T1 112012009 Full text
KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS’ VIEWS TOWARD THE CODE
SWITCHING STRATEGY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja
112012009
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2016
KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS’ VIEWS TOWARD THE CODE
SWITCHING STRATEGY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja
112012009
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2016
i
ii
iii
iv
v
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in
any course or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any
university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this contains no material
previously published or written by any other person except where due reference is
made in the text.
Copyright @2016: Nadia Angela Danuatmadja and Joseph Ernest Mambu, Ph.D.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means
without the prior written permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the
English Language Education Program, Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya
Wacana Christian University, Salatiga.
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja:
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER ......................................................................................................
i
PERNYATAAN TIDAK PLAGIAT .......................................................
ii
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN AKSES.............................................
iii
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION ..............................
iv
APPROVAL FORM .................................................................................
v
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT ..................................................................
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................
vii
ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................
1
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................
1
LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................................................
4
Defining Code Switching ................................................................................................
4
Young Learner and Second Language Learning ..............................................................
4
Review of Previous Study...............................................................................................
5
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ..........................................................
7
Functions of Code Switching ..........................................................................................
7
Reasons or Motivations of the Use of Code Switching ....................................................
7
THE STUDY ..............................................................................................
8
Research Methodology ...................................................................................................
8
Context of the Study .......................................................................................................
8
Participants ....................................................................................................................
8
Data Collection Methods ................................................................................................
9
Data Analysis Procedure .................................................................................................
10
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ..............................................................
10
Quantity of the Use of L1 and L2 in Code-Switching Use ...............................................
11
Function of Code Switching ...........................................................................................
13
Reasons or Motivations of Code Switching .....................................................................
14
CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................
15
vii
REFERENCES .........................................................................................
18
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................
20
APPENDIX ................................................................................................
21
viii
KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS’ VIEWS TOWARD THE CODESWITCHING STRATEGY
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja
ABSTRACT
Many parents in urban areas expect their children to understand and use a
second language including the English as early as possible. With this demand,
there are many kindergartens in Indonesia which offer English as one of the
school subjects. However, there is a controversy among kindergarten English
teachers whether to use only English or to switch the language from English to
Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom. With these as the background, the study aims
to examine kindergarten teachers’ perspectives of their code-switching strategy in
helping young learner to acquire English. To understand these teachers’
perspectives, three kindergarten teachers who teach English twice a week at a
school in Kudus, Central Java, Indonesia were interviewed. To choose the
participant, the three teachers should have the criteria such as they had at least two
years of experience to be a teacher especially in teaching young learners and
understand both Indonesia and English languages. For choosing the participants, I
used quota sampling, because the participants were selected based on a number of
the above criteria. The results of the interviews can be categorized into three
crucial points: (1) quantity of the use of L1 and L2 in Code-Switching use, (2)
function of Code Switching, and (3) reasons or motivations of Code-Switching.
Key words: code switching strategy, young learner
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays most of parents in urban areas expect their children to know
and understand a second language (like an English Language) in an early age.
However, it seems that there is still a controversy about learning a second
language for young learners, especially kindergarten students. Some people
argued that if children understand two languages in an early age, it will bring
1
benefits for them as young learners. For example, Westly (2011) argued that
learning a second language can give kids brain boost. It can boost the neuronal
cell density in certain areas which is important for cognitive functioning.
However, some other people may think that learning a second language in early
age will cause a burden for the children. For example, Genesee (2008) stated that
there are wrong assumptions about learning dual language in an early age. For
instance it will “cognitively and linguistically burdensome for children” (p. 60)
and “the child will learn better and faster if they only learn one language” (p. 61).
Stephen-Kalong (2008) expressed concern that code-switching in teacher
instruction might lead students to feel bored and lose their attention to the
previous instruction in the target language. It happens because teachers often
repeat their instruction in students’ first language. However, this study will focus
on those who agree that early age English education is important and those who
agree to put their child in a kindergarten which has an English class.
There are several techniques used by English teachers in early age school
to teach students from around 2.5 years old to 6 years old. One of the techniques
is by using code switching. Some researchers believe that it is better for English
teachers in early age school to use code-switching strategy to teach young
learners. Winford (2003) stated that code switching is the use of two languages as
an alternative between sentences. According to Williams & Anselmo (2012), the
code-switching strategy has been used by teachers who shuttle between English
and Spanish during reading a book, giving explanations, and instructions to the
children. In that study code-switching strategy was used by the teacher to deliver
2
the material and it helped young learners understand the lessons. Besides that,
Timm (1993), as cited in Riegelhaupt (2000), also stated that code switching will
probably be effective and conducive to create a more relaxed classroom
atmosphere, which can enhance the enthusiasm of the learning process. That is,
when the students do not understand about meanings in the second language, then
the teacher will use their mother tongue to translate and explain the second
language itself.
There are two reasons why the researcher chooses this topic of the
research. The first reason is that English language is an International language
which is important to learn especially in teaching English for young learner. In
fact, to teach English language to young learner is not easy because English is the
young learners’ second language and young learners do not master it yet and
because young learners have several characteristics which differ them from adult.
The second reason why I have chosen this topic is because it seems that
many English teachers are confused about whether they have to use code
switching to teach young learners or not. Considering the confusion between
English teachers in kindergarten, I am interested in doing a study how English
teachers in a kindergarten view code switching in order to give information about
teachers of kindergarten’s views about code switching. The result of this study can
be used as a consideration for English teachers in kindergarten to apply code
switching to young learners.
3
LITERATURE REVIEW
Defining Code Switching
There are two types of code; they are code switching and code mixing.
Heller (1988), as cited in Mati (2004), stated that code switching is the use of
more than one language in a single communication, whereas Wardhaugh (2006)
stated that code mixing is a conversation which happens when the languages are
mixed in a single utterance. In this study, however, I use the notion of code
switching to also mean code mixing.
Young Learners and Second Language Learning
According to Kalendova (2008) a young learner means children who are in
the first stage of formal schooling. They are eleven to twelve years old. In
addition, Slattery and Willis (2001) stated that young learners can be divided into
two groups. The first group consists of very young learners who are children
under seven years old. The second group includes young learners who are children
from eight to 12 years old. Moreover, Khatib and Mellati (2012) proposed another
definition of young learner. According to them, young learners are students who
attend pre-primary school and primary school. Similarly, Ersoz (2007) proposed
several stages of children’s second language learning (p. 3). The first stage is
called “very young learners,” who range from age 3-6 years old. The second stage
is called “young learners,” who range from age 7-9 years. The third stage is called
“older/late young learners,” who range from age 10-12 years old.
In light of Ersoz (2007), this study focuses more on the first stage (i.e.,
very young learners). Children in the first stage is expected to have a chance to be
4
more proficient in second language than adult as proposed by Clark (2004) who
argued that children 2.5 to 6 years may achieve native like fluency in his or her
second language. In addition, Jia (1998), as cited in Jeffery (2008), also argued
that people who begin learning a language at an early age have higher levels of
success than those who begin late. Moreover, Cummins (1981 as cited in Mati,
2004) also proposed that young learners are more likely to be more highly
proficient in the second language because they have good memory. It can be
referred from the statement above, therefore, that children from 2.5 to 6 years old
may have a greater chance to be more proficient in the second language than
adults.
