"Despite our English-only policies, students still slip into their L1 [first language]. If they’re in a group where everyone’s language is the same, it’s virtually impossible to get them to speak in English" (IEP administrator, personal communication, January 2010).

Student language use has been a controversial topic of discussion among English instructors and administrators of intensive English programs (IEPs) for many years. This topic is especially concerned with students’ use of English outside of the language classrooms (e.g., in the hallways, the lunchroom, the computer lab). It is commonly believed that IEPs are designed for improving language skills through immersion in an English-speaking environment. Thus, assuming that speaking English not only in class, but also outside the classroom will help students learn the language faster, some IEPs enforce an English-only policy that prohibits using the L1 at any time within the confines of the language school. In such programs, the administration and teachers “devise elaborative games, signals, and penalty systems to ensure that students do not use their L1” (Auerbach, 1993, p. 16). On the other hand, a large number of programs do not have such a restrictive language policy. They let students choose what language to use in the hallways and computer labs; however, they encourage students to speak English and expect them to do so (Personal email correspondence through TESOL interest sections, January, 2010).

A few years ago, I participated in an online discussion on this very issue with the members of several TESOL interest sections. In this discussion, many teachers and administrators admitted that, regardless of the school statement in terms of language use, students continue to communicate with each other in their native languages. Here are some of their responses: “We try a lot, but in the end I would say it falls short. Students continue to speak their L1”; “If students have a choice, they mostly always choose not to use English”; “It is really frustrating to admit we are so ineffective, but despite a great deal of effort, it seems the L1 is still very evident in the classroom area”; “Even if we wanted it, it is entirely impossible to enforce an English-only policy outside of class”; “I’ve asked students why they want us to have to deal with this issue through punishment and why they cannot make the commitment to speak in English for [the] 5 hours a day they are in our program. They say they want to but can’t break the habit. We have not been able to figure out how to break this habit.” These comments all demonstrate that students’ language use in school is a concern for many English programs.

As a teacher myself, this topic intrigued me. More specifically, I wanted to investigate the issue from the student perspective. This article presents some of the findings of the questionnaire that was administered in the English Language Center, an IEP in Provo, Utah. The purpose of the questionnaire was to examine student attitudes toward the English-only environment in school. The questionnaire was completed by 158 students of different levels and L1 backgrounds.

The results indicate that the students had generally positive reactions to the English-only rule. They believed that practicing English in a safe school environment would help them prepare for real-world communication. They also pointed out the benefit of the rule in terms of developing friendships with students from other countries. Finally, the students felt that choosing to speak English was a demonstration of their respect for other students and teachers who could not understand their first language.

However, despite the positive reactions to the English-only rule, many students expressed negative attitudes. In what follows, I will discuss these negative attitudes, as they help us better understand the reasons why students are hesitant to communicate in the target language in school.

The Ineffectiveness of the English-Only Rule on Language Proficiency

Despite the general teachers’ belief that the English-only rule helps students improve their skills, students may have little confidence in the effectiveness of using English with other language learners. For example, in our questionnaire, students’ biggest concern was the quality of learner-learner interaction, which they felt was not effective in facilitating improvement of language proficiency. This notion was nicely summed up by this comment: “I don’t know how much you can learn from other students that most of the time speak worse than you.”

This might indeed sound like a valid apprehension. However, students need to realize that learner-learner communication is only one type of interaction that gives them chances to practice English, among other opportunities that they have outside of the school. Most students would probably agree that speaking English in class, whether with a teacher or with classmates, has a beneficial impact on their language proficiency. In the same way, learners should be reassured that communication with other language students outside the classroom is equally beneficial to interactions in class and is by no means “linguistically harmful” (Pica, Lincoln-Porter, Paninos, & Linnell, 1996, p. 80).

Teachers’ Reactions to Students Speaking Their L1

Another reason why some students may have strong negative feelings about the English-only rule, at least according to the results of our questionnaire, may be the teachers’ reactions to students who speak their native languages in the hallways, the lobby, and the lab. The comments on the questionnaire indicate that the students wished the teachers were more understanding of the reasons why they speak their native languages.

Therefore, in our efforts to remind students to speak English, we need to be encouraging, friendly, and motivating. It is true that many students set a goal to practice English as much as possible, yet it is quite easy for them to lose sight of their goals and slip into their native language, so they need to receive appropriate support and encouragement from the teachers and the administration. And although it is obviously not our intent to hurt students’ feelings, sometimes we may, without realizing it, embarrass students and thus make them resentful.

In order to avoid that, as an alternative to the standard “Speak English, please!” we can simply approach the students and start a small-talk conversation. Or we can make light of the situation by using joking statements to address students speaking an L1. Such approaches may serve as potential solutions for addressing students in a "nicer” way and could easily be brought up during teacher training and professional development sessions.

Punishment

Another major factor contributing to students’ negative reactions to the English-only rule may be the idea of punishment for the violation of the rule that is sometimes implemented in English institutions. Such punitive methods may include deducting class points, giving out so-called penalty tickets that deprive students from various benefits, assigning extra work, and so forth. This idea of implementing punitive consequences for not using English was addressed by nearly all participants in our questionnaire with disapproval and criticism. The students often described such methods as discouraging and inappropriate for mature adult learners as well as making them resentful toward the rules, policies, and teachers.

Thus, instead of punishing students for using their L1, we should encourage, support, and reward their efforts in speaking English. This can be done by emphasizing their progress in using English and by acknowledging the situations in which students try to speak the target language with each other.

Forcing Students to Speak English

The results of our questionnaire demonstrate that even those students who pointed out the positive effects of the English-only rule were quite critical of the idea of its enforcement. Imposing the rule, in students’ opinions, will most likely fail because the learners themselves should be responsible for the choices they make in regard to the language use. If students are not motivated or do not see the advantages of practicing English, none of the rules can force them to use it.

As my own experience and the experiences of my colleagues show, it is practically impossible to enforce the rule on students. Therefore, instead of imposing it, the school administration should find ways to positively influence students and help them see the importance and the benefits of speaking English. Because the classroom is perceived as a learning area, most students develop a habit of speaking English in class. Therefore, it would behoove school administrations to create an out-of-class environment that would also be perceived as a learning area. In other words, the out-of-class area would be an extension of the classroom, though perhaps less formal and much less structured.

In conclusion, students’ success largely depends on the learning environment in school. Therefore, we should strive to provide an enjoyable and stress-free atmosphere in which students will feel comfortable and motivated to use English with each other.

References

Auerbach, E. R. (1993). Reexamining English-only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 9–32.

Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59–84.

Elena Shvidko is a PhD student in second language studies/ESL at Purdue University, where she also teaches first-year composition courses. She has taught ESL in academic and community contexts. Her academic interests focus on sociocultural aspects in second language acquisition, intercultural rhetoric, critical pedagogy, writing program administration, and nonnative-English-speaking teachers.