"To speak or not to speak"

(1)

1

Degree Project with Specialisation in English

Studies in Education

15 Credits, Second Cycle

“To speak or not to speak”

Teachers’ thoughts on the role of Swedish language in teaching

English

”Att tala eller inte tala”

Lärarnas syn på Svenskspråkets roll i Engelska undervisning

Poorya Kazemipour

English Studies in Education, Grades 7-9 Date for the Opposition Seminar 2018.01.12

Examiner: Marie Jedemark Supervisor: Vanja Lozic

Faculty of Education and Society School Development and

Leadership

(2)

2

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate when, how and why three teachers in Sweden use Swedish language in teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom. Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory is used as the background theory for this study. Furthermore, literature regarding the use of the first language and the target language during the foreign language teaching is presented in this thesis. Some findings on one hand support the use of the first language during the foreign language teaching, but on the other hand they claim that excessive use of the first language can de-motivate the students and become a barrier in their target language learning. Researches that support the use of first language state that using the first language to mediate the target language learning and to scaffold students’ learning can be beneficial. Additionally, researches that suggest the use of the target language suggest that maximizing the target language during the foreign language learning can expose the students to utilize the target language. Qualitative data collection method with semi-structured interviews and observations are used for this study.

(3)

3

1. Introduction

Speaking is an important skill that is considered as a bridge that connects people who speak the same language. It helps people express their thoughts, ideas and feelings. It plays an important role in the communication process and it is one of the most important types of linguistic activities. Developing speaking skill helps to create an effective link between people in society (Swedish Syllabus in English, 2011).

According to Swedish Syllabus in English (2011, p.32), “through teaching, pupils should be given the opportunity to develop all-round communicative skills. These skills involve understanding spoken and written English, being able to formulate one’s thinking and interact with others in the spoken and written language”. The syllabus emphasizes the importance of oral communication by mentioning that pupils should be given the opportunity to communicate. Furthermore, knowledge requirement states that “students should be able to understand the main content of spoken English and they should show their understanding by presenting an overview with discussion and comments on content and details” (Swedish syllabus in English, 2011, p.37). For that reason, it is important that teachers provide a learning environment in which pupils can practice the target language. Additionally, Sweden Syllabus in English has provided the information of What should be accomplished by learning and teaching English, but it hasn’t provided the information of How goals in English should be achieved. Thus, teachers have different approaches for fulfilling the goals in English and the choice of language in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom.

There is much discussion about the use of the first language and the target language in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classes (Macaro, 2005). How much target language or first language should be used or when it is necessary to use the first language are among English teachers’ considerations (Moeller and Roberts, 2013). Cook (2001) maintains that the first language should not be avoided by teachers and students in the classroom because it can create an authentic target language learning environment rather than something to be avoided at all costs. This indicates that it is possible to use first language for learning purposes. Turnbull (2001) claims that by using first language as a “frame of reference”, learners can process the language more easily and it will result in greater understanding of the target language. Burden (2000) states that many teachers believe that the classroom is often “students’ only exposure to English” and they

(6)

6

emphasize that this exposure should be maximized. Exposing learners to “extensive periods” of comprehensible target language input will ensure mastery of the target language (Moeller and Roberts, 2013). Thus, the goal of this study is to conduct three interviews and observations with three teachers in grades 7-9 to gain a better perspective of what is the best way of using the first language and target language in the EFL classroom according to the teachers.

1.1 Purpose and Research questions

This study aims to investigate when, why and how do teachers use Swedish and English language in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom. The questions of this study are:

1. In what teaching situations do teachers use Swedish in the EFL classroom? 2. How do they include Swedish and English in teaching the EFL classroom?

3. What are teachers’ view on the importance of using English and Swedish by the teachers in the EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classroom?

1.2 Thesis outline

This thesis examines the choice of language by the teachers in the EFL classroom in Southern Sweden. The outline of the study is as follow:

Chapter One is about the introduction of the study and it represents the reasons and purposes of the study as well as the thesis outline. Chapter two is an insight of the literature review and presents the researches that are relevant to this study. It starts by presenting the background theories and continues by representing code-switching, using target language and first language in the EFL classroom, challenges of using only the target language and learning environment in the EFL classroom. Chapter three is about the research design and methodology, including the procedure and ethical considerations, research tools and data analysis. Chapter four displays the analyses and discussion of the results from the interviews and observations. Finally, chapter five is the conclusion of the study and answer the research questions. Additionally, it presents the limitations of the study and provides the recommendation for further research.

(7)

7

2. Literature Review

This chapter first presents the background theories about language learning and then represents what research states about the usage of first language and target language in foreign language learning environment.

2.1 Background theories

This section explains the cultural theory that was developed by Vygotsky. Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory is chosen as the background theory for this study because all the scholars and researchers that have been used as a reference for this study, have built their theories and studies upon Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory.

Vygotsky (1978) argued that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition. He stated that we learn through our interaction and communications with others. He continues by claiming that learning takes place through the interactions that students have with their peers, teachers, and other experts, consequently, teachers should provide a learning environment that maximizes the learners’ ability to interact with each other through discussion, collaboration and feedback. That could be implied that the teachers should encourage the students to use English in the class which it will be discussed further in this study.

Social interaction is vital for cognitive development. Related to this idea, Vygotsky (1978) explains the idea of Zone of Proximal Development (ZDP). According to him, children who are in the zone of proximal development, are cognitively prepared but they require help and social interaction to fully develop it. He maintains that a teacher can provide the learner with “scaffolding” to support the student’s learning.

2.2 Teaching English as a Foreign language

According to Harmer (2007), there are many arguments on why it is worthwhile to speak English by the teachers in the classroom. The significant one is that the pupils involve in a social interaction with other pupils, and over time it becomes natural for them to speak the language. However, he claimed that there are negative aspects of completely denying students’ first language in the

(8)

8

classroom because mother language is closely connected to pupils and teachers. He clarifies these negative aspects as de-motivation and not utilizing the target language by the students in the classroom. The spoken language by the teachers should be English although it is not possible for them to control the students’ language in the classroom (Harmer, 2007).