In the next section, I will review two previous studies that explored
teachers’ decisions to (or not to) code-switch to L1. These teachers in two
different contexts were aware that maximizing L2 was important, but could not
deny the role of L1 for their learners. In one of these studies (i.e., Williams &
Anselmo, 2012), the researchers focused on the use of code switching for young
learners. However, the theoretical framework for my current study is adapted from
Edstrom (2007). Although she focused on adult learners, Edstrom’s work was
published in a reputable journal, and her findings are highly related to mine.
Review of Previous Studies
A study about L1 Use in the L2 Classroom was conducted by Edstrom
2007) in a language classroom in Spain. In her study, Anne Edstrom used three
steps to collect the data such as 24 audio-recorded class sessions, a reflective
5
journal, and written questionnaires with 15 participants who are students of her
Spanish class. The majority of students ranged from 18 to 22 years old, who were
beginners who had learnt the Spanish language. The finding of the study was
divided into three sections: quantity of L1 use, functions of L1 use, and reasons or
motivations for L1 use. The teacher used 18 percent of English in the first month
and 42 percent of English in the last month. Edstrom (2007) reported that the
teacher used L1 for grammar instruction, classroom management, and to
compensate for a lack of comprehension.
Another study was conducted by Williams and Anselmo (2012) in a rural
area but has a high population of families speaking Spanish as their primary
language. The participants of the study were 19 preschoolers from Spanish
backgrounds in two classrooms. In their study, Williams and Anselmo examined
code-switching techniques demonstrated by the teacher to help English language
learners acquire a second language. The findings of this study suggest that the
code-switching technique appeared to support the acquisition of a second
language for English language learners.
Although interesting, the two previous studies above occurred in an
English-speaking country (i.e., the USA), so there are no specific discussion about
the use of Bahasa Indonesia as L1 and English as L2 in Indonesian context for
students in early age which ranged from 3 to 6 years old. Therefore, in this study I
aim to examine teachers’ views toward code switching strategy used by English
teacher for young learners in Indonesia.
6
Theoretical Framework
Although Edstrom (2007) investigated the use of L1 with her adult
learners, the themes of her findings are suitable to be the theoretical framework of
the current study.
Functions of Code Switching.
There are several functions of code switching in second language learning.
Edstrom (2007) in her study found out that code switching in second language
learning was useful for grammar instruction, for classroom management, and to
compensate for a lack of comprehension. For classroom management, she used
the code-switching strategy for dealing with an unsuccessful vocabulary activity,
raising grammar-related questions, discussing some cultural issues, connecting
with students, and translating.
Reasons or Motivations of the Use of Code-Switching.
There are also several reasons or motivations of teacher for using code
switching. Edstrom (2007) in her study found out several reasons for using code
switching. The first reason is because that the teacher is concerned about
communicating respect and creating a positive environment. The second reason is
because teacher has multiple goals. Examples of the second reason in Edstrom’s
(2007) study are to equip her students to become proficient users of Spanish, to
help her student recognize the difficulty of learning a language, to better
understand the relationship between language and the realities it describes, and to
7
avoid stereotypical ideas about Hispanic cultures. The third reason is because
teacher is lazy and tempted to use L1 to save time.
THE STUDY
Research Methodology
This research is conducted with a qualitative method by interviewing three
English teachers of Agape Kenari Kindergarten School in Kudus, Central Java,
Indonesia. In this qualitative study, I will address this research question: What are
the English teachers’ views toward code switching strategy in English language
learning for young learners?
Context of the Study
This research was conducted in Kindergarten Agape Kenari in Kudus,
Central Java, Indonesia. There was only one reason why I chose Agape Kenari as
the setting. Agape Kenari was a kindergarten which does not normally use English
language on a daily basis. However, there is an English class which is held twice a
week. The purpose was the teacher wanted to acquaint the young learners with
English as an international language. In the learning process, the teacher applied
the code-switching strategy in their teaching for young learners.
Participants
This research uses purposive sampling, more specifically quota sampling.
According to the Business Dictionary Online refers to quota sampling is the
process of data collection in which the samples are targeted based on a number of
8
criteria
determined
by
the
researcher
(http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/quota-sampling.html). In order to
conduct this qualitative research, I interviewed three teachers in Agape Kenari
kindergarten school in Kudus. There are two main criteria for selecting these
participants. The first criterion is all teachers should have experience in teaching
English to young learners because Hanushek (1986) argue that experience has
effect on students’ achievement even though the effect is not really significant.
The second criterion is all teachers should be able to speak both Indonesia and
English. To choose the participants, I used quota sampling, because the
participants were selected based on the above criteria.
Data Collection Methods
In this research, I used a semi-structured interview with open-ended
questions in Indonesia language. Before I collected the data, I had prepared a
consent form for the participant. After that, I asked an official letter from the
Faculty of Language and Literature which I obtained in the administration office,
in order to ask permission for interviewing the teacher of Agape Kenari
Kindergarten School. In my interview process, I used Bahasa Indonesia in the
questions because I wanted to anticipate if there were some participants who did
not know what I wanted to ask when I used the English language. In other words I
wanted to avoid misunderstanding during interviews. Besides, I thought that the
participants would feel more comfortable in answering the questions if I used
Bahasa Indonesia. I also assumed that using Bahasa Indonesia would ensure that
my data would be rich. In the interview process I used an audio recording and I
9
transcribed it. See the Appendix for the list of interview questions to get the
teachers’ view about code switching strategy. For further information, I did the
first interview on Saturday, 30 January 2016; the second interview on Thursday, 4
February 2016 and follow-up interviews on Thursday, 25 February 2016. All data
that I report here have been translated from Bahasa Indonesia to English.
Data Analysis Procedure
As I read my transcribed data, I made marginal notes on them,
highlighting any teacher responses which I believed would illustrate particular
points, and then listed what I saw, I grouped the data into several key themes
based on Edstrom’s (2007) statement which are (1) quantity of the use of L1 and
L2 code switching use, (2) functions of code switching, and (3) reasons or
motivations of code switching. Edstrom’s framework has also been combined
with Johansson’s (2013) study about when and why code switching is used and
teachers’ reasons of doing it.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
I do not mention the teacher’s name and I use the term of Interviewer (I),
Interviewee 1 (Teacher 1), Interviewee 2 (Teacher 2), and Interviewee 3
(Teacher 3) in order to keep the participants’ personal data. The result shows that
all teachers agree that the use of code-switching is important in teaching English
for young learners because young learners still need their mother tongue to help
them understand the second language.
10
Quantity of the Use of L1 and L2 in Code-Switching Use
On the interview, Teacher #2 and Teacher #3 argued that it is better if they
teach their student using English language around (80%) and Indonesia language
use around (20%). The reason of that decision was to make the students
accustomed to English therefore they will be able to speak English in early age.
