#eflresearch

L1 in the primary and pre-primary classroom part 2: We must follow the leaders. In every good thing.*

by

Meet Ela, a newly qualified, inexperienced VYL/YL teacher, from Poland, who has just completed her CELTA course and who is about to start a new chapter of her life, as a teacher of English.

Ela is lucky. She is starting not only one but two new jobs next week and both will involve working with very little people. One is in her hometown and it will be face-to-face, the other one online, in China. Ela is a bit nervous, because it is a new job and because she has never really worked with kids before. There will be some induction or orientation at both places but it is only to take place next week.

She is also lucky because there is still some time left AND she has got access to more than just google. Her teacher training centre is in her hometown so she can just walk in and do a bit of research and reading in the library there. She hasn’t even started to teach and she already has lots and lots (and lots) of questions.

What about the L1 for example, the students’ mother tongue? Should the teacher use the L1 in class? Or outside of class? Should the kids been allowed to use L1 in class? Should they only use English? Should the teacher know the students’ first language?

Ela is a newly qualified teacher and so her way of compiling a reading list is not a perfect one but here some of the ideas that she has come across…

Herbert Puchta and Karen Elliott, Activities For Very Young Learners

This publication is a compendium of activities and ideas for the classroom but it includes a brief introduction with some of the principles that should be taken into account while working with the pre-school children. Puchta claims there that the knowledge of the L1 on the C2 level is absolutely necessary in order to help clarify any problems with comprehension as well as to assist the children in case a problem occurs.

What does Ela think now? Well, she is grateful for all the practical advice on how to avoid using the L1 in class but, at the same time, feels like she is doing something wrong or even illicit. After all, she was offered this job in China and not one person ever asked any questions about her level of Chinese. Then, she is thinking of her best friend, Kasia, who left for Japan and taught kids there, and Anya who landed in South Korea…her CELTA tutor who used to teach in Mexico and one of her CELTA peers, Jessie, who worked in Poland and that none of them spoke the langauge of the country where they worked and definitely not on a C2 level. Not even on an A2 level, to be honest. Ela is confused.

Opal Dunn, Introducing English to Young Children: Spoken Language

No, scratch that. Ela only thought she was confused earlier. Now she really is, after having gone through a few pages of the Opal Dunn’s publication.

First of all, it is because she has found out that children cannot bond with a monolingual teacher (that is a teacher who does not speak the children’s L1) and that they might get disappointed and frustrated. It does not bode well for that online job in China or for any other future positions abroad but at least that’s some good news for the groups she is going to teach in her hometown.

The rest, however, is a bit more difficult to digest because translation, at the same time, must be and mustn’t be used in the classroom. ‘Only English’ should be one of the rules but the teacher should explain it both in English and in L1. The same can be done whenever a new concept is introduced but should be done quickly and in a different voice.

There is also the issue of the kids translating from one langauge to the other. It should at the same time be encouraged (‘as being able to translate is a skill that needs to be encouraged’ p. 134) and discouraged as kids might not tune into the English version waiting for translation (‘the habit to translate should be broken’ p. 136).  

Ela is beyond confused. She wishes she had stopped reading on page 134. Or that she had only limited her reading to page 136. Too late!

Vanessa Reilly and Sheila M. Ward, Very Young Learners

Reilly and Ward’s publication is the oldest resource available on the market devoted solely to teaching VYL and for some time it was the only published resource for the teachers who work with the pre-primary children.

Probably the most important line that Ela finds there is the following quote: ‘if we tell the children that they can only speak in English, it is as good as telling them to be quiet’ (p.5), followed by the list of reasons to accept the L1 in the classroom and some practical ideas on how to avoid using it and how to gradually replace it with English.

Ela is somewhat relieved to have found a note that the attitude to the mother tongue in the EFL/ESL classroom might depend on the country and the particular school’s policy. She thinks that perhaps that might, at least to some extent, explain the fact that she and her colleagues were hired to teach despite the lack of knowledge of the children’s L1, although, the authors here, just like everyone else she has read so far, seem to assume that all the teachers working with YL and VYL speak the children’s mother tongue.

Ela is, admittedly, more peaceful now, although she still does not quite understand she even got the job if the L1 proficiency is such an important requirement.