2.3 Code-Switching

Stoltz (2009) in his article “Code-Switching in the language classroom”, claims that there is a general opinion among the teachers that the second language, in this context means English, is the language that should be spoken in the classroom for the students to develop their language. He also argues that explaining grammatical rules in second language might be challenging for students to understand. Therefore, using the first language can be helpful for explaining the grammatical concepts. He conducted a study in which he examined in what situations Swedish is used by the teacher during French classes. He found out that the teacher used French for explaining the concept and translate the same sentence directly into Swedish, but as a consequence, students used their first language (Swedish) to respond and communicate with the teacher (Stoltz, 2009. According to the author, this process when two languages are mixed by the teacher for a communicative purpose is called “code-switching”. This approach creates an environment where the students use more Swedish instead of the foreign language (Stoltz, 2009).

2.4 Using the Target Language in EFL classroom

There is much discussion about the use of the first language and the target language in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classes (Macaro, 2005). How much target language or first language should be used or when it is necessary to use the first language are among English teachers’ considerations (Moeller and Roberts, 2013). Some teachers are against using the first language in English teaching. They believe that there is a risk of creating first language dependence and thus preventing students’ effort to find the meaning from explanations or contexts (Ellis, 1994).

(9)

9

According to Moeller and Roberts (2013), teachers should create a teaching environment where the target language is standard, the students should be encouraged for risk-taking and through the process they will learn from their mistakes. The authors argue that it is important that the teachers provide a learning environment where students can freely practice the target language and overcome their anxiety of learning the target language. Moeller and Robersts (2013) claim that maximizing the target language in the classroom will increase the level of language proficiency for the students and promote motivation for learning the foreign language. The authors suggest several approaches for teaching the target language without using the first language. For example, if teachers want to explain new grammatical concepts, they should use a story which “serves as rich context allowing learners to fill in the linguistic gaps that may occur” (Moeller and Roberts, 2013, p.26). They suggest that for introducing new vocabulary, teachers can use images to enhance the textual input as well as recognition. They explain that through the process students use their background knowledge and visuals to decode the meaning and this will eliminate the need for using the first language.

Burden (2000) states that many teachers believe that the classroom is often “students’ only exposure to English” and they emphasize that this exposure should be maximized. Exposing learners to “extensive periods” of comprehensible target language input will ensure mastery of the target language (Moeller and Roberts, 2013). The authors claim that there is a direct and positive correlation between learners’ achievements and teachers’ use of target language. According to MacDonald (1993), target language usage will result in increased motivation as students realize the immediate usefulness of TL. “Such support for exclusive target language use has led language professionals, publishers and teachers to accept target language use as best practice in second and foreign language learning and teaching” (Moeller and Roberts, 2013 p.22).

Lundgren (2002) highlights the role of “culture integration” in language learning and he suggests that language should be taught with culture integration. She explains that in a class that students have different nationality backgrounds, integrating culture into language learning will increase the students’ desire to learn the target language. By using activities such as presentation, students are given the chance to present their cultures, traditions and backgrounds and this will encourage the use of English in the class (Lundgren, 2002).

(10)

10

Harbord (1992) maintains that giving instructions in the target language is one of the most spectacular opportunities for the teacher-student communication in the classroom. The author also states that by using target language strategies and adjustments, there will be no need for using the first language for instructing, disciplining or provide a friendly support. Polio and Duff (1994) highlight that by using the target language for classroom management or instruction, teachers can create the most authentic and natural learning environment in the classroom.

2.5 Using the First Language in the EFL classroom

Using the first language in teaching a foreign language has been supported by research. Cook (2001) maintains that the first language should not be avoided by teachers and students in the classroom because it can create an authentic second language learning environment rather than something to be avoided at all costs. First language is recommended when it helps the students to gain a better understanding of specific concepts (Cook, 2001). This indicates that it is possible to use first language for learning purposes. Turnbull (2001) claims that by using first language as a “frame of reference”, learners can process the language more easily and it will result in greater understanding of the target language. Though both Cook, and Turnbull maintain that the usage of the target language should be maximized by the teacher, but they believe that making a limited use of the first language for explain words can help learners’ language development. According to Swain & Lapkin (2000), using first language to mediate target language learning can create a productive learning environment. The authors urge that the first language can be considered as a cognitive tool that aids in second language learning and helps learners to scaffold their learning.

However, Turnbull & Arnett (2002) reexamined the exclusive target language use in the classroom and found out by using first language as a “frame of reference”, language can be more easily processed by the learners and they can achieve a greater understanding of the target language. Meyer (2008) states that the use of target language should be maximized in the classroom, but the first language can be used as a tool to scaffold students’ learning. The author exemplifies that using translation activities and code-switching within challenging activities and pave the way for the students to understand language structures and grammatical concepts. However, Moeller and Roberts (2013) mention that teachers typically use first language for teaching grammar. They suggest that in order to overcome this temptation “grammar can be

(11)

11

approached inductively and present in a context that will allow students to discover rules of grammar on their own, thereby processing more deeply and enhancing comprehension” (Moeller and Roberts, 2013, p.31). The authors indicate that this results in a “greater sense of accomplishment and promotes self-efficacy” (p.31). Moeller and Roberts (2013) suggest that for inductive approach to the grammar, teachers can use a short story or text that contains different forms of one new grammar structure. McMillan and Turnbull (2009) discuss that for teaching new words that can’t be explained by paraphrasing or represented through pictures, code-switching can be used as an efficient teaching strategy.

Salmona Madrinan (2014) defines the term “cross-linguistic connections”. The author explains that the mother language affects foreign language acquisition and that such process is called cross-linguistic connections. The author indicates that due to students’ background differences, they have different amount of exposure to the language outside the classroom, therefore it is reasonable for the teachers to use cross-linguistic connections from the foreign language to the mother language. Salmona Madrinan (2014) explains that during the early stages of foreign language acquisition process, learners try to make connections with their mother tongue which makes learning context even richer. Lungren (2002) mentions that English is a foreign language in Sweden and there is a challenge for children with different nationalities who have another mother tongue to learn the third language through the second language.