As Teacher #2 said:
I think children have strong memory. Therefore, if I make them exposed to English, they
will be able to speak English fluently. Besides, it is an English class not an Indonesia
class, so I prefer to use English language more often rather than Indonesia language in
order to make the students accustomed with English. I expect that if the students are
accustomed to listening to English, they will be able to speak English in early age.
(Interview, January 30, 2016)
This statement corresponds to Cummins (1981 as cited in Mati, 2004) who
stated that young learners’ good memory contributes to high levels of proficiency
in two languages. It can be inferred that young learners may be able to remember
utterances in English quickly and may easily achieve native-like proficiency if the
teacher speaks English more often than Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom.
Moreover, supporting ideas of the statement above are also proposed by
Krashen (1981) as cited in (Ellis, 2005) who argued that the use of the mother
tongue in the learning process should be minimized. In addition, Ellis (2005) also
stated that the maximal use of the target language during instruction could create a
target language atmosphere in their classrooms. A classroom which is designed to
have a target language atmosphere may be effective to make students exposed to
English. Last, Hall & Macaro (as cited in Ellis, 2005) also stated the maximal use
of L2 could set an example for the students which later promote students’
production.
11
However, an opposite view came from Teacher #1 who agreed to use 20
percent English and 80 percent Bahasa Indonesia because she thought the students
would lose their mother tongue (Bahasa Indonesia) if they are more exposed to
English than Bahasa Indonesia, as Teacher #1 stated below: “I think the use of
Bahasa Indonesia is needed because if I used English too often, student will get
confused and it will decrease their mother tongue. Therefore, I should only teach
English vocabulary for students.” (Interview, January 30, 2016)
This statement corresponds to Ramirez’s (1985) finding that there was a
controversy between the use of code switching in teaching English because it can
cause regressive code switching, a condition where children are losing their first
language and leaning on their second language to supply missing elements.
Interestingly, even though Teacher #3 agreed to use more English than
Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom, she was also aware that teaching English for
young learners brings a risk for the loss of Bahasa Indonesia as learners’ mother
tongue, as quoted below:
I think the students do not fully master Bahasa Indonesia because they are just children
who are still in the process of acquiring Bahasa Indonesia. Using full English in the
classroom may slow down or even obstruct their ability to speak Bahasa Indonesia. That’s
why I still use a little bit Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom. (Interview, 04 February
2016)
It can be concluded that Teacher #1 and Teacher #3 are basically aware
that teaching English for young learners is quite risky for students’ process of
learning mother tongue. However, Teacher #3 prefers to use English as much as
possible in the classroom considering the fact that young learners have a great
chance to master English due to their good memories.
12
Functions of Code Switching
Based on the interview, there are several functions of code switching in
teaching young learners. The first function is for translation. All teachers think
that the use of code switching is needed to translate some difficult words to the
students to help them understand the lesson. For example, Teacher #1 said:
“Umm, I usually use Bahasa Indonesia when I explain my lessons to my student.
For example, I show a picture and say ‘banana, pisang.’ So, I must translate it in
order to make my student understand more” (Interview, January 30, 2016).
Another example was given by Teacher #2 who stated that she would use
code switching when there are some new students who join the class. She would
translate her utterances from Indonesia to English. Teacher #2 stated:
When I explain the material and if there are some new students who join the class
recently, I usually use Bahasa Indonesia first then I translate it in the English language to
make them understand what I say and I think that student need adaptation in the learning
process. (Interview, January 30, 2016)
The two statements above similar to one of Johansson’s (2013) findings in
her study that teachers use code switching to make it easier for the students to
understand what they are teaching. This finding also corresponds to Edstrom
(2007) and Polio & Duff (1994) who stated that code switching is useful for
translating difficult words.
The second function of code switching is to reprimand students, as
Teacher #1 quoted below:
I usually use Bahasa Indonesia without planning. It happens when I want to reprimand a
student who disturbs another student when I am explaining in the class. Because if I use
English language, I believe that there are students who cannot understand what I’m saying
to them and they can’t respond back to me. (Interview, January 30, 2016)
13
It can be concluded that Teacher #1 think that code switching is useful for
classroom management because Rahman (2011) stated that one of several aspects
of classroom management is providing a suitable reprimand. Therefore, teachers’
use of code switching to reprimand students can also be said useful for classroom
management. This finding corresponds to Polio’s & Duff’s (1994) who think that
reprimand is useful for classroom management.
Reasons or motivations of Code Switching
There are two reasons why teachers use code switching. The first reason is
because they realize that the students have different levels of proficiency.
Therefore, they switched the language from Indonesia to English to avoid
negative atmosphere, as Teacher #2 stated below:
I don’t differentiate my choice of language in all classes even though there are certain
classes in which many of the students have high proficiency in English. It’s because there
are still some students who don’t understand English yet. So, I think it’s better if I use
both Bahasa Indonesia and English in each class. (Interview, January 30, 2016)
It can be concluded from the finding that if the teachers used 100 percent
of English in the classroom, students with low level of proficiency may be
burdened. Therefore, to create positive atmosphere the teachers used code
switching. This finding corresponds to Edstrom (2007) who state that the teachers
used code switching in order to create a positive environment to the students.
The second reason of using code switching is because Teacher #3 realized
that some students did not feel confident about practicing English speaking in the
class. Therefore, the teachers used both Bahasa Indonesia and English in the class,
as Teacher #3 stated below:
14
Sometimes students are not confident to speak English even to speak short and simple
sentences that I have explained. Therefore I switch from English to Bahasa Indonesia to
make the students be more comfortable. I hope when the students feel comfortable and
enjoy the lesson, they will be more confident in speaking English. (Interview, 04
February 2016)
It can be inferred from the statement above that the teacher attempted to
understand students’ feeling. Therefore, she switched from English to Bahasa
Indonesia. This finding is closely related to one of several categories of L1 use
proposed by Polio & Duff (1994) which is to express their empathy/solidarity.
CONCLUSION
This study was conducted to find out what strategies used by English
teachers in a kindergarten school which offers a dual-language program for young
learners. Data in this study is derived from the interview that has been done in an
English class with three teachers in Agape Kenari Kindergarten School in Kudus,
Central Java, Indonesia. The finding shows that the teacher used code switching
strategy which was grouped in 3 themes there are (1) quantity of the use of L1 and
L2 code switching use, (2) function of code switching, and (3) reasons or
motivations of code switching. Based on the three themes, code switching was
used consistently in the classroom.
The first theme is concerned with quantity. Teacher #2 and Teacher #3
used 80 percent English and 20 percent Indonesia in the classroom because they
think it is needed for students to train and familiarize themselves to speak English
as soon as possible. This statement supported Cummins (1981 as cited in Mati,
2004) who stated that young learners’ good memory contributes to high levels of
proficiency in two languages. While Teacher #1 used 20 percent English and 80
15
percent Indonesia in the classroom because she thinks that using Bahasa Indonesia
more often than English is possible for students in order to maintain their mother
tongue. This statement is supported by Ramirez (1985) who stated that there was a
controversy between the use of code switching in teaching English because it can
cause regressive code switching (i.e., a condition where children are losing their
first language). Interestingly, even though Teacher #3 agreed to use more English
than Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom, but she aware that teaching English for
young learners had a risk for students’ mother tongue. She realized that students
have a risk to loss of Bahasa Indonesia as their mother tongue. However, Teacher
#3 prefer to use English as much as possible in the classroom considering the fact
that young learners have a great chance to master English due to their good
memories.
