoding Kiswahili, but not Chinese.