2.6 Challenges of using only the target language

According to Meyer (2008), factors like age, pre-knowledge, differences of knowledge level and students with different mother tongues can complicate the use of only the target language in the classroom. Therefore, first language should be implemented in English teaching. But caution is advised against overuse of the first language because students don’t feel the need of utilizing the use of the target language since they think that they will be given the chance to use the first language (Meyer, 2008). He suggests that as the learners progress in their language learning and abilities, gradually the use of target language should be maximized.

Mayer (2008) argues that by fully exposing the students to the target language at the beginning, there is a risk that some students get anxious and confused which will result in stopping their language learning process. As a consequence, they won’t be able to accomplish advanced

(12)

12

linguistic tasks. Therefore, it is crucial that the teachers implement the first language for scaffolding during the English as a foreign language learning (Meyer, 2008). He suggests that by teaching communication strategies to the students, they will be able to use synonyms, antonyms and body language to practice speaking by using the target language. Moeller and Roberts (2013) mention that teaching concrete learning strategies will improve students’ learning. The authors maintain that by using learning strategies, students can get more involved in their own language learning and can develop their communicative skills through the process.

Abrahamsson (2009) discusses the importance of the interaction between teachers and students in the classroom. He mentions that if the teachers adjust their English-speaking level to the level of students, there will be not enough for the learners’ language development because the language is not used as it is spoken by the native speakers. Ellmin (2011) advocates that security and the density in interactions between teachers and students are two significant concepts that will lead to methodical work where the students’ social skills will improve. This statement is based on Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory on learning by interacting.

2.7 Learning environment in EFL classroom

Lightbown & Spada (2006) classify learning environments into natural learning environment and teaching environment. They define natural learning environment as “where the learner is exposed to the target language at work or in social interaction. If the learner is a child, in a school situation where most of the other children are native speakers of the TL and where the instruction is directed toward native speakers rather than toward learners of the language” (p.109) Teaching environment is where a group of second or foreign language learners are gathered together with a teacher (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006). They categorized teaching environments into Structure-based (where form, grammar and vocabulary are emphasized) and Communicative teaching environments (where the emphasis is on interaction, conversation and language use).

Håkansson (2003) discusses the concept of “Language Bath”. She explains that in the language pool, one tries to imitate the process of children’s first language acquisition and focus on the content instead of focusing on linguistic errors. The author believes that creating a learning environment where students get the opportunity to learn the second language at the highest level is vital for students’ language learning.

(13)

13

Estling Vannestål and Lundberg (2012) argue that due to guidelines of the national curriculum, teaching English should be conducted completely in English from the beginning. They explain that students should be surrounded by the target language and that will require a greater concentration of students when they listen to the language as well as trying to understand it. The authors believe that students’ language development depends on the amount of language usage in the learning environment. Furthermore, English should be use in a context of reality through different activities in the class (Estling Vannestål and Lundberg, 2012). Based on Vygotsky’s emphasis on the importance of interaction for language acquisition, the authors advocate that it is important that teachers speak English in the classroom because students can have the chance to practice their target language with the teacher and the student.

Stoltz (2009) maintains that language learning is through interaction with others. He claims that students learn from other students and teacher in the classroom and the perception that knowledge is something that is transferred from the teacher to the student is outdated.

Lundgren (2002) underlines that students may find it embarrassing to use English language for expressing themselves in the classroom, therefore, they may get anxious of being wrong in front of their classmates. The author maintains that teachers should use the target language most of the time to encourage students to speak the target language. This also will positively affect students’ motivation (Lundgren, 2002). She mentions that English is a foreign language in Sweden and Swedish could endanger the student’s language acquisition as they would learn the third language through the second language.

(14)

14

3. Methodology

This chapter presents my considerations about the research method, data collection, participants, interviews, observations and ethical considerations.

3.1 Qualitative data collection

Qualitative data collection is used for this study to find out when, why and how do teachers use English and Swedish in the EFL classroom. Qualitative methods aim to make us think about the varieties and characteristics of phenomena (Carlström & Carlström, 2007). By choosing qualitative method, this study intends to discuss the varieties and characteristics of the phenomena. Trost (2010) claims that in order to understand people’s way of thinking, acting or distinguishing different action patterns, qualitative study is recommended. Accordingly, I used qualitative interviews and observations for this research to gain a better perspective on my research questions. Using both interviews and observations made it possible for me obtain a valuable data for the analysis. With interviews I attained a greater perspective of teachers’ thoughts on the usage of English and Swedish in the EFL classroom and with observations, I gained a deeper perspective of how it works in an authentic environment.

3.2 Semi-structured interviews

Semi-structured interview with prepared questions is used as a method of data gathering for this study. Three teachers from two different compulsory schools in southern Sweden were interviewed. The purpose of using semi-structured interview is to have a conversation about the subject to provide more insight from the teachers rather than sticking to the questions (Carlström & Carlström, 2007). Therefore, I chose semi-structured interview as a method of collecting the information for this study. Through the interviews many interesting points and related questions were asked and pointed out. Additionally, qualitative interviews enable me to have a direct meeting with the interviewee (Widerberg, 2002). Accordingly, the reason of choosing qualitative interview as a method of data collection is to engage the teachers to explain and discuss their answers, since the aim of the study is to investigate on when, why and how English teachers use Swedish and

(15)

15

English in the EFL classroom. The interview guide helped me to remain within the area of my investigation.

3.3 Observations

Three observations are conducted for this study as a complement to the interviews in order to gain a better perspective and understanding on my research questions. Carlström & Carlström (2007) claim that the observation can be considered as a data collection method in which physical reality is studied directly and information through observations can be used to describe and enhance the understanding of people’s actions and behaviors in an authentic environment. According to the authors there are two kinds of observations: open and hidden. In open observation the teacher knows that there is an observer in the class while in hidden observation the teacher doesn’t know (Carlström & Carlström, 2007). I chose open observation to have freedom in the class, go around and looking at things, asking questions or sitting down and taking notes (Carlström & Carlström, 2007). I participated as an observer in the English classes of the interviewees. During the observation, I paid attention on how the teaching English was carried out, what were teachers’ approaches and the choice of language for teaching, instructing, interacting with the students in the classroom. Moreover, what language did the students use while interacting with each other and the teacher. The observation guide, pencil and a paper were used as the tools of the observation. Each observation was one hour and since the aim of this study is to investigate in what teaching situations do the teachers use Swedish and English, the observation times were selected when the teachers wanted to teach a new lesson to the students.