The second theme is about the functions of code switching. The first
function is for translation. All teachers in my study thought that the use of code
switching was necessary to translate some difficult word to the student. The
second function of code switching is for giving reprimands to the student.
The third theme is related to the degree of students’ motivations. There are
two reasons of the teachers of using code switching. The first reason is because
they realize that the students have different level of proficiency, if the teachers
used English 100 percent in the classroom, students with low level of proficiency
may be burdened and lost their motivation. The second reason of using code
switching is because some students do not feel confident in practicing English
speaking in the class.
16
As the implication for pedagogical practice, teachers are recommended to
use code switching strategy for kindergarten school students since code switching
has well various benefits for young learners which can help them to learn English
easier and to be more confident in speaking English.
Finally, I hope that this study may be useful for English teachers in
kindergarten schools to be more confident about using code switching after
knowing it is benefits. However, considering the limitation of time, context, and
number of participants, this study could be developed on more than one
kindergarten contexts with larger number of participant to know various teachers’
views toward code switching. I also encourage researchers to use classroom
observations to check the extent to which teachers’ responses regarding code
switching in interviews are confirmed or not in classroom contexts.
17
REFERENCES
Clark, J. J. (2004). Early and late Spanish–English bilinguals' acquisition of
English word stress patterns. Cambridge Journals, 7(3), 207-226.
Edstrom, A. (2007). L1 use in the L2 classroom: One teacher’s self-evaluation.
The Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(2), 275-292
Ellis. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. The Asian EFL Journal,
7(3), 9–24.
Ersoz, A. (2007). Teaching English to young learners. Ankara: EDM Publishing.
Genesee, F. (2008). Dual language development in preschool children. Arizona
State University, 59-79.
Hanushek, E. (1986). The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in
Public Schools. Journal of Economic Literature, 24(4), 1141-1177.
Jeffery, L. (2008). Early language learning research white paper report.
Johansson, S. (2013). Code-switching in the English classroom: What teachers
do and what their students wish they did (Unpublished MA thesis).
Karltads University.
Kalendova, E. (2008). The use of game-like activities in teaching English to young
children. Masaryk University, English language.
Khatib, M. & Mellati, M. (2012). Literature and young learners in an EFL
situation. Journal of Comparative Literature and Culture, 1(1), 18-22.
Mati, X. (2004). Using code switching as a strategy for bilingual education in the
classroom. Proceedings of the 21st annual AEAA Conference , 1-28.
Polio, C. & Duff, P. (1994). Teachers' language use in university foreign language
classroom: A qualitative analysis of English and target language alternation.
Modern Language Journal, 78, 313-326.
Quota Sampling. (n.d.) Business dictionary online . Retrieved from April 25, 2016
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/quota-sampling.html.
Rahman, M. S. (2011). Classroom managemenet: Knowing student’s interest to
involve them (Unpublished Bachelor’s Thesis), BRAC University, India.
18
Ramirez, A. G. (1985). Bilingualism through schooling: Cross-cultural education
for minority and majority students. New York: State University of New
York Press.
Riegelhaupt, F. (2000). Codeswitching and language use in the classroom. In F.
Riegelhaupt, & A. Roca (Eds.), Research on Spanish in the U.S. (pp. 204217). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Slattery, M., & Willis, J. (2001). English for primary teachers: A handbook of
activities and classroom language . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stephen-Kalong. (2008). Code-switching as a Resource in Content and Language
Integrated Learning or Bilingual Classroom. Retrieved March 30, 2015,
from
http://studentbounty.com/essays/code-switching-as-a-resource-incontent-and-language-integrated-learning-or-bilingual-classroom/
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to sociolinguistics (5th ed.). Hongkong:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Westly, E. (2011). The bilingual advantage: Learning a second language can give
kids’ brains a boost. New York City.
Williams, M. & Anselmo, G. (2012). Does code switching work for young
children? A case study of English language learners . Undergraduate
Research (NCUR), Weber State University, Ogden Utah.
Winford, D. (2003). An introduction to contact linguistics. Malden: Blackwell
Publishing.
19
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thankfulness to God Almighty, this study has been finished. This hard long
effort could not be done without those who supported me during on the study. I
would like to dedicate my acknowledgement to:
Jesus Christ who has accompanied and blessed me during the process of
my study.
My father Harsono Danuatmadja (alm) and my mother (Elsjawani
Tjokrosoeharto) who have supported and prayed for the smoothness of my
study.
My brother, Hans Kristanto Danuatmadja. You have supported and prayed
for the smoothness of my study.
My big Tjokrosoeharto’s family who have cared and prayed for me to
finish my thesis soon.
Bapak Joseph Ernest Mambu, Ph.D. who gave me a big chance and trust to
join his Proposal class when I didn’t have a Proposal class yet and thank
you for being patient and kind in guiding me to compose this thesis.
Bapak Christian Rudianto, M.Appl.Ling. Thank you for being a good,
kind, and friendly examiner.
My beloved boyfriend, Rendra Pramana Putra Kurniawan who gave me
supported, accompanied, helped, and prayed for the smoothness of my
study.
My beloved best friends: Lidya, Sola, Ivana, and Yoas. You are guys who
gave me cheerfulness, spirit, and support to finish my thesis. I also wish
the best for your thesis, girls. Keep spirit and believe that you can do it!
All 2012-ers.
20
APPENDIX
Interview Questions
• Male
Female
(
)
(
)
• What are your subject(s) beside English?
• How many years have you been teaching?
1. What do you think about the use of Bahasa Indonesia in the English
classroom, in general?
2. In what situations do you choose to speak Bahasa Indonesia?
3. Are there times and situations when you always speak Bahasa Indonesia?
When and why?
4. Are there advantages in changing from English to Bahasa Indonesia in
your teaching?
5. Are there times and situations when you never speak Indonesia or try extra
hard not too? When and why?
6. Are there disadvantages in changing the language to Indonesia when you
teach?
7. Are there times when you speak Indonesia when it was not planned ahead?
When does this occur? What situations make you switch into Indonesia?
Why do you use Indonesia in those situations?
8. Is your choice of language different if you are talking to the whole class or
with a single student?
9. Is your choice of language different depending on which one of your
classes you are teaching?
10. Are there advantages when students switch to Bahasa Indonesia when you
teach?
11. Are there disadvantages when the students switch to Bahasa Indonesia
when you speak?
12. Are there situations when you encourage students to speak Bahasa
Indonesia?
21
13. In the new syllabus for English it is said that teaching should as far as
possible be conducted in English. What has this new guideline meant for
your teaching?
This interview questions were modified from Johansson (2013).
