ACADEMIC DISCOURSE IN KINDERGARTEN: LINGUISTIC FEATURES AND REPERTOIRES AT PLAY IN ACQUIRING LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY AND CONSTRUCTING MEANING IN FORMAL LITERACY CONTEXTS

Abstract

The construct of academic language—while of great interest, in part, because of recently adopted or revised content and English-language development (ELD) standards that explicitly focus on academic language—and its role in the academic success of all students, including young learners and English learners (ELs), is far from clearly understood. Nowhere is the issue of the construct of academic language more contested than in the locus where many students are formally introduced to schooling in the United States; that is, in kindergarten classrooms. Kindergarten is many students’ formal introduction to public education in the United States, and this includes ELs, who represent a growing percentage of students in U.S. schools. Indeed, about 16% of kindergarteners in the country are classified as ELs (U.S. Department of Education, 2019a). Beginning at the kindergarten level, academic language is a primary focus of College and Career Readiness (CCR) standards, such as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), which require students to engage in cognitively and linguistically complex academic practices (van Lier & Walqui, 2012). Similarly, ELD standards in the U.S. have recently been written anew or revised to correspond to the ambitious CCR standards, and, therefore, English language proficiency (ELP) expectations inherent in the ELD standards have become more rigorous as well. A hallmark of both ELD standards and CCR standards is a predominant focus on academic language. Yet consensus is lacking on what academic language is, exactly, and how it is operationalized in classrooms; some researchers argue that the construct of academic language may not even exist as it is currently conceptualized (e.g., Bunch, 2014; Gutiérrez et al., 2011; Valdés, 2004). In this study, I provide a description of classroom language usage in formal literacy contexts in kindergarten, inclusive of ELs, through a qualitative analysis of language use at the lexical, syntactic, and discoursal levels in academic literacy events. Additionally, I investigate whether students’ degree of exposure to academic language in kindergarten, language status, prior exposure to formal classroom contexts, gender, and age are related to academic language proficiency at the end of one academic year and when controlling for beginning-of-year academic language knowledge. Qualitative analyses illustrated that, while classroom discourse contained a relatively small percentage of lexically and syntactically complex language, students were exposed to a wide range of language during formal literacy events, from high-frequency to low-frequency (sophisticated) words, and from syntactically simple to complex utterances, across a variety of language functions aligned with the state’s literacy standards, both within and across classrooms. Greater amounts of sophisticated words and syntactically complex structures were present during shared reading activities specifically and, to a lesser degree, during foundational literacy activities. Exemplars from qualitative analyses illustrated that common, high-frequency words and simple syntactic structures were, at times, employed to present and discuss academic language and concepts and also employed, at times, as an instructional support for some ELs. Lessons that featured language functions related to the reading strand of the literacy standards and, to a lesser degree, the foundational literacy skills strand, afforded opportunities for sophisticated vocabulary and complex syntax. At this formative grade, then, the use of common, high-frequency words and simple syntax in service of teaching academic vocabulary and academic concepts during shared reading and other literacy activities was characteristic of the classrooms observed. Quantitative analyses indicated a significant relationship between academic language proficiency, as measured by a standardized language proficiency assessment, and language status, gender, and academic language exposure. However, when controlling for students’ beginning-of-year academic language proficiency (operationalized as their pretest scores), the relationship between academic language proficiency and academic language exposure in the classroom was no longer significant. In consideration of both qualitative and quantitative results, then, minimal exposure to academic language may not be sufficient to promote academic language proficiency. I recommend that literacy instruction could be enhanced to maximize exposure to and productive use of sophisticated words and syntactically complex language, as appropriate for kindergarten ELs and EOs, and in consideration of their developing language proficiency. Findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the language used in academic literacy contexts as instantiated in kindergarten classrooms, and begin to explore under what linguistic conditions all students, ELs and EOs, can more readily develop academic language proficiency in the earliest of elementary grades.