3.4 Participants

I observed three English as a Foreign Language classes and then interviewed respective teachers. The teachers are from grades 7, 8 and 9 and they are from two different Compulsory Schools in southern Sweden (two of them are from one school, and one of them is from another school). The reason that I chose to observe first is that I wanted to have a better perspective in analyzing the data. Teachers’ profiles are as follow:

(16)

16

• Teacher A, teaching grade7, 30 years of experience in teaching German and English

• Teacher B, teaching grade 8, 13 years of experience working as a teacher in English

• Teacher C, teaching grade 9, 15 years of experience working as an English teacher

3.5 Procedure and ethical considerations

I started by contacting the teachers from two different schools in southern Sweden. I called them and explained about my study and after they approved for interviews and observations, we agreed on a date for conducting the observations and interviews. I conducted my research by observing the teachers first and then interviewing them after the observation. Before the observations, I had a little bit time to sit down with the teachers and talked about my study. During the observations, notes were taken for further analysis. After the observation, I and the teachers took a break and then chose an empty and calm room at the school to conduct the interviews. I explained the ethical considerations before starting the interviews and got the approval from the teachers to record our conversation on my smartphone. I asked the interviewees whether they want to have the interview in English or Swedish, and they chose English. In order to provide a comfortable situation for them, I told them that they may switch into Swedish whenever they want. During the interviews, I took some notes for further analysis. According to Vetenskapsrådet (2002), there are four principles that should be followed during a scientific research: information, consent, confidentiality and usage requirements. Therefore, all the participants were informed about the purpose of my research and that they could ask questions or withdraw from the interview whenever they want. They were also informed that they would remain anonymous during the interview and I will give a number to the teachers instead of using their name. Furthermore, they were told that the collected data is only accessible by me and it will be destroyed after completing the research.

(17)

17 3.6 Data analysis

Computers for writing and composing the text, smartphones for recording the interviews for later transcribing and a notebook for taking notes during the observations are used for this study. Carlström & Carlström (2007) suggest three stages for analyzing the qualitative data: First, the interviews should be transcribed clearly as well as observation notes. Then, the data should be read several times to gain a better perspective. Finally, the data should be analyzed by reading through the data and identify those themes and key words that are relevant to the study. Following Carlström & Carlström (2007) I started the analysis by listening to the recordings and then transcribing them in full text and then listened to each interview for several times to make sure that I haven transcribed all the details. After that, I read the transcriptions and identified the factors that are related to my research questions. Those factors are reflected and discussed in chapter 4 of this study. During the analysis, I used my observations notes and interview transcriptions at the same time to gain a better perspective for my analysis.

(18)

18

4. Results and analysis

This chapter presents an overview of interviewees’ reflections and observed of interactions and teaching in the classroom. During the interviews many questions were asked, and many other interesting points were mentioned by the interviewees. The result of observations and interviews show that Swedish was used by the teachers in the following areas: Teaching grammar and difficult words, providing instructions, controlling students’ behavior in the class and dealing with students’ frustration.

4.1 Teaching grammar and difficult words

Results show that all three teachers used Swedish (code-switched) when they wanted to explain a new grammatical term or a new difficult word or phrase. But their approaches towards using Swedish during teaching English were different.

Teacher A claimed that for explaining the grammatical terms, concepts and difficult words or phrases Swedish was used. The teacher mentioned that the Swedish language was used in order to help the students to achieve a greater understanding of the grammar. The result is supported by Stoltz (2009), whom maintained that explaining grammatical rules in English might be challenging for the students to understand and he recommended to use Swedish for explaining grammar. However, Moeller and Robersts (2013) claim that teachers typically use first language for teaching grammar and they recommended that in order to overcome this temptation, they can use a short story or a text that contains different forms of one new grammar structure to explain the grammar. An interesting statement was mentioned by teacher A: “students need to compare the English grammar with Swedish grammar to achieve a better understanding, thus, using Swedish is very useful”. According to Lundahl (2009) the comparison between Swedish and English grammar can cause confusion and problem for the students who have different mother tongues. Based on the observation, teacher A used Swedish language while explaining present irregular verbs in English. The teacher first wrote irregular verbs on the white board in English and then wrote the Swedish translation in parentheses. After that, the teacher kept using Swedish to explain the concept. The dominant language for explaining the grammar was Swedish. Teacher A emphasized that using Swedish in the classroom will be decreased as the students get more

(19)

19

confident in using the target language. Meyer (2008) warned the teachers from overuse of the first language and he believed that excessive use of the first language can result in de-motivation of the students in using the target language. Based on the observation Teacher A was focusing on the grammar and vocabulary most of the time. Lightbrown & Spada (2006) call this teaching environment as “structured based” environment where form, grammar and vocabulary are emphasized.

Teacher B maintained that for explaining grammar and translating difficult words Swedish was used. The teacher argued that explaining difficult words in English might be a challenge to understand for those students that they have difficulties, therefore it is easier to explain in Swedish. The teacher exemplified that “I write the new English word on the white board and explain it through some examples, then I translate it into Swedish”. Furthermore, the teacher stated that there are some words in English that they don’t have the right equivalent in Swedish, therefore they need to be explained in Swedish. McMillan and Turnbull (2009) discuss that for teaching new words that can’t be explained by paraphrasing or represented through pictures, code-switching can be used as an efficient teaching strategy. Salmona Madrinan (2014) explains that during the early stages of foreign language acquisition process, learners try to make connections with their mother tongue which make learning context even richer. The teacher also mentioned that the meaning of articles in English are different from Swedish articles and it is easier to explain them in Swedish, because students can connect and compare the English articles with Swedish articles and achieve a better understanding of them. Based on the observation, Teacher B explained an English word in English for the students and then explained it once in Swedish for them. Teacher B reported that “sometimes during the teaching, I translate the same sentence that I said in English. Because based on my experience, some key parts need to be clarified for students to achieve a better understanding”. Meyer (2008) states that the use of target language should be maximized in the classroom, but the first language can be used as a tool to scaffold students’ learning. Teacher B also said that “I sometimes give them the opportunity to explain the concepts for each other through group activities. According to Vygotsky (1978) learning takes place through the interactions with other students, teachers and other experts. Based on the observation, Teacher B didn’t use Swedish language during the teaching as much as Teacher A, and English was used in more than half of the interactions, including student-student and teacher-student in the class. The teacher was keep reminding them to speak English all the time.