22
SWITCHING STRATEGY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja
112012009
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2016
KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS’ VIEWS TOWARD THE CODE
SWITCHING STRATEGY
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja
112012009
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
SALATIGA
2016
i
ii
iii
iv
v
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in
any course or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any
university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this contains no material
previously published or written by any other person except where due reference is
made in the text.
Copyright @2016: Nadia Angela Danuatmadja and Joseph Ernest Mambu, Ph.D.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means
without the prior written permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the
English Language Education Program, Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya
Wacana Christian University, Salatiga.
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja:
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER ......................................................................................................
i
PERNYATAAN TIDAK PLAGIAT .......................................................
ii
PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN AKSES.............................................
iii
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION ..............................
iv
APPROVAL FORM .................................................................................
v
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT ..................................................................
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................
vii
ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................
1
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................
1
LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................................................
4
Defining Code Switching ................................................................................................
4
Young Learner and Second Language Learning ..............................................................
4
Review of Previous Study...............................................................................................
5
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ..........................................................
7
Functions of Code Switching ..........................................................................................
7
Reasons or Motivations of the Use of Code Switching ....................................................
7
THE STUDY ..............................................................................................
8
Research Methodology ...................................................................................................
8
Context of the Study .......................................................................................................
8
Participants ....................................................................................................................
8
Data Collection Methods ................................................................................................
9
Data Analysis Procedure .................................................................................................
10
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ..............................................................
10
Quantity of the Use of L1 and L2 in Code-Switching Use ...............................................
11
Function of Code Switching ...........................................................................................
13
Reasons or Motivations of Code Switching .....................................................................
14
CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................
15
vii
REFERENCES .........................................................................................
18
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................
20
APPENDIX ................................................................................................
21
viii
KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS’ VIEWS TOWARD THE CODESWITCHING STRATEGY
Nadia Angela Danuatmadja
ABSTRACT
Many parents in urban areas expect their children to understand and use a
second language including the English as early as possible. With this demand,
there are many kindergartens in Indonesia which offer English as one of the
school subjects. However, there is a controversy among kindergarten English
teachers whether to use only English or to switch the language from English to
Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom. With these as the background, the study aims
to examine kindergarten teachers’ perspectives of their code-switching strategy in
helping young learner to acquire English. To understand these teachers’
perspectives, three kindergarten teachers who teach English twice a week at a
school in Kudus, Central Java, Indonesia were interviewed. To choose the
participant, the three teachers should have the criteria such as they had at least two
years of experience to be a teacher especially in teaching young learners and
understand both Indonesia and English languages. For choosing the participants, I
used quota sampling, because the participants were selected based on a number of
the above criteria. The results of the interviews can be categorized into three
crucial points: (1) quantity of the use of L1 and L2 in Code-Switching use, (2)
function of Code Switching, and (3) reasons or motivations of Code-Switching.
Key words: code switching strategy, young learner
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays most of parents in urban areas expect their children to know
and understand a second language (like an English Language) in an early age.
However, it seems that there is still a controversy about learning a second
language for young learners, especially kindergarten students. Some people
argued that if children understand two languages in an early age, it will bring
1
benefits for them as young learners. For example, Westly (2011) argued that
learning a second language can give kids brain boost. It can boost the neuronal
cell density in certain areas which is important for cognitive functioning.
However, some other people may think that learning a second language in early
age will cause a burden for the children. For example, Genesee (2008) stated that
there are wrong assumptions about learning dual language in an early age. For
instance it will “cognitively and linguistically burdensome for children” (p. 60)
and “the child will learn better and faster if they only learn one language” (p. 61).
Stephen-Kalong (2008) expressed concern that code-switching in teacher
instruction might lead students to feel bored and lose their attention to the
previous instruction in the target language. It happens because teachers often
repeat their instruction in students’ first language. However, this study will focus
on those who agree that early age English education is important and those who
agree to put their child in a kindergarten which has an English class.
There are several techniques used by English teachers in early age school
to teach students from around 2.5 years old to 6 years old. One of the techniques
is by using code switching. Some researchers believe that it is better for English
teachers in early age school to use code-switching strategy to teach young
learners. Winford (2003) stated that code switching is the use of two languages as
an alternative between sentences. According to Williams & Anselmo (2012), the
code-switching strategy has been used by teachers who shuttle between English
and Spanish during reading a book, giving explanations, and instructions to the
children. In that study code-switching strategy was used by the teacher to deliver
2
the material and it helped young learners understand the lessons. Besides that,
Timm (1993), as cited in Riegelhaupt (2000), also stated that code switching will
probably be effective and conducive to create a more relaxed classroom
atmosphere, which can enhance the enthusiasm of the learning process. That is,
when the students do not understand about meanings in the second language, then
the teacher will use their mother tongue to translate and explain the second
language itself.
There are two reasons why the researcher chooses this topic of the
research. The first reason is that English language is an International language
which is important to learn especially in teaching English for young learner. In
fact, to teach English language to young learner is not easy because English is the
young learners’ second language and young learners do not master it yet and
because young learners have several characteristics which differ them from adult.
The second reason why I have chosen this topic is because it seems that
many English teachers are confused about whether they have to use code
switching to teach young learners or not. Considering the confusion between
English teachers in kindergarten, I am interested in doing a study how English
teachers in a kindergarten view code switching in order to give information about
teachers of kindergarten’s views about code switching. The result of this study can
be used as a consideration for English teachers in kindergarten to apply code
switching to young learners.
3
LITERATURE REVIEW
Defining Code Switching
There are two types of code; they are code switching and code mixing.
Heller (1988), as cited in Mati (2004), stated that code switching is the use of
more than one language in a single communication, whereas Wardhaugh (2006)
stated that code mixing is a conversation which happens when the languages are
mixed in a single utterance. In this study, however, I use the notion of code
switching to also mean code mixing.
Young Learners and Second Language Learning
According to Kalendova (2008) a young learner means children who are in
the first stage of formal schooling. They are eleven to twelve years old. In
addition, Slattery and Willis (2001) stated that young learners can be divided into
two groups. The first group consists of very young learners who are children
under seven years old. The second group includes young learners who are children
from eight to 12 years old. Moreover, Khatib and Mellati (2012) proposed another
definition of young learner. According to them, young learners are students who
attend pre-primary school and primary school. Similarly, Ersoz (2007) proposed
several stages of children’s second language learning (p. 3). The first stage is
called “very young learners,” who range from age 3-6 years old. The second stage
is called “young learners,” who range from age 7-9 years. The third stage is called
“older/late young learners,” who range from age 10-12 years old.
In light of Ersoz (2007), this study focuses more on the first stage (i.e.,
very young learners). Children in the first stage is expected to have a chance to be
4
more proficient in second language than adult as proposed by Clark (2004) who
argued that children 2.5 to 6 years may achieve native like fluency in his or her
second language. In addition, Jia (1998), as cited in Jeffery (2008), also argued
that people who begin learning a language at an early age have higher levels of
success than those who begin late. Moreover, Cummins (1981 as cited in Mati,
2004) also proposed that young learners are more likely to be more highly
proficient in the second language because they have good memory. It can be
referred from the statement above, therefore, that children from 2.5 to 6 years old
may have a greater chance to be more proficient in the second language than
adults.