Sandie  Mourão and Gail Ellis, Teaching English to Pre-Primary Children

Ela might not know it yet but she is really lucky: as a newly qualified teacher, at the very beginning of her career, she had a chance to read this particular book.

The authors outline ten principles of teaching English in the early years and the principle number 2 refers to L1: ‘Children will sometimes use their home / school language when learning English, which is viewed as part of the natural process of language aquisition and evidence of learning’ (p. 214) and they provide a list of situations in which both the teacher and the students might feel the need to resort to the L1 in the EFL context. Ela takes notes as she might need this knowledge to understand what is going on in her classroom. She especially likes the questions for self-reflection, such as ‘Why and how did I use the L1?’, ‘Could I have done it differently?‘ (p.215) or, as seen from the child’s perspective ‘What steps did I take to help the child move from L1 to English‘ (p.215).

Elat is happy, she finally feels like she has learnt something. She is not as nervous as she used to be. There is only one question that has been left unaswered and that refers to al these teachers who teach preschoolers without speaking their L1. They exist and Ela is one of them. Only now, she is too excited and she only wants to go on reading. This is where we are going to leave her now… Enter the Dragon (teacher/trainer), me with only a few facts from the VYL kingdom with a few summarising comments.

At the moment, there are altogether 4 volumes devoted to teaching pre-schoolers. Reilly and Ward published their compendium in 1997 and it took twenty years (as in 20, as in two decades) for another title to appear on the market in 2017 when Puchta and Elliott came out. All that despite the fact that this area of the market has been growing in strength all this time (Garton and Copland, 2018).

The latest addition, by Sandie Mourao and Gail Ellis has just been released and it willl take some time for it to make it to all the libraries, teacher training courses reading lists, bookshops so it might be that some newly qualified teachers will be walking into their first lessons without having read it. But the good thing is – the book existis and it is available. The newly qualified VYL and YL teachers, the VYL and YL novices, the Elas of today are indeed lucky. They have a lot at their disposal and a lot more than the Elas of five or ten years ago.

Even in the areas that are and have been ‘hot’, ‘popular’ and well-researched, it takes forever for the findings to permeate into the coursebooks and the mainstream consciousness, let alone areas like ours that is considered ‘a niche’, at least by some. As Sandie Mourão writes (2018) ‘Precious little research involves pre-primary FL learners, so research in any direction would be welcome’. Yes, ‘precious little‘ and ‘any‘…Things have started to change, slowly so it will probably take another twenty years and a few more dedicated teachers and scholars before we have answers to some more of the VYL questions. Those related to the presence of the L1 in the EFL classroom but not only those, of course.

In the meantime, there is still more to come in this series here, some studies that I have come across as well as the findings of my own small scale study on what the VYL teachers think of the L1 and what they do…See you in a bit. Oh, and if you haven’t done it yet, check out the introduction, too!

PS I am really interested in the attitudes of primary and pre-primary teachers to using the kids L1 in class, by the students and by the teachers. This was one of the beliefs that I was researching in my MA dissertation (the post on that coming up in this series). The MA is done (yay) but the research continues so if you have a few minutes to spare and you don’t mind taking part in the survey, please follow the link and answer a few questions here.

Bibliography

Photos courtesy of Юлец

* )W.Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing, act II, scene I

O.Dunn (2013), Introducing English to Young Children: Spoken Language, Collins

Garton, S. and F. Copland (eds), (2018), The Routledge Book of Teaching English to Young Learners, Routledge.

S.Mourão and G.Ellis (2020), Teaching English to Pre-Primary Children, Delta Publishing

S.Mourão (2018), Research into teaching of English as a Foreign Language in early childhood and care, In: S. Garton and F. Copland (eds), The Routledge Book of Teaching English to Young Learners, Routledge, p. 425 – 440. 

H.Puchta and K.Elliott (2017), Activities for Very Young Learners, Cambridge University Press

V.Reilly and S.M.Ward (1997), Very Young Learners, Oxford University Press

Jerome et al or how the EFL world started to scaffold

by
https://ru.freepik.com/free-photo/construction-site-silhouettes_1243080.htm#page=1&query=scaffolding&position=7

This is the first post in the series of ‘Reading and Research’ in which I would like to at least try to bring forward the great thinkers and researchers that stand behind everything that we do in the classroom, in the hope that in the worst case scenario it will be a tiny contribution to spreading the word and in the best case scenario, someone is going to reach out and read the original article and look at the procedures in the classroom from a different angle. Today: Jerome. Then Leo, Lily and all the other ones. And yes, I am using their first names as a sign of my utmost respect because over the years, we have grown really close.