(20)

20

Teacher C underlined that the Swedish language was used for giving a hint or a brief explanation of a specific concept in grammar. Turnbull (2001) claims that by using first language as a “frame of reference”, learners can process the language more easily and it will result in greater understanding of the target language. The teacher exemplified a moment of teaching grammar by saying that “teaching if-conditional structures in English can be challenging to understand by some students, thus, I only translate some key words for them to get connected with the concept. The teacher stated that the students should be exposed to the target language as much as possible but there are some students that they need special helps, or they have lesser knowledge than the others, therefore Swedish can make it easier for them to understand. The teacher also provided the opportunity for students to work in different groups and explain the concepts for each other. Stoltz (2009) maintains that students learn from other students and teacher in the classroom. Based on the observation, the teacher used English almost all time except one time, in which the teacher explained a word very briefly in Swedish to one of the students. It can be interpreted from this situation that students are in Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, and the teacher provide the learner with “scaffolding” to support the student’s learning. Teacher C stated that “instead of using Swedish in teaching, I sometimes try to adjust my level of spoken English to the students’ level in order to prepare a learning environment where the students can have the chance to acquire the second language”. Håkansson (2003) discusses the concept of “Language bath” in which students tries to imitate the process of children’s first language acquisition and focus on the content instead of focusing on linguistic errors. Abrahamsson (2009) discusses the importance of the interaction between teachers and students in the classroom. He mentions that if the teachers adjust their English-speaking level to the level of students, there will be not enough for the learners’ language development because the language is not used as it is spoken by the native speakers. Based on the observation, interaction and communication were the center of Teacher C’s English teaching which is called communicative teaching environments according to Lightbrown & Spada (2009).

To sum it up, Swedish language was used by all three teachers for teaching grammar and difficult words or phrases, but their approach towards using the Swedish language were different. Although teacher B didn’t use Swedish as much as teacher A, but they both used Swedish language for explaining the grammatical concepts or difficult words. Teacher A and B used Swedish for scaffolding for whole the class although they used Swedish very much, but teacher C used Swedish

(21)

21

for scaffolding only for a few students. In teacher A’s class, Swedish was the dominant language and it was used for explaining the new words or grammatical concepts, but teacher B used Swedish after trying to explain them in English first. Teacher C had a different approach towards using Swedish in teaching English than teacher A and B, the teacher used Swedish language for giving a hint or a brief explanation of a specific concept in grammar. English was the dominant language in the class. All the three teachers believed that using Swedish language in teaching English is beneficial and it help students gain a better understanding of the target language. Although research states that students’ exposure to the target language should be maximized, but it also supports the use of first language in teaching the target language. Meyer (2008) claims that it is crucial that teachers implement the first language to scaffold students’ learning, but the author states that excessive use of the first language can result in de-motivation of the students in using the target language. Research also suggests that in order to overcome the temptation of using the first language for teaching grammar, teachers can use a short story or a text that contains different forms of one new grammar structure to explain the grammar. Teacher B and C prepared an environment in which students were given the opportunity to explain the grammatical concepts or difficult words to each other. They both believed that this method can decrease the level of students’ frustration. Research claims that fully exposing the students to the target language at the beginning can result in anxiety and confusion in students, therefore implementing the first language can help students’ learning. Since Swedish was the dominant language in teacher A’s class, students didn’t have an opportunity to explain the concepts to each other.

4.2 Providing instructions

According to the results, Teacher A and Teacher B provided instructions in Swedish both in speech and on the white board, but Teacher C provided instructions in Swedish only in speech.

Teacher A explained that Swedish was used for giving the instructions, like translating almost the same sentence from English to Swedish for better understanding. The teacher mentioned that if the students don’t understand the instructions completely, they won’t be able to fulfill the tasks. According to Cook (2001), first language is efficient in order to assist students to understanding of a particular task. Based on the observation, Teacher A provided the instructions on the board in Swedish and then explained them in Swedish too. The main language for the

(22)

22

instructions was Swedish and whenever the teacher provided the instructions in English, he/she translated them directly into Swedish. The teacher reflected this approach in the interview by claiming that with this method, students can understand better and keep their concentration in the class, “because if they don’t understand, they lose the concentration and start disturbing the class”. Teacher B reported that for avoiding misunderstandings, Swedish was used. The teacher reflected that there are some students that they have difficulties and they need to see the instructions on the board otherwise they can’t concentrate, and they forget the tasks, therefore, “I write the instructions in Swedish on the board, then I explain them in Swedish to make sure that they’ve understood the instructions”. Teacher B mentioned that “since those students with learning difficulties need to have clear and visualize instructions, I chose to write in Swedish on the board to avoid misunderstandings. Based on the observation, there were also some students that they were not verbally active in the class. After explaining the instructions, the teacher went towards them and asked them in Swedish if they understood the instructions. Then explained the instructions in Swedish for them again.

Teacher C stated that the usage of Swedish language depends on the complexity of the specific content or instruction. The teacher mentioned that to simplify and clarify some complex concepts, Swedish can be effective. The teacher continued the statement by giving an example: “instructions for writing an article can be challenging to understand for some students, hence, after explaining the instructions in English, I go directly towards those students that I know that they have difficulties and explain the instructions in Swedish for them”. According to the observation, the teacher provided the instructions in English on the board and then explain them in English too. During the lesson, students had the chance to clarify the instructions for each other for better understanding.