In the next section, I will review two previous studies that explored
teachers’ decisions to (or not to) code-switch to L1. These teachers in two
different contexts were aware that maximizing L2 was important, but could not
deny the role of L1 for their learners. In one of these studies (i.e., Williams &
Anselmo, 2012), the researchers focused on the use of code switching for young
learners. However, the theoretical framework for my current study is adapted from
Edstrom (2007). Although she focused on adult learners, Edstrom’s work was
published in a reputable journal, and her findings are highly related to mine.
Review of Previous Studies
A study about L1 Use in the L2 Classroom was conducted by Edstrom
2007) in a language classroom in Spain. In her study, Anne Edstrom used three
steps to collect the data such as 24 audio-recorded class sessions, a reflective
5
journal, and written questionnaires with 15 participants who are students of her
Spanish class. The majority of students ranged from 18 to 22 years old, who were
beginners who had learnt the Spanish language. The finding of the study was
divided into three sections: quantity of L1 use, functions of L1 use, and reasons or
motivations for L1 use. The teacher used 18 percent of English in the first month
and 42 percent of English in the last month. Edstrom (2007) reported that the
teacher used L1 for grammar instruction, classroom management, and to
compensate for a lack of comprehension.
Another study was conducted by Williams and Anselmo (2012) in a rural
area but has a high population of families speaking Spanish as their primary
language. The participants of the study were 19 preschoolers from Spanish
backgrounds in two classrooms. In their study, Williams and Anselmo examined
code-switching techniques demonstrated by the teacher to help English language
learners acquire a second language. The findings of this study suggest that the
code-switching technique appeared to support the acquisition of a second
language for English language learners.
Although interesting, the two previous studies above occurred in an
English-speaking country (i.e., the USA), so there are no specific discussion about
the use of Bahasa Indonesia as L1 and English as L2 in Indonesian context for
students in early age which ranged from 3 to 6 years old. Therefore, in this study I
aim to examine teachers’ views toward code switching strategy used by English
teacher for young learners in Indonesia.
6
Theoretical Framework
Although Edstrom (2007) investigated the use of L1 with her adult
learners, the themes of her findings are suitable to be the theoretical framework of
the current study.
Functions of Code Switching.
There are several functions of code switching in second language learning.
Edstrom (2007) in her study found out that code switching in second language
learning was useful for grammar instruction, for classroom management, and to
compensate for a lack of comprehension. For classroom management, she used
the code-switching strategy for dealing with an unsuccessful vocabulary activity,
raising grammar-related questions, discussing some cultural issues, connecting
with students, and translating.
Reasons or Motivations of the Use of Code-Switching.
There are also several reasons or motivations of teacher for using code
switching. Edstrom (2007) in her study found out several reasons for using code
switching. The first reason is because that the teacher is concerned about
communicating respect and creating a positive environment. The second reason is
because teacher has multiple goals. Examples of the second reason in Edstrom’s
(2007) study are to equip her students to become proficient users of Spanish, to
help her student recognize the difficulty of learning a language, to better
understand the relationship between language and the realities it describes, and to
7
avoid stereotypical ideas about Hispanic cultures. The third reason is because
teacher is lazy and tempted to use L1 to save time.
THE STUDY
Research Methodology
This research is conducted with a qualitative method by interviewing three
English teachers of Agape Kenari Kindergarten School in Kudus, Central Java,
Indonesia. In this qualitative study, I will address this research question: What are
the English teachers’ views toward code switching strategy in English language
learning for young learners?
Context of the Study
This research was conducted in Kindergarten Agape Kenari in Kudus,
Central Java, Indonesia. There was only one reason why I chose Agape Kenari as
the setting. Agape Kenari was a kindergarten which does not normally use English
language on a daily basis. However, there is an English class which is held twice a
week. The purpose was the teacher wanted to acquaint the young learners with
English as an international language. In the learning process, the teacher applied
the code-switching strategy in their teaching for young learners.
Participants
This research uses purposive sampling, more specifically quota sampling.
According to the Business Dictionary Online refers to quota sampling is the
process of data collection in which the samples are targeted based on a number of
8
criteria
determined
by
the
researcher
(http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/quota-sampling.html). In order to
conduct this qualitative research, I interviewed three teachers in Agape Kenari
kindergarten school in Kudus. There are two main criteria for selecting these
participants. The first criterion is all teachers should have experience in teaching
English to young learners because Hanushek (1986) argue that experience has
effect on students’ achievement even though the effect is not really significant.
The second criterion is all teachers should be able to speak both Indonesia and
English. To choose the participants, I used quota sampling, because the
participants were selected based on the above criteria.
Data Collection Methods
In this research, I used a semi-structured interview with open-ended
questions in Indonesia language. Before I collected the data, I had prepared a
consent form for the participant. After that, I asked an official letter from the
Faculty of Language and Literature which I obtained in the administration office,
in order to ask permission for interviewing the teacher of Agape Kenari
Kindergarten School. In my interview process, I used Bahasa Indonesia in the
questions because I wanted to anticipate if there were some participants who did
not know what I wanted to ask when I used the English language. In other words I
wanted to avoid misunderstanding during interviews. Besides, I thought that the
participants would feel more comfortable in answering the questions if I used
Bahasa Indonesia. I also assumed that using Bahasa Indonesia would ensure that
my data would be rich. In the interview process I used an audio recording and I
9
transcribed it. See the Appendix for the list of interview questions to get the
teachers’ view about code switching strategy. For further information, I did the
first interview on Saturday, 30 January 2016; the second interview on Thursday, 4
February 2016 and follow-up interviews on Thursday, 25 February 2016. All data
that I report here have been translated from Bahasa Indonesia to English.
Data Analysis Procedure
As I read my transcribed data, I made marginal notes on them,
highlighting any teacher responses which I believed would illustrate particular
points, and then listed what I saw, I grouped the data into several key themes
based on Edstrom’s (2007) statement which are (1) quantity of the use of L1 and
L2 code switching use, (2) functions of code switching, and (3) reasons or
motivations of code switching. Edstrom’s framework has also been combined
with Johansson’s (2013) study about when and why code switching is used and
teachers’ reasons of doing it.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
I do not mention the teacher’s name and I use the term of Interviewer (I),
Interviewee 1 (Teacher 1), Interviewee 2 (Teacher 2), and Interviewee 3
(Teacher 3) in order to keep the participants’ personal data. The result shows that
all teachers agree that the use of code-switching is important in teaching English
for young learners because young learners still need their mother tongue to help
them understand the second language.
10
Quantity of the Use of L1 and L2 in Code-Switching Use
On the interview, Teacher #2 and Teacher #3 argued that it is better if they
teach their student using English language around (80%) and Indonesia language
use around (20%). The reason of that decision was to make the students
accustomed to English therefore they will be able to speak English in early age.
