User talk:Lopez484/sandbox

Home Factors that Affect Bilingualism
Catherine E. Snow was interested in the relationship of individual home conditions and the ability to become proficient in two languages. In order to determine the role of vocabulary in the bilingual population a series of experiments were conducted analyzing the consequences of the socio economic status (SES) of individuals as well as language predictors in both of the languages in question--spanish and english (Snow et al, 2007). The sample was a group of 96 fifth-grade Latino english language learners of varying SES (Snow et al, 2007). In order to determine what the SES was for the sample, the following factors were considered--mother’s education and individual income per household (Snow et al, 2007). Vocabulary development was found to be linked to the literacy practices of the individual as well as the family which varies across the SES of the households (Snow et al, 2007). Environmental factors played a role in the literacy of individuals. The number of books in the household as well as the amount that the parents read accounted for 51% of the variability in literacy (Snow et al 2007). Personal factors--help from guardians in areas such as homework, reading with the child, and telling stories--accounted for 65% variation in both languages. The statistics had an internal reliability of .71 for spanish and .72 for english indicating that the results are relatively consistent (Snow et al, 2007). Analysis of parental language showed that the maternal preference for english explained about 59% of variation in literacy with a reliability of .9 indicating that the factor was relatively consistent. Another factor that was considered to explain parental preference explained only 13% of variability of literacy among individuals with an internal reliability of .85 (Snow et al, 2007). The high correlation between these factors led to the conclusion that multiple resources are necessary for a child to become proficient in both their first and second languages. It was also found that parental language preference relates to the proficiency of the child in both languages (Snow et al, 2007). Children in homes that used mainly English tended to have a higher proficiency in english, and predominantly spanish speakers tended to have a higher proficiency in spanish (Snow et al, 2007). For parental preference when spanish was the first language, it was found that the father’s language preference was more predictive of the child’s proficiency in that particular language. For preference in the english language, both maternal and paternal preference were significant factors in predicting the proficiency of a particular language. Even if spanish was prefered in an initially english speaking home, the child had a higher proficiency in the spanish language (Snow et al, 2007).Fulle033 (talk) 20:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Catherine Snow was apart of a study where they looked to see if home factors had an influence on a child’s English and Spanish vocabulary. The study was conducted with Latino children where Spanish was most common spoken in the home. They administered a questionnaire to the families that were going to participate in the study. The questions included information of the family’s background, home-language use and home literacy environment.The home factors that were looked at included parental education, parental English proficiency, previous school attendance, mothers working status, literacy resources in the home and number of books at home, along with other factors.The study found that family income did not have an impact on the child’s vocabulary. That children in low-income households were more expressive during book sharing activities having a positive impact on the child's vocabulary (Snow, et. al, 2010). Spanish did become less dominant in the home compared to English because of certain home factors. One factor is that many of the books that are resourced are in English rather than Spanish causing book sharing time at home with the child to be mainly in English than in Spanish. The study also noted how the more exposure a child had to either a parent, relative or sibling read to them the better it impacted the child’s vocabulary (Snow et. al, 2010). In the home, the more exposure a child has to language the richer their vocabulary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lopez484 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Maternal Factors
The study that Catherine Snow was apart of included looking to see if the mother’s interaction had an impact on the child’s vocabulary in both English and Spanish. The study looked at a sample of Latino children where Spanish was the predominant language. The research used home visits as a way to collect data on maternal factors. The home visits involved parental interviews, observing book sharing between the mother and the child and the mothers also had to complete a vocabulary test. Some questions that came up in the parental interview was the differences between their culture and the United States and also their beliefs of language acquisition and literacy. The book that was used to examine the mothers interaction with the child during book sharing time was Frog Where Are You? By Mercer Mayer The objective of this was because this book provided the tools for a child to create narratives if the mother encouraged this response during the activity(Snow et al, 2010). The study found that when mother's used labeling questions during book sharing time, it had a positive impact on the child's vocabulary. When the mother used labeling questions it also had a strong a positive connection with Spanish vocabulary while it also had a weaker and positive connection with English vocabulary (Snow et al, 2010). The study also found how Spanish culture may have an effect in having their children have open ended responses with their mothers. (Snow et al, 2010). The more the mother spoke in English the negative result it had in the child's Spanish vocabulary but positively impacted the child's English vocabulary (Snow et al, 2010). Mother and child interaction has a positive influence on cognitive skills and lexical development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lopez484 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Perspectives on Bilingualism
Catherine E. Snow participated in a guide in 1992 called Educational Researcher, published by American Educational Research Association to answer some questions and explain the research behind second language development. There are many common questions that were presented to her and the others writing the guide such as, what are the consequences of bilingualism, why might someone have more trouble than others learning an addition language, what are the individual differences in bilingualism and many more. Snow's section was called Perspectives on Second-Language Development: Implication for Bilingual Education which described 4 different approaches of studying, recording history and researching bilingualism to answer these common questions. The 4 based approaches are foreign, L1, psycho linguistic and social linguistic approach. Each approach views learning and developing language in different ways and takes into account different circumstances, situations, disadvantages and advantages. ("Perspectives on Second-Language Development", 1992).