All in all, all three teachers used Swedish to provide instructions for the students to clarify and simplify the tasks. Teacher A and B provided instructions both in writing and speech in Swedish language, but teacher C provided instructions in Swedish only in speech. According to Swain & Lapkin (2000), using the first language can be beneficial as a “cognitive tool” that aids in second language learning and help learners to scaffold their learning. Teacher B and C were also concerned about the students with special needs but their approach towards using Swedish for providing instructions was different. Teacher B provided the instructions both in speech and writing. The teacher mentioned that students with learning difficulties need to have a clear and

(23)

23

visualize instructions, therefore the instructions were provided on the white board in Swedish. Teacher C provided instructions in Swedish for those students that need special helps by going towards them and explain the instructions in Swedish. Cook (2001) indicates that “to carry out a task, the students must understand what they have to do” (p.415). The author exemplifies by mentioning that tasks in a book may be very challenging to understand for the students, unless they get translated into the first language. “The argument for using the first language is efficiency, leading to more effective learning” (Cook, 2001, p.415).

4.3 Dealing with students’ frustration

Teacher A and B stated that for preventing frustration and anxiety among the students, Swedish language was used. But Teacher C had a different approach for dealing with the frustration.

Teacher A mentioned that “If I explain it in English, they might not exactly understand what’s going on and then they get frustrated and lose their concentration”. Teacher B stated that English language should be used as much as possible but in order to simplify or clarify some parts in teaching, Swedish language is effective, for example, when explaining about present continuous from in English, students become confused because they don’t have the equivalent in Swedish language, therefore the explanation should be simplified for the students. Mayer (2008) argues that by fully exposing the students to the target language at the beginning, there is a risk that some students get anxious and confused which will result in stopping their language learning process. As a consequence, they won’t be able to accomplish advanced linguistic tasks. Therefore, it is crucial that the teachers implement the first language for scaffolding during the English as a foreign language learning (Meyer, 2008).

Teacher C had a different approach for dealing with frustration. The teacher provided an opportunity for students to explain some grammatical concepts for each other. Teacher C reflected this approach by stating that this method will help the students lower their level of frustration and communicate with each other and give each other feedback. This will help them understand much better. Lundgren (2002) underlines that students may find it embarrassing to use English language for expressing themselves in the classroom, therefore, they may get anxious of being wrong in front of their classmates. The author maintains that teachers should use the target language most

(24)

24

of the time to encourage students to speak the target language. This also will positively affect students’ motivation (Lundgren, 2002).

4.3 Controlling students’ behavior in the class

The results indicate that all three teachers used Swedish for controlling students’ behavior in the class, including instructing the students, disciplining, show understanding and provide a friendly support.

Teacher A argued that using Swedish to communicate and instruct students in the classroom. According to the observation, Teacher A used Swedish language when the class was messy at start to get the students’ attention by saying that “Nu får vi börja lektionen!”. Later the teacher used Swedish language to get the class in order by instructing some students to get back to their seats, “ni måste gå tillbaka till eras plats”, “sätt dig!” During the lesson, Swedish was used for communication between the teacher and the students most of the time.

Teacher B used Swedish to discipline the students. Based on the observation, there were two specific students in the class that were disturbing the class and the teacher started disciplining them in English first, but it didn’t affect those two students’ behavior very much, “You two need to be quite and focus on the task”. Then later the teacher used Swedish and those two students became quite and started working, “kan ni höra mig? Lyssnar ni? Ni får inte snacka när alla jobbar!”. Teacher B explained about that situation in the interview by mentioning that it is important to expose the students to English in every situation, but sometimes using Swedish can make the things easier. The teacher exemplified that “if I only used English to express myself in that situation, those two students would not get what I said and that would cause more tension and misunderstanding”.

Teacher C reported that in order to control students’ behavior in the class, Swedish was used very briefly. The teacher explained that “I usually use English in all the situations, but using Swedish language can make a difference”. Based on the observation, there was a moment that one student wanted to check her cell phone, but the teacher said: “you may check it when we are done with the tasks”, but the student seemed a bit confused, then the teacher said: “efter lektionen”. The student’s facial expression showed that she has understood the instruction and said: “ok!”. Teacher

(25)

25

C also used Swedish to show understanding and providing a friendly support. According to the observation, it was a moment that students were supposed to write a short story about a topic. One of the students was a bit sad and confused whether he can write about the topic or not. The teacher approached him, and the student said: “det är svårt för mig, it’s difficult”, then the teacher said: “I know it is difficult, men litar på dig själv, you can!”. The teacher believed that with providing some hints or key words, students feel connected to the conversation and can understand the situation.

Ultimately, the results show that all three teachers used Swedish to control students’ behavior. Teacher A and B used Swedish language for instructing and disciplining the students in the class while teacher C used Swedish language not only to instruct the students, but also to show understanding and providing a friendly support. Cook (2001) maintains that the first language can be used for organizing the classroom, maintain discipline and contacting individuals. The author states that first language can be used for controlling the class; “Saying Shut up or you will get a detention in the first language is a serious threat rather than practice of imperative and conditional constructions” (p.415). According to Macaro (2000) code-switching is a useful communication strategy for controlling students’ behavior. The results indicate that all three teachers used Swedish language as a communication strategy for instructing or disciplining the students. Teacher C used Swedish language also to show understanding and a friendly support. Cook (2001) underlines these situations by stating that “the main benefit of using the first language for personal contact is naturalness, when using the first language, the teacher is treating the students as their real selves rather than dealing with assumed target language personas” (p.416). Harmer (2007) indicates that it is impossible to deny the students’ first language in the classroom because the mother language is closely connected to the students and the teachers. Although research supports the usage of first language for instructing, disciplining and providing a friendly support, but it also supports the usage of the target language for instructing, disciplining or providing a friendly support. Harbord (1992) maintains that giving instructions in the second language is one of the most spectacular opportunities for the teacher-student communication in the classroom. The author also states that by using target language strategies and adjustments, there will be no need for using the first language for instructing, disciplining or provide a friendly support. Polio and Duff (1994) highlight that by using the target language for classroom management or instruction, teachers can create the most authentic and natural learning environment in the classroom.