As Teacher #2 said:
I think children have strong memory. Therefore, if I make them exposed to English, they
will be able to speak English fluently. Besides, it is an English class not an Indonesia
class, so I prefer to use English language more often rather than Indonesia language in
order to make the students accustomed with English. I expect that if the students are
accustomed to listening to English, they will be able to speak English in early age.
(Interview, January 30, 2016)
This statement corresponds to Cummins (1981 as cited in Mati, 2004) who
stated that young learners’ good memory contributes to high levels of proficiency
in two languages. It can be inferred that young learners may be able to remember
utterances in English quickly and may easily achieve native-like proficiency if the
teacher speaks English more often than Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom.
Moreover, supporting ideas of the statement above are also proposed by
Krashen (1981) as cited in (Ellis, 2005) who argued that the use of the mother
tongue in the learning process should be minimized. In addition, Ellis (2005) also
stated that the maximal use of the target language during instruction could create a
target language atmosphere in their classrooms. A classroom which is designed to
have a target language atmosphere may be effective to make students exposed to
English. Last, Hall & Macaro (as cited in Ellis, 2005) also stated the maximal use
of L2 could set an example for the students which later promote students’
production.
11
However, an opposite view came from Teacher #1 who agreed to use 20
percent English and 80 percent Bahasa Indonesia because she thought the students
would lose their mother tongue (Bahasa Indonesia) if they are more exposed to
English than Bahasa Indonesia, as Teacher #1 stated below: “I think the use of
Bahasa Indonesia is needed because if I used English too often, student will get
confused and it will decrease their mother tongue. Therefore, I should only teach
English vocabulary for students.” (Interview, January 30, 2016)
This statement corresponds to Ramirez’s (1985) finding that there was a
controversy between the use of code switching in teaching English because it can
cause regressive code switching, a condition where children are losing their first
language and leaning on their second language to supply missing elements.
Interestingly, even though Teacher #3 agreed to use more English than
Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom, she was also aware that teaching English for
young learners brings a risk for the loss of Bahasa Indonesia as learners’ mother
tongue, as quoted below:
I think the students do not fully master Bahasa Indonesia because they are just children
who are still in the process of acquiring Bahasa Indonesia. Using full English in the
classroom may slow down or even obstruct their ability to speak Bahasa Indonesia. That’s
why I still use a little bit Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom. (Interview, 04 February
2016)
It can be concluded that Teacher #1 and Teacher #3 are basically aware
that teaching English for young learners is quite risky for students’ process of
learning mother tongue. However, Teacher #3 prefers to use English as much as
possible in the classroom considering the fact that young learners have a great
chance to master English due to their good memories.
12
Functions of Code Switching
Based on the interview, there are several functions of code switching in
teaching young learners. The first function is for translation. All teachers think
that the use of code switching is needed to translate some difficult words to the
students to help them understand the lesson. For example, Teacher #1 said:
“Umm, I usually use Bahasa Indonesia when I explain my lessons to my student.
For example, I show a picture and say ‘banana, pisang.’ So, I must translate it in
order to make my student understand more” (Interview, January 30, 2016).
Another example was given by Teacher #2 who stated that she would use
code switching when there are some new students who join the class. She would
translate her utterances from Indonesia to English. Teacher #2 stated:
When I explain the material and if there are some new students who join the class
recently, I usually use Bahasa Indonesia first then I translate it in the English language to
make them understand what I say and I think that student need adaptation in the learning
process. (Interview, January 30, 2016)
The two statements above similar to one of Johansson’s (2013) findings in
her study that teachers use code switching to make it easier for the students to
understand what they are teaching. This finding also corresponds to Edstrom
(2007) and Polio & Duff (1994) who stated that code switching is useful for
translating difficult words.
The second function of code switching is to reprimand students, as
Teacher #1 quoted below:
I usually use Bahasa Indonesia without planning. It happens when I want to reprimand a
student who disturbs another student when I am explaining in the class. Because if I use
English language, I believe that there are students who cannot understand what I’m saying
to them and they can’t respond back to me. (Interview, January 30, 2016)
13
It can be concluded that Teacher #1 think that code switching is useful for
classroom management because Rahman (2011) stated that one of several aspects
of classroom management is providing a suitable reprimand. Therefore, teachers’
use of code switching to reprimand students can also be said useful for classroom
management. This finding corresponds to Polio’s & Duff’s (1994) who think that
reprimand is useful for classroom management.
Reasons or motivations of Code Switching
There are two reasons why teachers use code switching. The first reason is
because they realize that the students have different levels of proficiency.
Therefore, they switched the language from Indonesia to English to avoid
negative atmosphere, as Teacher #2 stated below:
I don’t differentiate my choice of language in all classes even though there are certain
classes in which many of the students have high proficiency in English. It’s because there
are still some students who don’t understand English yet. So, I think it’s better if I use
both Bahasa Indonesia and English in each class. (Interview, January 30, 2016)
It can be concluded from the finding that if the teachers used 100 percent
of English in the classroom, students with low level of proficiency may be
burdened. Therefore, to create positive atmosphere the teachers used code
switching. This finding corresponds to Edstrom (2007) who state that the teachers
used code switching in order to create a positive environment to the students.
The second reason of using code switching is because Teacher #3 realized
that some students did not feel confident about practicing English speaking in the
class. Therefore, the teachers used both Bahasa Indonesia and English in the class,
as Teacher #3 stated below:
14
Sometimes students are not confident to speak English even to speak short and simple
sentences that I have explained. Therefore I switch from English to Bahasa Indonesia to
make the students be more comfortable. I hope when the students feel comfortable and
enjoy the lesson, they will be more confident in speaking English. (Interview, 04
February 2016)
It can be inferred from the statement above that the teacher attempted to
understand students’ feeling. Therefore, she switched from English to Bahasa
Indonesia. This finding is closely related to one of several categories of L1 use
proposed by Polio & Duff (1994) which is to express their empathy/solidarity.
CONCLUSION
This study was conducted to find out what strategies used by English
teachers in a kindergarten school which offers a dual-language program for young
learners. Data in this study is derived from the interview that has been done in an
English class with three teachers in Agape Kenari Kindergarten School in Kudus,
Central Java, Indonesia. The finding shows that the teacher used code switching
strategy which was grouped in 3 themes there are (1) quantity of the use of L1 and
L2 code switching use, (2) function of code switching, and (3) reasons or
motivations of code switching. Based on the three themes, code switching was
used consistently in the classroom.
The first theme is concerned with quantity. Teacher #2 and Teacher #3
used 80 percent English and 20 percent Indonesia in the classroom because they
think it is needed for students to train and familiarize themselves to speak English
as soon as possible. This statement supported Cummins (1981 as cited in Mati,
2004) who stated that young learners’ good memory contributes to high levels of
proficiency in two languages. While Teacher #1 used 20 percent English and 80
15
percent Indonesia in the classroom because she thinks that using Bahasa Indonesia
more often than English is possible for students in order to maintain their mother
tongue. This statement is supported by Ramirez (1985) who stated that there was a
controversy between the use of code switching in teaching English because it can
cause regressive code switching (i.e., a condition where children are losing their
first language). Interestingly, even though Teacher #3 agreed to use more English
than Bahasa Indonesia in the classroom, but she aware that teaching English for
young learners had a risk for students’ mother tongue. She realized that students
have a risk to loss of Bahasa Indonesia as their mother tongue. However, Teacher
#3 prefer to use English as much as possible in the classroom considering the fact
that young learners have a great chance to master English due to their good
memories.