Snow began with the first basic bilingual approach, The Foreign Language which is a simplistic approach because it focuses on the idea that the best way to learn a second language is to be in the native and social environment of that language. This can affect older and younger learners in different ways. She states that under this approach, young learners such as children will learn a second language better in a social environment of that foreign language. For older learners, being taught by a tutor that's native language is that foreign language will allow older learners to learn and develop their second language better. This approach does not support the idea that there is a certain critical age where someone needs to learn a second or third language. It also does not support the cognitive ability to learn a language or whether learning one language has any emphasis on learning a second language. ("Perspectives on Second-Language Development", 1992). As a result of not supporting cognitive abilities and whether learning one language affects second language development, the Foreign Based approach was later challenged by a L1 Based Approach. Snow states under this approach researches and supports what the Foreign based model didn't. It explains that many of the characteristics of a first language are part of learning a second language. Which supports their claim of how quickly and adequately a learner learns his/her first language affects how fast and efficiently they can learn a second language. They emphasize that how learners learn their language, what's strategies they use, how they're taught by their parents, carry onto their second language acquisition which could be an advantage or disadvantage. However some children or people are not given good learning strategies or are raised by parents that don't particularly speak their own language well which could hinder a children's second language development, let alone first language.("Perspectives on Second-Language Development", 1992).

Following the development of two of the four basic bilingual approaches, two more arose, a psycho-linguistic and social linguistic. Snow explains how that a Psycho-linguistic approach perceive second language development as a special kind of information process. They bring up the concept that learning and understanding a language are no different from one another. They both use analytic and auditory skills allowing learners to develop their second language to the best of their ability. They focus on the raw cognition and development skills of learners and how these aspects give advantages to them in learning other languages. This approach supports the claim that learners that already know more than one language will be more successful in learning other languages than learners that have only ever understood one language. This approach focuses a lot on the cognitive factors such as the L1 based approach but does not look into other factors that affect learning like the social aspect. ("Perspectives on Second-Language Development", 1992). This is why Snow brings up the Social Linguistic research. This approach emphasizes the idea of social context on second language development. They support that learning a second language is tied to personal identity, culture, nation, ethnic pride and many other factors like those given. They also tie into the L1 based approach that learning a second language has the same characteristics of a first language learner, they just exploit more of their strategies and habits socially within their second language environment to get a better understanding of it. This approach has findings showing that more children grow up learning 2 languages rather than just one which is good for developing another language. However this approach could imply that within a social environment where only one language is spoken, it can be very difficult to learn another language when a language learner is thrown into an environment when there is more than one common language. ("Perspectives on Second-Language Development", 1992).

Snow finishes her section of the article in Educational Researcher with stating that each perspective of bilingualism researchers answers each common question differently. She implies that there is no one research more correct than the other because language development has many different factors and they all can't be expressed in one research approach that's why there is so much different bilingual approaches. Each one has their own studies and findings which support their claim, so it's a matter of what kind of findings are researchers looking for in a language development. ("Perspectives on Second-Language Development", 1992). (Anzal002 (talk) 02:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC))

Literacy Development in Elementary School Second- Language Learners
Catherine Snow was a part of a series of studies that collected data on the language development of bilingual students. This study focused on elementary students who are second-language learners and the relationship between literacy in their first language which translates into literacy into their second language. The research involved in this study was a combination of assessments, data on home-language, and school records that determined students reading ability. The overall project design was to examine cross-language relationships in the classroom and at home. Parents were asked to fill out questionnaires about home language and family reading practices for a better insight. Researchers controlled a variation in teaching methods by studying children only in schools that employed Success for All (Snow et al 2006). Lastly, the reading skills had to be carefully assessed to track the first and second language development and their relations to each other. Researchers examined the student's phonological segmentation, word reading skills, word recognition, and listening and reading comprehension in both Spanish and English. Concluding that being orally proficient in a first-language will not be enough to develop second-language skills (Snow et al 2006). Children need to be literate in their first language to build second-language skills and having instructions in their first language will only be beneficial to their success. On top of first language instructions, teachers need to incorporate English instructions as well to build on to their student's vocabulary and spelling. Jamieaneza (talk) 20:27, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review
First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? -We thought the section Perspectives on Bilingualism was well organized, and clearly expressed the different approaches. It was easy to follow and understand, offering a clear outlook. The writing was neutral, and fact based. We all found there to be a clear structure throughout the article, and felt that did a good job guiding us through the article. Lastly we saw all reliable sources, to ensure the articles accuracy. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement? -We suggest making another heading titled works, or something similar; because this is a page about the person herself a heading of Home Factors may suggest her personal home life, not the home factors of her studies. We also suggest changing the format of the Perspectives in Bilingualism section to be in paragraph form to match the other sections, this change would be more pleasing to the eye and easier to follow. The Perspectives in Bilingualism section also has no references. The lead section is a bit choppy as it is, it feels like a list more than a paragraph; and your contributions need to be added. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? -Overall the article was really well put together. The organization of the article made it flow very easily. We believe the most important improvement the authors can make is to make sure that every statement or fact be followed by a reference. Like the professor mentioned Wikipedia is fact based so everything should be backed up. This improvement will help the article tremendously. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! -Something I noticed about the article that I believe would be applicable for our own writing is the way that the article is organized. The article is easy to read and follow along with the large headings and it’s clean look. It makes the article feel welcoming to the reader. I will also suggest to my own group members that we add a section of overall perspectives on bilingualism, as well as our linguist’s personal perspectives on bilingualism, because this section is educational and is an interesting perspective to add to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ander270 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 16 November 2018 (UTC)