Let me introduce my first superhero, Jerome S. Bruner.

However, before we get to scaffolding and the EFL classroom, please start with watching one of the last interviews that Jerome S. Bruner gave, in 2013, three years before his death. Why? Just to find out more about the life of a great scholar who cheated in order to be able to be enlisted to fight in WWW II, served under general Dwight Eisenhower and who, upon moving to England to start teaching at the University of Oxford in 1972, wanted to take his boat with him so badly that he basically organised an across-the-ocean sailing do with a bunch of his friends…

Now, scaffolding.

It is probably one of the very few methodology terms that made it into the everyday vernacular of teachers, used not only by trainers and resource book writers but also teachers. Such a concept! So much potential!

That is one single reason why digging deep (and deeper), it is worthwhile to be inquisitive about the beginnings of all of these concepts that are so familiar and yet so unknown and which, initially, had nothing or, indeed, very little to do with learning language.

Jerome S. Bruner and his two colleagues David Wood (University of Nottigham) and Gail Ross (Harvard University) carried out an experiment on a group of children, aged 3, 4 and 5 in order to find out how these childrenfor the first time introduced this term in relation of learning and, funnily enough, initially it had nothing, or very little, to do with learning languages.

The article was the report of the research that the three psychologists conduced on a group of children, aged 3, 4 and 5 to find out how these learners behave in a specific learning situation and how the tutor’s support, its amount and quality, varies in relation to the child’s age. This research was carried out in the light of the socio-cultural theory of learning which assumes that adults (teachers, parents, older siblings also known as ‘experts’) help children (or not adults, not experts but novices) to learn. Based on what they observed, they defined scaffolding as the ‘process that enables a child or novice to solve a problem, carry out a task or achieve a goal which would be beyond his unassisted efforts’ (Woods et al, 1976: 90).

The research

The experiment itself is a fascinating piece of reading and I would recommend having a look at it to every teacher working with young or very young learners.

Let’s take the task, first of all. The three gentlemen designed the task (and ‘the toy’) themselves with a few objectives in mind, namely it had to be interesting enough for the children to be willing to get involved or as they call it ‘feature rich’. It had to be complex to challenge the kids but at the same time achievable, both for 3 y.o. and 5 y.o. and for example it could not be very complex as regards fine motor skills of physical strength as the younger children would not be able to participate in it. What is more, it had to be repetitive to enable the children to learn while dealing with the task and to apply the developed skills in later stages of the activity.

The final result was a set of interlocking blocks, that, if used properly, come together as a pyramid. The children were allowed to play with the blocks alone, under the supervision of an experienced tutor, who would apply what techniques she found most suitable to help each child complete the task as independently as it was only possible in each case. Then, the quality of this support was analysed and conclusions drawn.

The findings

The most fascinating part of this research are the differences in they way in which children of different age groups of preschoolers reacted to the task.

During the interaction with the tutor, the youngest children needed most help but also, that, because of their age, they were not quite interested in observing the demonstration and instructions. The other children, most likely already familiar with the school set-up and the roles of the learner and the teacher, were indeed ready to listen, ready to be taught.

When it comes to the oldest children in the group, because of their cognitive development, they were ready to deal with the task, almost from the word ‘go’, with a minimal tutor support. It can be assumed that for slightly older children, the presence of the tutor would be completely redundant.

What do we, the YL teachers, get from this?

A better understandig of how the same task may or may not work with students from different age groups.

This is especially important for the teachers of very young learners. It might happen (and it often does) that, for whatever the reason, children of different ages end up studying in the same group, for example a 3 year-old with a 5 year-old, since they are both pre-school beginners. Or, even more frequently, the same coursebook is used with a group of 3 year-old beginners and with a group of 5 year-old beginners, although they are miles away in terms of social, cognitive, linguistic development.

No need to panic, however, here is the good news from Jerome et al: we can make it work. In most cases there is a leeway and the same resource, activity, handout, craft, game can be used with the younger and with the older preschoolers and the things to change will be the instructions, staging and the amoung of the teacher’s inolvement and support. A post with more examples and practical solutions soon to come!

A better understanding of what a VYL or YL activity should be, from the perspective of child development

For language teachers the most important factor to take into consideration while assessing materials and activities is their potential contribution to a meaningful language production. However, teachers working with early years, primary or pre-primary, are aware of the fact that they cannot open the book or bring a handout and hope that their students will get involved in completing the activities just because this is something that the teacher wants them to do. The criteria that Bruner et al outlined while designing their ‘toy’ are a good starting point for the teachers who can be asking the following questions while lesson planning

  • Is the task going to be ‘interesting’ for the students? Why would they want to do it? Is it a game? Is it fun? Is it colourful? Does it involve their favourite characters? It does not mean that all these criteria need to be met every single time but is it a little bit more than ‘exercise 2 on page 11’?
  • Will they be able to do it? Is it achievable for the students whose hands, brains and social skills are only 4 years old? Is it challenging enough (in terms of the congitive skills, the linguistic skills, the motor skills)?
  • Is there any point in investing the teacher’s and the students’ time and energy in it? Can it be recycled later, in any way? The game which might be possibly time-consuming to set up the first time but that can be played again and again, with different sets of vocabulary…Learning a song that, intially, might be too long and to complex but which will become the group’s feel-good anthem…Making the puppet of a favourite character that perhaps will not generate too much language in the first three months but that will be your students’ safely blanet and will make them feel safer in class…I don’t think there is one one definite answer here that would work for all the children, all the teachers and all the groups but, nonetheless, it is a good question to bear in mind.

A better understanding of how we can support our students in class

Before the concept of ‘scaffolding’ became one of the key words in EFL and before it got watered down a bit, Wood, Bruner and Ross, based on all their observations of children, managed to highlight six ways in which a tutor (or a teacher) can actually scaffold an activity. Among them (only) three are directly related to teaching:

  • demonstration (or modelling and instructions appropriate for the students’ age, level and cognitive skills),
  • marking critical features (or monitoring and feedback)
  • reduction in degrees of freedom (which stands for what is most frequently associated with scaffolding – task simplification by providing more support for the student).

The other three are more related to the fact that the group were preschool children and involve

  • getting the kids interested in the task (recruitment),
  • making sure they stay interested (direction maintenance)
  • dealing with tantrums and demotivation (frustration control) in order to enable them to complete the task.

So every single time you are demonstrating, getting your kids’ attention, calling their name to get them back or every time you praise them because you can see they are struggling and are about to burst into tears…Every time you are colour-coding the handout or manipulating it in any way to make it doable…Anytime you are putting on your silly voice to turn it into magic or counting down to signal that they should be settling down, you are, in fact, scaffolding! And that is the way to go!

References

Wood, D., J.S. Bruner and G.Ross (1976), The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving, Journal of Child Psychology, 17, pp 89 – 100.

Inside the Psychologist’s Studio with Jeremy Harmer (2013), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxn6IpAJEz8

Pairwork for pre-schoolers: Where the angels don’t fear to tread*

by

Ha! It was working!

Again, I made it happen. They were sitting in pairs, facing each other, making riddles, answering, all by themselves. I was sitting in the corner, just keeping an eye.

First reaction? To run out of the classroom, shout it from the rooftops or, since they were just in the hallway, tell me students’ parents. But then, just then, I hesitated because, in my mind’s eye, I saw their reaction. What if I really did rush out, with a victorious ‘Your kids can play in pairs!!!!’

What would they do? They’d just look at me with an eyebrow raised. They do know that their 4 and 5-year-old sons and daughters can play in pairs. They did see it, a million times, in playgroups, in the playgrounds, in kindergartens, at home…what’s the big news here?

Indeed. If you at the types of play and the age slots when kids normally are capable of engaging, then yes, for a long time, children are only taking part in unoccupied play (0 – 2), solitary play (2-3), onlooker play (2.5 – 3.5) and parallel play (2.5 – 3.5) but even the children aged about 3- 4 do engage in associative play and, a bit later, from the age of 4, in cooperative play. And that means, that for most of the EFL students (with some exceptions as there are school which admit 2 and 3-year-olds), there is nothing, from the point of view of child development, that should prevent children from interacting with each other and working together towards a common goal, without the adult, or rather, with the adult being involved only marginally.

Consequently, they should be able to take part in a pairwork activity in an English class because why not?

Naturally, some provisions related to the age of the participants will have to be made and the whole definition of what a pair-work activity is, adapted. And things such as the inability to read and write, the level of English, the duration of the activity, the ability to stay on the task…but these are the things that we work on anyway so…

Personally, I think I became obsessed with pairwork in the early years about five years ago. The group I was teaching was big, nine or even ten students at a time. They were absolutely amazing, some of them I still teach today, but there were ten of them and I felt really unhappy. They did not produce as much as they could have as we had to focus on whole class activities. Until, one day, I had enough of that, and out of this desperation, I started taking my first steps towards pairwork. From that group on, nothing was the same, pairwork was there on the table, for this and for all the other groups. There is no way back.

This year, with my new level 1 group and with the BKC Conference approaching, I decided to run an experiment, a small case study, just to put the pairwork with pre-schoolers on a timeline, out of curiosity and for the other teachers, too.

The group

There were seven kids in that group, two boys and five girls. The youngest of my students was around three, the two oldest ones – five years old.

The course

The group studied once a week, for sixty minutes. We had a pacing schedule and we did use the coursebook. In many ways, this was a typical level 1 group. We did things in the way that I normally did them with a level one group, the only real difference was that I kept my eyes open and I kept the journal of the whole experiment. Throughout the whole project, I did plan to go through it in the most organic of ways, without speeding the process, observing the kids and moving on to the next stage when they were ready.

Stage one: weeks 1 – 12: the start of the course

During these first twelve weeks of the course, we did absolutely everything that we do when we start with a new group, including:

  • The first vocabulary sets: colours, numbers, school things, toys
  • The first functional language phrases: hello, goodbye, blue, please, thank you, who’s next, are you ready, it’s big, it’s small etc.
  • Establishing and working on the routine
  • The first everything: the first lesson with the coursebook, the first story, the first craft, the first video, the first holiday
  • Developing social skills, building the class community

Stage two: a new game: week 13

Since the kids already knew the toys vocabulary and we had played some simple flashcards games, I decided to introduce a more complex game and the basis for the whole project: the guessing game ‘Is it?’

In week 13, we played the game for the first time, ever, with the kids sitting in a circle, with the teacher leading the game. I did have to play it up a little bit, in the beginning, pretending to be student A and student B but they got the idea of the game very quickly. I did accept the one-word production but some of the older children started to ask full questions from the very beginning.

Stage three: students take over: week 14 – 18

At the time I was not sure when this particular stage would happen, I wanted to wait for the kids to be ready and I was getting ready to wait. But, surprise surprise, they were ready, already in the following lesson.

I did play a few rounds, with me in the lead and then, invited a few of them to lead the game. They did need my help with holding the cards and keeping the game going but that’s really it. It was all natural and they were more taken aback by the fact that, out of all eight of them, not everyone did have a go.

Stage four: team vs team: the stage that did not happen

When I was staging the whole process, I did plan the stage in which the kids divided into teams would be playing the game, with one set of cards.

The idea was that would be slightly more independent, at the same time not being exposed and supporting each other in the game and the teacher could still supervise them effectively.

However, when we were sitting down to play the game, one of the pairs, grabbed the cards that were lying on the side, took them and, without any further ado, started to play the game, with the child sitting nearest, using full sentences.

This is when I realized that we were ready for the next stage so we proceeded.

Stage five: pairs: lesson 19 – 24 and onwards

It just happened and it was a success, despite the fact that between the whole Christmas break took place between lesson 18 and 19 and the fact that a student came back after a longer trip. As soon as the kids saw the materials, they knew what was to come (I knew because they were commentating in Russian) and to reinforce the whole idea, I prepared another set of seats, in another part of the classroom.

Stage six: the follow-up: interrupted by the pandemic

Here, again, I can only tell you about everything that I was planning to do, and everything that I could not do because we are chased out of the classroom by the coronavirus.