The second theme is about the functions of code switching. The first
function is for translation. All teachers in my study thought that the use of code
switching was necessary to translate some difficult word to the student. The
second function of code switching is for giving reprimands to the student.
The third theme is related to the degree of students’ motivations. There are
two reasons of the teachers of using code switching. The first reason is because
they realize that the students have different level of proficiency, if the teachers
used English 100 percent in the classroom, students with low level of proficiency
may be burdened and lost their motivation. The second reason of using code
switching is because some students do not feel confident in practicing English
speaking in the class.
16
As the implication for pedagogical practice, teachers are recommended to
use code switching strategy for kindergarten school students since code switching
has well various benefits for young learners which can help them to learn English
easier and to be more confident in speaking English.
Finally, I hope that this study may be useful for English teachers in
kindergarten schools to be more confident about using code switching after
knowing it is benefits. However, considering the limitation of time, context, and
number of participants, this study could be developed on more than one
kindergarten contexts with larger number of participant to know various teachers’
views toward code switching. I also encourage researchers to use classroom
observations to check the extent to which teachers’ responses regarding code
switching in interviews are confirmed or not in classroom contexts.
17
REFERENCES
Clark, J. J. (2004). Early and late Spanish–English bilinguals' acquisition of
English word stress patterns. Cambridge Journals, 7(3), 207-226.
Edstrom, A. (2007). L1 use in the L2 classroom: One teacher’s self-evaluation.
The Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(2), 275-292
Ellis. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. The Asian EFL Journal,
7(3), 9–24.
Ersoz, A. (2007). Teaching English to young learners. Ankara: EDM Publishing.
Genesee, F. (2008). Dual language development in preschool children. Arizona
State University, 59-79.
Hanushek, E. (1986). The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in
Public Schools. Journal of Economic Literature, 24(4), 1141-1177.
Jeffery, L. (2008). Early language learning research white paper report.
Johansson, S. (2013). Code-switching in the English classroom: What teachers
do and what their students wish they did (Unpublished MA thesis).
Karltads University.
Kalendova, E. (2008). The use of game-like activities in teaching English to young
children. Masaryk University, English language.
Khatib, M. & Mellati, M. (2012). Literature and young learners in an EFL
situation. Journal of Comparative Literature and Culture, 1(1), 18-22.
Mati, X. (2004). Using code switching as a strategy for bilingual education in the
classroom. Proceedings of the 21st annual AEAA Conference , 1-28.
Polio, C. & Duff, P. (1994). Teachers' language use in university foreign language
classroom: A qualitative analysis of English and target language alternation.
Modern Language Journal, 78, 313-326.
Quota Sampling. (n.d.) Business dictionary online . Retrieved from April 25, 2016
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/quota-sampling.html.
Rahman, M. S. (2011). Classroom managemenet: Knowing student’s interest to
involve them (Unpublished Bachelor’s Thesis), BRAC University, India.
18
Ramirez, A. G. (1985). Bilingualism through schooling: Cross-cultural education
for minority and majority students. New York: State University of New
York Press.
Riegelhaupt, F. (2000). Codeswitching and language use in the classroom. In F.
Riegelhaupt, & A. Roca (Eds.), Research on Spanish in the U.S. (pp. 204217). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Slattery, M., & Willis, J. (2001). English for primary teachers: A handbook of
activities and classroom language . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stephen-Kalong. (2008). Code-switching as a Resource in Content and Language
Integrated Learning or Bilingual Classroom. Retrieved March 30, 2015,
from
http://studentbounty.com/essays/code-switching-as-a-resource-incontent-and-language-integrated-learning-or-bilingual-classroom/
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to sociolinguistics (5th ed.). Hongkong:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Westly, E. (2011). The bilingual advantage: Learning a second language can give
kids’ brains a boost. New York City.
Williams, M. & Anselmo, G. (2012). Does code switching work for young
children? A case study of English language learners . Undergraduate
Research (NCUR), Weber State University, Ogden Utah.
Winford, D. (2003). An introduction to contact linguistics. Malden: Blackwell
Publishing.
19
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thankfulness to God Almighty, this study has been finished. This hard long
effort could not be done without those who supported me during on the study. I
would like to dedicate my acknowledgement to:
Jesus Christ who has accompanied and blessed me during the process of
my study.
My father Harsono Danuatmadja (alm) and my mother (Elsjawani
Tjokrosoeharto) who have supported and prayed for the smoothness of my
study.
My brother, Hans Kristanto Danuatmadja. You have supported and prayed
for the smoothness of my study.
My big Tjokrosoeharto’s family who have cared and prayed for me to
finish my thesis soon.
Bapak Joseph Ernest Mambu, Ph.D. who gave me a big chance and trust to
join his Proposal class when I didn’t have a Proposal class yet and thank
you for being patient and kind in guiding me to compose this thesis.
Bapak Christian Rudianto, M.Appl.Ling. Thank you for being a good,
kind, and friendly examiner.
My beloved boyfriend, Rendra Pramana Putra Kurniawan who gave me
supported, accompanied, helped, and prayed for the smoothness of my
study.
My beloved best friends: Lidya, Sola, Ivana, and Yoas. You are guys who
gave me cheerfulness, spirit, and support to finish my thesis. I also wish
the best for your thesis, girls. Keep spirit and believe that you can do it!
All 2012-ers.
20
APPENDIX
Interview Questions
• Male
Female
(
)
(
)
• What are your subject(s) beside English?
• How many years have you been teaching?
1. What do you think about the use of Bahasa Indonesia in the English
classroom, in general?
2. In what situations do you choose to speak Bahasa Indonesia?
3. Are there times and situations when you always speak Bahasa Indonesia?
When and why?
4. Are there advantages in changing from English to Bahasa Indonesia in
your teaching?
5. Are there times and situations when you never speak Indonesia or try extra
hard not too? When and why?
6. Are there disadvantages in changing the language to Indonesia when you
teach?
7. Are there times when you speak Indonesia when it was not planned ahead?
When does this occur? What situations make you switch into Indonesia?
Why do you use Indonesia in those situations?
8. Is your choice of language different if you are talking to the whole class or
with a single student?
9. Is your choice of language different depending on which one of your
classes you are teaching?
10. Are there advantages when students switch to Bahasa Indonesia when you
teach?
11. Are there disadvantages when the students switch to Bahasa Indonesia
when you speak?
12. Are there situations when you encourage students to speak Bahasa
Indonesia?
21
13. In the new syllabus for English it is said that teaching should as far as
possible be conducted in English. What has this new guideline meant for
your teaching?
This interview questions were modified from Johansson (2013).
22