Perfiles De Cargos

Researchers, teachers, and learners have criticised the monolingual approach. Most of the previous studies explored the L1 inclusion in L2 setting revealed that both EFL teachers and learners have constructive ideas and attitudes towards its implementation in their classrooms. Researchers reported on the benefits of L1 inclusion and asserted that it could be used in certain situations, including for facilitating vocabulary, grammar instructions, classroom and behaviour management, checking comprehension, and interaction (Littlewood & Yu, 2011; Macaro, 2001; Tian & Wang, 2009). In ths regard, Littlewood and Yu (2011) reported that L1 is more than welcomed in L2 classes. Additionally, Tsukamoto and et al (2012) argued that the L2-only method not be definitive in supporting language learning.

This is in line with Cook (2001) who also argued that L1 should be seen as a resource and a tool, rather than as something to avoid. Butzkamm (2003) also argued that “the mother tongue is the greatest asset people bring to the task of foreign language learning and provides a language acquisition support system” (p. 29). In addition, Nation (2003) and Larsen-Freeman (2012) declared that L1 should not be rejected from EFL classrooms. Nation (2003) noted that the opportunity to use L1 to discuss performance helps the learners to accomplish an advanced level of L2 performance. He added that there are numerous means of teaching new L2 vocabularies, but the translation to L1 is the most effective one. He further advocated using L1 when the meaning to be carried out in L2 was beyond students ‘competences’, and he believed that “a small amount of L1 discussion can help overcome some of the obstacles” (p. 3).

La Campa and Nassaji (2009) carried out a study on German as a foreign language in Canada and to find out real reasons why the two participated teachers used English rather than German. They found that interpretation of vocabulary from German to English was one of the most popular utilizations of the L1 (English). They also found that L1 was used to link and compare the two languages, for classroom management and to give instructions. In addition, personal comments and teacher-student interactions were run in L1 rather than in L2.

Al-Harbi (2010) claimed that using L1 in the EFL classrooms was a valuable device. Consequently, EFL teachers should spectacle the similarities and differences between the learners' L1 and L2 languages, particularly for beginning and intermediate learners. Furthermore, she pointed out that by utilizing L1 in the L2 classrooms, explicit mistakes could be reduced, and the learners might be able to identify and correct themselves when such faults occur. However, other studies confirmed the importance of L1 in the comparison between the two languages when teaching grammar. For example, Moore (2013) conducted a study in Japan that involved EFL students from a college level, which involved observation of L1 use by students during the preparation stage leading up to two verbal presentation activities, one in the first semester, the other in the second semester. The findings showed that in the second task, the quantity of L1 (Japanese) use between the same groups increased due to negotiations around use of forms in a content-creation activity.

Some other researchers trust that using L1 is a helpful teaching tool in EFL classrooms. For example, L1 could be used to enhance learners’ understanding and L2 learning (Cook, 2005; Tang, 2002). Jabbar (2012) argued that L1 could help L2 learners understand new vocabularies, clarify problematic grammar points, and provide more explicit guidelines as well as recommendations. According to Cook (2005), using L1 in EFL classrooms is part of regular communication when both teachers and learners share two languages; therefore, there is no reason why learners should not be permitted to make use of their L1 in the EFL classroom. In addition, he emphasised that L1 enabled students’ understanding of the resources presented in the EFL classrooms, which consequently saved time for both teachers and learners. He added that L1 could be used to check word meanings and explain some grammar points.

In this regard, Nation (2003) explained that using L1 in EFL class was supportive and could be used to save class time, to encourage learners and to decrease their anxiety and to present the significant differences between L1 and L2. He added that L1 use helped to make classroom instructions and rules clearer to learners and maintained their discipline.

Similarly, Tang (2002) reported that L1 could be used in low and average proficiency levels in EFL classrooms to clarify word meanings, complex ideas, to clarify compound grammar points, and to give instructions. Additionally, Alshammari (2011) and Machaal (2012) claimed that the L1 usage could increase learners understanding, save class time and make the learning process more effective.

In his study, Samadi (2011) emphasised the roles and benefits of L1 in EFL classrooms and mentioned that it could be used to establish a stress-free classroom environment, and for managing the classroom, giving instructions, translating new words, and explaining grammar points. Some other researchers stated that L1 is valuable to establish communication in classrooms. Therefore, students express their ideas in L1 if they could not understand or when they want to simplify a word meaning in L2.

Furthermore, Tian and Macaro (2012) found that a combination of both L1 and L2 helps in vocabulary and grammar learning. Similarly, Storch and Wigglesworth (2003) reported that allowing learners to use their L1 could help them to achieve and do activities at a compound cognitive level. For instance, the L1 would not be used to make the commands and teachers instructions understandable and consequently to motivate the communicative value of the task. She recommended considering four diverse features in relative to L1 utilisation in the EFL classroom:

 The circumstances under which L1 may be successfully used

 Teacher translation in EFL classrooms as a valuable practical approach.

 The L1 usage as a cognitive link to L2

 “L1 usage in the EFL classroom as most valuable with low proficiency levels and beginning students” (p. 23).

Some researchers have confirmed that avoidance of L1 usage is doubtful especially if both teachers and learners share the same first language (Raschka & et al., 2009). Additionally, Macaro (2005) claimed that banning the L1 use in EFL classrooms deprives the L2 students of a critical communication strategy.

2.3.2 Arguments against using L1 in EFL classrooms

A number of researchers and teachers support the L2 usage in class as the merely teaching medium and communication. For example, Ellis (2005) stated that one of the central values of taught language learning is general L2 involvement, whether inside the class through communication and interaction or outside the class by producing chances for learners to make use of the L2. In addition, Hall and Cook (2013) claimed that “English is best taught and learned without the use of students’ own language(s)” (p. 7).

According to Ellis (2005), teachers who overuse their students’ L1 prevent their learners from accessing a critical language practice in which students try to learn about what is

being conducted in their EFL classrooms. Pan and Pan (2010) also stated that using (L1) in EFL classrooms contexts is often criticised for its possible interfering with the acquisition of the L2. Moreover, Turnbull (2001) asserted that learners do not yield when teachers depend extensively on using learners’ L1, principally when the L2 teacher is the only linguistic accessible model and the core source of L2 input. He further stated that the L1 might be adopted only to assist learners’ L2 learning process and teachers may use the learners’ L1 only to guarantee the learners’ understanding of grammatical rules or new terms.

In EFL teaching contexts, teachers are guided to maximise the L2 usage and practice, but this does not essentially mean that L1 should be fully banned. In this regard, Turnbull (2001) suggested that the “use of L1 and L2 should be seen as complementary” (p. 535). Similarly, Levine (2003) also supported ‘maximising’ L2 usage and at the same time allowing L1 for educationally sound purposes (p.343). Moreover, Meiring and Norman (2002) suggested that the “priority must be to establish the benefit of pupil use of target language and ways of maximising it” (p. 29).

Some other researchers consider that the L1 usage in EFL classrooms negatively affects learners’ successes and ability in L2, because of the skills they learn in classes. In this regards, Sharma, (2006) stated that the rationale for using only L2 in the classroom was that “the more students are exposed to English, the more quickly they will learn; as they hear and use English, they will internalize it to begin to think in English; the only way they will learn it is if they are forced to use it” (p. 80). Additionally, for some other researchers, the use of L1 is considered to be a barrier that stops students from obtaining the appreciated input in L2 classrooms (Ellis, 2005; Mahadeo, 2006; Tsao, 2001 ).

In a similar study, Nation (2003) stated that if the classroom was the only place for learners to drill and exercise the L2, it would be better to have the maximism of L2 input in the class. He made some recommendations including role play activities and games to overcome this problem. In addition, aiming to enhance and maximize L2 input, he suggested that teachers should use a task that meets the learners’ abilities and proficiency levels to encourage them to participate in the class discussion using L2.

Similarly, Sipra (2007) suggested the following recommendations to encourage L2 use: he advised that the EFL teachers should select suitable resources for learners according to their proficiency levels and they should prepare warm-up activities for students. Moreover, he added that teachers should encourage learners to become better English speakers by assigning

speaking based assignments including making interviews and voice recorded reports. He further suggested that teachers use some activities related to daily routine practices aiming to simplify the L2 comprehension. In this regard, Cook (2001) identified three essential values of the L2 use:

 The learning of L2 should be through maximum exposure to it.

 Active learning includes the separation and distinction between L1 and L2.  The significance of L2 being taught through its repeated use.