The first step was to be switching the vocabulary, to push the boundaries of the familiar and the unknown a bit, and play the same guessing game with school objects and colours.

The second step was to switch the game and, hopefully, swish through a few stages and use a game to play in pairs, Abracadabra, Pelmanism or One or many.

Reflection

All in all, it was very easy and pretty straightforward despite the fact that the kids were quite young and despite the fact that we only did meet once a week. I would imagine that, if we had classes more regularly, for example twice a week, even less time would have been required and we would have met our aims even faster.

If you haven’t tried pairwork with pre-primary, then use the first opportunity and go for it!

The contributing factors

  • Seating arrangements: very important, especially for the first few times with pair-work. It does make it a bit more complicated for the teacher, to put together mini-stations with two stools facing each other or, even better, two stools at a small table, in a reasonable distance from the other mini-stations but it really does contribute to the whole project. Kids can only see their partner; they have a small working space in front of them and the other pairs are automatically excluded. Out of sight, out of mind.
  • Material arrangement: very important. Colourful flashcards are great and beautiful to look at but they proved to be too big to manipulate for some of the little hands. It was too much of a challenge to shuffle them, one of twice they did spill onto the carpet and if the kids really wanted to keep them a secret, they did press them tight to their chests and the flashcards got folded and creased. This is how the black and white mini-flashcards appeared. Even if they got torn, lost, destroyed, it was super easy to replace them. To make sure that they were not see-through and they don’t fly out of the little hands, the colourful envelopes appeared. The students very quickly learnt to associate these envelopes with this particular game
  • Material coherence: This is in order to ensure that they students will be using the full structures and that they will be using the grammatically correct language. Naturally, it will depend on the activity and the vocabulary set. In our case, we started using pairwork with toys but I decided to eliminate ‘puzzles’, ‘crayons’ ‘blocks’ from this particular game. I did not want my students to overgeneralize and use ‘Is it?’ with a noun in plural and, at this point in the game, they had not learnt the plural form ‘Are they?’ and I did not want to overcomplicate things.
  • Voices to show interest: especially in the beginning, while modelling, when the teachers themselves are their own student B and student A. A little bit of theatre goes a loooong way here.
  • Decision making: or in other words, teaching kids to be independent. In a regular lesson, there are plenty of opportunities for the students to make decisions about the lesson – choosing the colour of the stool to sit on, choosing which song to sing, which game to play, the order in which they join the circle, or who is the next one to lead the game. This way, step by step, the little people learn that the teacher is always the hub and not the only hub in this little community and it all comes in handy later on, during the pairwork tasks.
  • Leading the game: as soon as the kids become familiar with the activity, they can be given the opportunity to ‘be the teacher’ and lead the game. This way they will be producing more language but, from the point of view of pair-work, they will be also better prepared to take a bit more responsibility for the game.
  • S-S interaction: as with leading the previous point, the students should be given many opportunities to interact with other students, without the teacher. Obviously, with the little ones, these exchanges will be limited to saying hello and goodbye to each other, not only to the teacher, to students asking each other ‘How are you?’, to students giving out pencils, asking for them and saying thank you etc.
  • Pairing-up aka Clever teacher: Ideally, of course, everyone should be able to work with each other and be on good terms with everyone in the group and building these relations is one of the general aims of the course. However, getting to that place is a process and work in progress and it will take time. For that reason, it might be a good idea, to consider pairing children up in a way that will be contributing to pairwork, with the hope that the benefits for the community spirit will be secondary here. There might be two factors to take into consideration, on the one hand pairing up the children that work well together, on the other pairing up the younger with the older, creating perfect conditions for this pairwork ZPD, with one student the expert, the other the novice.
  • Functional language: We started with the key language necessary for this particular game (Is it…? Yes, it is. No, it isn’t) and only later, when the time came, we added ‘I give up!’ which turned up to be necessary. When we were about to start the proper pairwork, I added chants to give it a proper framework, ‘Are you ready? 3…2…1…Let’s play!’ to start the activity and ‘Let’s finish. 10.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2.1. Well done!’

If you are interested in the topic of language production in pre-schooler, make sure you check out the posts on Colourful Semantics, discourse clock, using songs and activities based on developing cognitive skills.