(26)

26 4.4 Summary

All the teachers highlighted that code-switching can be used as an effective tool in teaching and it can help the students gain a deeper understanding of the target language. Teacher A stated that by using Swedish during the teaching, those students that have difficulties or have lower knowledge of English can feel included and can get a better understanding of the target language. The teacher also stated that the usage of English language will be increased gradually as the students’ progress in their language learning. Teacher B claimed that using Swedish can help students improve their understanding of the target language and it’s an effective approach to convey the meaning in some occasions. Cook (2001) argued that an approach to teaching through some form of code-switching creates an authentic learning environment where the learners acknowledges the influence of the first language on the target language. Additionally, Cook claimed that code-switching in the classroom is both acceptable and logical choice of behavior when the speakers and learners share two or more languages. Furthermore, Cook (2001) mentioned that too much usage of first language in the EFL classroom can become a barrier in students’ English learning. Teacher B stated that it is desirable to expose the students to the target language as much as it is possible, but it depends on what type of students are in the class. The teacher clarified the statement by mentioning that it meant students with learning difficulties. Teacher C had a slightly different view on using Swedish language in teaching English. The teacher stated that the students’ exposure to the English language in the class should be maximized and using Swedish to mediate English should be the last option. Furthermore, Teacher C argued that although the exposure to English should be maximized, but there are some students that they need extra help or have learning difficulties, therefore, using Swedish language in teaching English can be beneficial.

(27)

27

5. Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to achieve a deeper understanding of when, why and how the teachers use Swedish and English in the EFL classroom. The results of interviews and observations represented that teachers implemented Swedish in teaching English with different approaches. The study reflected that some research supported the limited usage of first language to provide scaffolding and increase the confidence in students. This chapter presents the answers to my research question.

Regarding the first research question: “In what teaching situations do teachers use Swedish in the EFL classroom?”, the results displayed that all three teachers used Swedish in different situations, such as providing instructions, teaching grammar, difficult words or phrases, controlling students’ behavior in the classroom and dealing with frustration.

Regarding the second research question: “How do they include Swedish and English in teaching the EFL classroom?”, the results showed that the teachers have different approaches towards the using of first language in the teaching a foreign language. Teachers believed that Swedish should be the dominant language at the beginning to prepare students’ knowledge for further development and learning and gradually increase the use of English in the EFL classroom as students’ knowledge of English increase. The instructions were provided both in speech and writing on the board for the students and some difficult words or phrases were translated into Swedish. Teachers also claimed that students’ exposure to English should be maximized in the EFL classroom, but Swedish language can be implemented within limits. One of the teachers translated or used some key words in Swedish to provide scaffolding for the students. Two of the teachers used group works as an approach where students can interact with each other both in the target language and the first language.

Regarding the third research question: “What are teachers’ view on the importance of using English and Swedish by the teachers in the EFL classroom?”, The results maintain that all three teachers were agree that students’ exposure to English should be maximized but code-switching, using Swedish language in teaching English, can work as a beneficial factor in students’ language learning. Teachers believed that using Swedish language in teaching English can help the students

(28)

28

with lesser knowledge of English in the class to understand better. Additionally, they claimed that using Swedish can help students improve their understanding of the target language and it’s an effective approach to convey the meaning in some occasions. Moreover, teachers reflected that the amount of using English in the EFL classroom depends on the group of students in the class, they referred to the students with learning difficulties, therefore first language was implemented in the teaching to avoid misunderstandings. Teachers also claimed that students’ exposure to English should be maximized in the EFL classroom, but Swedish language can be implemented within limits. Furthermore, teachers mentioned that too much usage of Swedish in the EFL classroom can become a barrier in students’ English learning. According to two of the teachers, students’ exposure to the English language in the class should be maximized and using Swedish to mediate the target language should be the last option, but there are some students that need extra help or have learning difficulties, therefore, using Swedish language in Teaching English can be beneficial. One of the teachers stated that by adjusting the level of spoken English, the teacher can maximize the students’ exposure to the English language.

As for the conclusion, the results indicated that Swedish was used in different situations by the teachers. It can be argued that Swedish should be implemented carefully in teaching English. It is also significant that the teachers take students with learning difficulties, students with different mother tongues in consideration while preparing new contents for teaching. Since the research maintains that students’ exposure to the target language should be maximized in the foreign language learning, it is important for teachers to use the target language in teaching and to provide instructions. According to Swedish Syllabus in English (2011), “students should be able to understand the main content of spoken English and they should show their understanding by presenting an overview with discussion and comments on content and details”. This can be interpreted that teachers should utilize the usage of the target language in the class and provide a learning situation that students can practice the target language, Estling Vannestål and Lundberg (2012) argue that due to guidelines of the national curriculum, teaching English should be conducted completely in English from the beginning. They explain that students should be surrounded by the target language and that will require a greater concentration of students when they listen to the language as well as trying to understand it. According to Estling Vannestål and Lundberg (2012), students’ language development depends on the amount of language usage in the learning environment. However, the results of my research reflect that it is not possible for

(29)

29

teachers to use only the target language in the class for teaching English and teachers should keep reminding the students to use the target language and provide an opportunity or environment in which students can practice the target language.

5.1 Limitations

The participants of this study were limited, and the results cannot be generalized or be observed as a representing result. The study had a limited time to be conducted, otherwise, more teachers could participate in the study and the results could be analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Contacting participants and booking an observation and interview time were among the limitations of this study. There weren’t many teachers willing to participate. The interviews and observations were conducted only in two secondary schools in southern Sweden. Results would be more significant if the study could be conducted in as many as possible schools in Sweden.

After working on this thesis, I believe that I have achieved a better and deeper perspective and knowledge on the usage of first language and the importance of the target language usage by the teachers in the EFL classroom. The information of this thesis can give a better insight about the choice of language for teaching English as a Foreign Language to the reader.

