Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-qr5l4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-04T07:37:57.440Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE LANGUAGE CONTACT PROFILE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2004

Barbara F. Freed ,
Dan P. Dewey ,
Norman Segalowitz  and
Randall Halter
Barbara F. Freed
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University
Dan P. Dewey
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Norman Segalowitz
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Randall Halter
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Efforts to gather data of various sorts—demographics, language-learning history, contact with native speakers, use of the language in the field—as they relate to participants in SLA research studies are inherent to understanding more about language acquisition and use. Scholars frequently develop questionnaires of their own, which are rarely shared widely in the profession. Consequently, much time and effort is invested in reinventing the process of gathering the types of data that are commonly needed.This research was funded in part by a grant to Barbara F. Freed from the Council for International Educational Exchange (New York), in part by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to Norman Segalowitz, and in part by a grant from the Dean's Office, Faculty of Arts and Science, at Concordia University to Segalowitz.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 349 - 356
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Efforts to gather data of various sorts—demographics, language-learning history, contact with native speakers, use of the language in the field—as they relate to participants in SLA research studies are inherent to understanding more about language acquisition and use. Scholars frequently develop questionnaires of their own, which are rarely shared widely in the profession. Consequently, much time and effort is invested in reinventing the process of gathering the types of data that are commonly needed.

The document we present here—a questionnaire to assess second language contact for students entering and completing language study programs in various contexts of learning (academic classrooms, intensive domestic immersion, and study abroad)—has proven useful to us, our colleagues, and students in a variety of projects. The form in which it appears here has evolved over the last decade since our first adaptation of prior language-learning questionnaires developed by a series of SLA researchers. A document entitled “The Language Contact Profile” was used by Seliger (1977). A year later, Bialystok (1978) adapted this questionnaire for her work, and Spada subsequently adapted it for her own use in 1986. In 1985, Day used some form of a language contact profile for his research.

In 1990, Freed refined and expanded what she came to call the Language Contact Profile (LCP) in her first project on the effects of language learning in a study abroad context and used it again in 1995. Since then, it has been continuously fine-tuned and has been used in a number of complementary studies. In 2001 we explored the best possible ways to elicit information that we deemed useful for students studying in a variety of contexts. This version has since been used by colleagues and students in a number of projects (Paige, Cohen, Kappler, Chi, & Lassegard, 2002; Dewey, 2002; Kohro, 2001; Mendelson, in preparation).

Because we are asked with great frequency to share copies of the LCP and because it was an integral research instrument in the studies reported in this issue (Freed, Segalowitz, & Dewey; Segalowitz & Freed), numerous anonymous SSLA reviewers requested a detailed version of it. In the following pages, two versions of the LCP are presented: a pretest version to be used at the beginning of a study, and a posttest version to be given at the conclusion of a study abroad project. We welcome communications from colleagues as to the use they have made of the LCP and productive changes that they have made to it.

PRETEST VERSION OF THE LANGUAGE CONTACT PROFILE

PROJECT: ACQUISITION OF SPANISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

The responses that you give in this questionnaire will be kept confidential. This cover sheet is to allow the researcher to associate your responses with your name if needed. However, only the people entering your responses into the computer will see this name. An identification number will be used in place of your name when referring to your responses in publications. Every effort will be made to keep your responses confidential.

Thank you for your cooperation. The information that you provide will help us to better understand the backgrounds of students who are studying Spanish in various contexts. Your honest and detailed responses will be greatly appreciated.

POSTTEST VERSION OF THE LANGUAGE CONTACT PROFILE

PROJECT: ACQUISITION OF SPANISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

The responses that you give in this questionnaire will be kept confidential. This cover sheet is to allow the researcher to associate your responses with your name if needed. However, only the people entering your responses into the computer will see this name. An identification number will be used in place of your name when referring to your responses in publications. Every effort will be made to keep your responses confidential.

The information that you provide will help us to better understand the learning experiences of students of Spanish. Your honest and detailed responses will be greatly appreciated.

References

REFERENCES

Bialystok, E. (1978). Language skills and the learners: The classroom perspective. In C. Blatchford & J. Schachter (Eds.), On TESOL '78 (pp. 224–231). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Day, R. (1985). The use of the target language in context and second language proficiency. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 69–95). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Dewey, D. (2002). The effects of study context and environment on the acquisition of reading by students of Japanese as a second language during study-abroad and intensive domestic immersion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Freed, B. F. (1990). Language learning in a study abroad context: The effects of interactive and noninteractive out-of-class contact on grammatical achievement and oral proficiency. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics: Linguistics, language teaching, and language acquisition: The interdependence of theory, practice, and research (pp. 459–477). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Freed, B. F. (1995). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kohro, Y. (2001). A pilot study of the linguistic impact of study abroad experiences on the writing of Japanese college ESL learners in America. JACET [The Japan Association of College English Teachers] Bulletin, 33, 57–72.Google Scholar
Mendelson, V. (in preparation). Spain or bust: Assessment and student perceptions out-of-class contact and oral proficiency in a study abroad context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Paige, R. M., Cohen, A., Kappler, B., Chi, J., & Lassegard, J. (2002). Maximizing study abroad. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Seliger, H. (1977). Does practice make perfect? A study of interaction patterns and L2 competence. Language Learning, 27, 263–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N. (1986). The interaction between types of contact and types of instruction: Some effects on the second language proficiency of adult learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar