todoELE

In recent years, Heritage Language Programs have been attracting more and more attention in the European academic and educational policy contexts. In Germany, many efforts are being undertaken to foster the teaching of heritage languages in schools. This paper provides an overview of the teaching of Spanish as a Heritage Language in Germany through the long-established Program ‘Spanish Culture and Language Lessons’ (Aulas de Lengua y Cultura Españolas) funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education for school-aged Spanish heritage speakers. The principal objectives of the study are to analyze the main fostering and constraining factors to participate in this program and to propose improvement measures. To achieve these purposes, a mixed quantitative and qualitative research methodology has been used. The findings are discussed according to these main topics arising during the research process: reasons for students to participate and learning needs, teaching challenges, family implication, relationship with the regular formal education system, blended learning, linguistic and culture diversity. Moreover, improvement measures for this Spanish Heritage Language program are suggested. The main conclusions may be useful for heritage language teachers and program managers in other heritage language (HL) programs in Germany and more generally in Europe.

Texto completo

Es bien conocida la dificultad que supone el aprendizaje de la morfología temporoaspectual en español como L2, hecho que ha llevado tanto a investigadores en adquisición de segundas lenguas (ASL) como a expertos en didáctica de lenguas extranjeras a trabajar en este asunto durante las últimas décadas, todos ellos guiados por los avances de las diferentes corrientes de la lingüística teórica. El objetivo de este trabajo es presentar el estado de la cuestión de la relación entre la investigación en ASL y la didáctica del español en materia de morfología temporoaspectual. Para ello se hará primero una breve revisión de tiempo y aspecto, después, se hará una revisión de los hallazgos hechos por la investigación de la adquisición de los pasados perfectivos e imperfectivos en español como L2 desde la propuesta de la Hipótesis del Aspecto Léxico (Andersen 1991; Andersen y Shirai 1994, 1996; Bardovi-Harlig y Comajoan-Colomé 2020; Salaberry 2021) hasta la actualidad, y tercero una revisión de los recientes análisis de la vinculación de dichos hallazgos con la práctica docente en el aula de español como L2 (Bardovi-Harlig y Comajoan-Colomé 2022; Comajoan-Colomé 2022). A pesar de la evidente conexión que vincula la investigación en ASL con la innovación didáctica en materia de aprendizaje de la morfología temporoaspectual, recientes revisiones de la influencia de la primera sobre la segunda muestran que todavía queda mucho camino por recorrer, y puentes por tender entre estas dos subdisciplinas de la lingüística aplicada (Bardovi-Harlig y Comajoan-Colomé 2022; Comajoan-Colomé 2022). Nuestro propósito último es poner de manifiesto la necesidad de reforzar la cooperación entre estas dos subdisciplinas de la lingüística aplicada para mejorar la experiencia del profesorado y el alumnado en las aulas.

Texto completo

En este estudio, describimos cómo aprenden y utilizan el alfabeto español estudiantes de esta lengua que se escolarizaron y alfabetizaron con sistemas de escritura que no se basan en el alfabeto latino (griego, cirílico, devanagari, árabe o chino). También exploramos sus prácticas letradas iniciales y sus estrategias orales y escritas de aprendizaje de una L2. Para ello entrevistamos a 21 hablantes de español como L2, de nivel B2–C1, y documentamos tanto su alfabetización en lengua materna como su acceso posterior al alfabeto latino en español u otro idioma. El corpus de datos recoge prácticas diversas, con variaciones discursivas y retóricas relevantes en relación con las de las comunidades hispanas, y con importantes implicaciones educativas. Algunos datos vinculan la preferencia por el modo oral o escrito para aprender con los procesos iniciales de escolarización y alfabetización de cada informante. Entre otros puntos: (a) en el mundo eslavo es frecuente alfabetizarse en casa con la familia antes de pisar la escuela; (b) en la comunidad china, la alfabetización se basa en la copia y la memorización de sinogramas, lo cual favorece el desarrollo de estrategias visuales de aprendizaje; (c) en las comunidades musulmanas destaca la importancia de la memorización y la recitación oral de suras del Corán, que favorecen las estrategias de aprendizaje auditivas; (d) en la mayoría de informantes, el acceso al alfabeto del español no supone ninguna dificultad porque es posterior a la apropiación de otras lenguas francas (inglés o francés), cuyos alfabetos coinciden en gran parte con el del español.

------------------------

In this paper we describe how Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) students from communities with non-Latin writing systems (Greek, Cyrillic, Devanagari, Arab or Chinese) learn and use the Spanish alphabet. We also explore their initial literacy practices in L2 as well as the written and oral learning strategies for an L2. We interviewed 21 speakers of Spanish as a second language, from levels B2–C1, and we documented their literacy in their mother tongue, as well as the later access to the Latin alphabet through Spanish or another language. The corpus of data compiles several practices, presenting meaningful discursive and rhetoric variation if compared to practices in Hispanic communities with important learning implications. Some data linked the oral or written mode of learning preference of some learners to their schooling and initial literacy. It is worth noting that (a) in Slavic communities, literacy occurs at home with the family before schooling; (b) in Chinese communities, literacy means copying and memorising synographs, which prompts visual learning strategies; (c) in Muslim communities, memorising and reciting the suras of the Koran take a central role, favouring auditory learning strategies; (d) most informants reported that access to the Spanish alphabet is not difficult at all, because this happens after having learnt another lingua franca (either English or French) with Latin-based alphabets similar to the Spanish alphabet.

Texto en inglés
Texto en español

Cognitive science is an interdisciplinary field of researchers from psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, philosophy, computer science, and anthropology who seek to understand the mind. In this regular American Educator column, we consider findings from this field that are strong and clear enough to merit classroom application.

--------------------

The teacher presents a strong, coherent lesson in which a set of significant facts is clearly connected to a reasonable conclusion. But, at test time, the students show no understanding of the connections. Some students parrot back the conclusion, but no facts. Others spit back memorized facts, but don't see how they fit together. Though the lesson wasn't taught in a rote way, it seems like rote knowledge is what the students took in. Why do well-integrated, coherent lessons often come back to us in a less meaningful, fragmented form? Can cognitive science help explain why this result is so common—and offer ideas about how to avoid it?

Artículo en inglés
Artículo en español

Cognitive science is an interdisciplinary field of researchers from psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, philosophy, computer science, and anthropology who seek to understand the mind. In this regular American Educator column, we consider findings from this field that are strong and clear enough to merit classroom application.

------------------

Very often, students will think they understand a body of material. Believing that they know it, they stop trying to learn more. But, come test time, it turns out they really don't know the material. Can cognitive science tell us anything about why students are commonly mistaken about what they know and don't know? Are there any strategies teachers can use to help students better estimate what they know?

Texto completo

The release of ChatGPT has sparked significant academic integrity concerns in higher education. However, some commentators have pointed out that generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT can enhance student learning. Consequently, academics should adapt their teaching and assessment practices to embrace the new reality of living, working, and studying in a world where AI is freely available. Despite this important debate, very little academic literature has been published on ChatGPT and other generative AI tools. This article uses content analysis to examine news articles (N=100) about how ChatGPT is disrupting higher education, concentrating specifically on Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom. It explores several key themes, including university responses, academic integrity concerns, the limitations and weaknesses of AI tool outputs, and opportunities for student learning. The data reveals mixed public discussion and university responses, with a focus mainly on academic integrity concerns and opportunities for innovative assessment design. There has also been a lack of public discussion about the potential for ChatGPT to enhance participation and success for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Similarly, the students’ voice is poorly represented in media articles to date. This article considers these trends and the impact of AI tools on student learning at university.