5.2 Further research

There are many studies that suggest the use of the first language in teaching the target language. Some studies claim that maximizing the target language in the classroom increases the level of language proficiency for the students, and promotes motivation for learning the foreign language. For further research, it would be interesting to investigate on how teachers try to maximize the students’ exposure to the target language in the EFL classroom. Furthermore, I would like to conduct interviews and observations with more Swedish teachers, international teachers and native speaker teachers, then analyze the results both in qualitative and quantitative approaches, and finally compare the findings.

(30)

30

References

Abrahamsson, Niclas. (2009). Andraspråksinlärning. Lund: Studentlitteratur

Burden, Peter. (2000). The use of the students’ mother tongue in Monolingual English “Conversation” classes at Japanese universities. The Language Teacher Journal, 24(6), 5–10.

Carlström, Inge & Carlström Hagman Lena-Pia. (2007). ”Metodik for utvecklingsarbete och

utvärdering”. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Cook, Vivian. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language

Review, 57(3), 402-423.

Duff, Patricia & Polio, Charlene. (1990). How Much Foreing Language Is There in the Foreign Language Classroom? The Modern Language Journal, 74(2), 154–166.

Ellmin, Roger. (2011). Elevens lärande: att erbjuda möjligheter. (1. ed.) Stockholm: Liber.

Estling Vannestål, Maria & Lundberg, Gun. (2010). Engelska för yngre åldrar. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Håkansson, Gisela. (2003). Tvåspråkighet hos barn i Sverige. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Harbord, John. (1992). The use of the mother tongue in the classroom. ELT Journal, 46(4), 350- 355.

Lightbown, Patsy M. & Spada, Nina. (2006). How languages are learned. UK: Oxford University Press.

Lundahl, Bo. (2014). Texts, topics and tasks: teaching English in years 4-6. (1. ed.) Lund: Studentlitteratur.

(31)

31

Lundgren, Ulla. (2002). Interkulturell förståelse i engelskundervisning – en möjlighet. Malmö: Forskarutbildningen i pedagogik.

Macaro, Ernesto. (2000). Issues in target language teaching. In K. Field (ed.,). Issues in Modern

Foreign Language Teaching, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 171-189.

Macaro, Ernesto. (2005). Codeswitching in the L2 classroom: A communication and learning strategy. In Enric Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and

contributions to the profession, New York: Springer, 63–84.

MacDonald, Carol. (1993). Using the target language. Cheltenam: Mary Glasgow Publications.

McMillan, Brian & Turnbull, Miles. (2009). Teachers’ Use of the First Language in French Immersion: Revisiting a Core Principle. M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Ed.). First Language

Use in Second and Foreign Language Learning. UK: Multilingual Matters, 15-35.

Meyer, Harry. (2008). The pedagogical implications of L1 use in the L2 classroom. Maebashi

Kyoai Gakuen College Ronsyu, (8), 147-159.

Moeller, Aleidine. & Roberts, Amy. (2013). Keeping It in the Target Language. Faculty

Publications: Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education, (178), 21-38.

Salmona Madriñan, Mara. (2014). The Use of First Language in the Second-Language Classroom: A Support for Second Language Acquisition. Gist Education and learning research journal, (9), 50-66.

Skolverket (2011). Läroplaner för förskolan, för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet

(32)

32

Stoltz, Joakim. (2009). Kodväxling i språkklassrummet: Om förstaspråkets roll i

språkundervisningen. In Tornberg, Malmqvist & Valfridsson (Ed.), Språkdidaktiska perspektiv: Om undervisning och lärande i främmande språk, Stockholm: Liber, 144-158.

Swain, Merrill & Lapkin, Sam. (2000). Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 251-274.

Trost, Jan (2010). Kvalitativa intervjuer. Lund, Studentliteratrue AB.

Turnbull, Miles (2001). There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching, but ...

Canadian Modern Language Review, 57 (4), 531–540.

Vetenskapsrådet (2010). Forskningsetiska principer inom humanistisk-samhällsvetenskaplig. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.

Vygotskij, Lev Semenovic. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological

processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U.P.

(33)

33

Appendix A

Interview guide:

Introduction, Background

• Confidentiality of all information • Use the real name?

• Recording?

• Is it ok to use the interview for research purposes? • Right to cancel the interview or not answer the questions Questions:

A. Background

1. What is your name and age? 2. What year did you graduate?

3. How did you get interested in being a teacher? Why did you choose English for teaching? 4. How many years of experience as a teacher do you have?

5. Have you spent any time in an English-speaking country? Where? How long?

6. What is the age of your present English pupils and how many years have they been studying English?

7. How do you see the pupils’ knowledge in English language?

B. Learning and challenges

8. What are the challenges they encounter when they learn English? 9. How they deal with these challenges?

(34)

34 11. What support is available at team work?

C. Teaching, learning environment and challenges

12. How do you usually start your language lessons?

13. Which skill do you emphasize the most in the classroom? (Speaking, Reading, Understanding or writing?)

14. Are there any specific moments in your teaching where you choose to speak in Swedish instead of English? If so, what are they?

15. Why do you choose to speak in Swedish in those situations? 16. How do you use Swedish in English teaching

17. What supportive tools do you use for your teaching?

18. What kind of classroom environment encourage and motivate pupils to speak English? 19. What are the challenges to prepare such a learning environment for the pupils?

(35)

35

Appendix B.

Observation guide

- What language does the teacher use when he/she welcomes the pupils into the classroom? - What language does the teacher choose to start the lesson?

- What is the lesson about?

- What language is spoken during the teaching? - How are the activities implemented?

- How does the teacher provide a learning environment in which pupils are given the chance to speak in English?

- How do the pupils interact in the learning environment?

- In what language do the pupils interact with each other and the teacher? - In what situations do the pupils speak English?

- Do pupils appear more motivated or engaged in such an environment? - How are the participants interacting?

- How is the relation between the teacher and the pupils? - In what teaching situations does the teacher speak English? - What language does the teacher choose to finish the lesson?

&quot;To speak or not to speak&quot;