References

*) This is the presentation I gave at the BKC IH Conference: Exprience, Excellence, Expertise, Moscow February 2020

What’s out there? Books and articles

by

A reading list for the pre-primary EFL teachers (an attempt:-)

Here is a new project.

Deeply rooted in the fact that I keep losing things and if I start piling the resources here, I will also be able to find them myself easily. Selfish, as usual.

But, here’s to hoping that this post will come in handy to all those teachers who are looking for things to read about the very young kids and the ways of approaching them.

P.S. The list is highly subjective. So are the mini-reviews.

P.P.S. It will be continually updated!

P.P.P.S. Make sure you also have a look at the Bibliography Part 2: Webinars Treasure Chest.

Books: EFL

  1. Sandie Mourão and Gail Ellis (2020), Teaching English to Pre-Primary Children: Educating very young children, Delta Teacher Development Series. About: Waiting for my delivery but based on the IATEFL presentation in Liverpool, this book is dream come true.
  2. Vanessa Reilly and Sheila M. Ward (1997), Very Young Learners, Oxford University Press. About: Some nice practical solutions but, beware, the VYL world has moved on since 1997. Take it with a pinch of salt.
  3. Herbert Puchta and Karen Elliott (2017), Activities for Very Young Learners, Cambridge University Press. About: Lots of practical ideas for the beginner VYL teachers.
  4. Opal Dunn (2014), Introducing English to Young Children: Spoken Language, Collins. About: Some insights on what teaching pre-primary should be (although I cannot agree with all the approaches include here)
  5. Opal Dunn (2014), Introducing English to Young Children: Reading and Writing, Collins. About: Some theoretical background in a reader-friendly mode and some practical ideas.
  6. Lynne Cameron (2001), Teaching English to Young Learners, Cambridge University Press. About: Not really VYL-focused but an excellent introduction to the world of the non-adult learners.
  7. Sandie Mourão (2015), Discover with Dex, Teacher’s Book, Macmillan About: The best pre-primary Teacher’s Book so far (the overview of the age group, the implications for the classroom, the solutions).  

Research articles EFL

  1. Sandie Mourão (2014), Taking play seriously in the pre-primary English classroom, ELT Journal, 68 / 3, p 254 – 264 About: On the importance of play in the EFL/ESL environment.
  2. Sandie Mourao (2018), Research into the teaching as a foreign language in early childhood education and care, In: Garton, S. and F. Copland (eds), (2018), The Routledge Book of Teaching English to Young Learners, Milton Park, New York: Routledge, pp. 425 – 440. About: For those interested in a more academic look at EFL in pre-primary. Start your reading here! Spoiler alert: very little research in the area. Surprise surprise!
  3. Daeun Song and Jang Ho Lee (2019) The use of code switching for very young EFL learners, ELT Journal, 73 / 2, p. 144- 153. About: The results of a small scale study from South Korea on the benefits of the bilingual instruction in the pre-primary EFL classroom.
  4. Pawel Scheffler and Anna Dominska (2018), Own-language use in teaching English to pre-school children, ELT Journal, 72/4, p. 364- 383. About: The results of a small-scale study on the use of L1 in the pre-primary classroom in Poland (they do and they don’t mind).

Books: Early Years Education

  1. Tina Bruce (2015), Early Childhood Education, Hodder Arnold About: An absolute must. Nothing to do with EFL, lots and lots about the youngest learners in general.
  2. Tina Bruce (2001), Learning Through Play: Babies, Toddlers and the Foundation Years, Hodder Arnold About: A little more on play and why it matters.
  3. Tina Bruce (2004), Developing Learning in Early Childhood, Paul Chapman Publishing About: An introduction into the cognitive development, the social skills development, communication and the importance of play in early years education.
  4. Janet R. Moyles (1989), Just Playing, The role and status of play in early childhood education, Open University Press About: Even more on play, its types and value, including play with and through language.

Research articles: Early Years Education

  1. Developmental Matters in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), Early Education (2012), The British Association for Early Childhood Education, https://www.foundationyears.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Development-Matters-FINAL-PRINT-AMENDED.pdf   About: If you’ve never worked with the little people, have a look at this summary. This is how they operate. This is what they need.

To be continued…