Citation
English as a second language in Puerto Rico

Material Information

Title:
English as a second language in Puerto Rico
Creator:
Llado-Berrios, Nitza, 1947-
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
English instruction ( jstor )
English teachers ( jstor )
Foreign language learning ( jstor )
High school students ( jstor )
Language ( jstor )
Learning ( jstor )
Learning motivation ( jstor )
Spoken communication ( jstor )
Students ( jstor )
Teachers ( jstor )
City of Gainesville ( local )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
22961868 ( ALEPH )
5360119 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO:
A LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY AND ITS
PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS













BY

NITZA LLADO-BERRICS













A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE CODUNCI
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR GF PHILOSCPHY


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1978





























Copyright 1978

by

Nitza Llad6-Berrios













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS



I wish to express my gratitude to all who in one way or

another helped and encouraged me in some phase of my research. In Puerto Rico, I wish to thank my parents for their constant encouragement and support; my English supervisor and dearest friend, Dr. Laudalina Varona, for her invaluable help and encouragement throughout my work; Mrs. Paquita ViSas de Vazquez, Director of the English Program of the Department of Education, who suggested that I do this study and petitioned for funding, and who also gave me her full cooperation; the English staff and English supervisors who made their suggestions and helped collect the data for the present study, and to the four students at the University of Puerto Rico, Rafael, Ita, Evelyn and Anita, who helped in the tabulation of the pilot questionnaires. My special thanks go to Dr. Jose L. Scto Padln, assistant professor at the University of Puerto Rico, who first helped in the statistical aspect of my study. I am also grateful to Mariles Reyes, Director of the Educational Division of the Computer Center of the Department of Education and to Edwin Blanco Pino, Systems Programmer at the Computer Center of the University of Puerto Rico. Special mention should be given to Dr. Howard Giles, Social Psychologist at the University of Bristol,



iii









England, who helped me in the design of the attitude studies included in my dissertation.

Here in Gainesville, I wish to express my gratitude to my adviser, Dr. Norman Markel, for his encouragement and guidance throughout my tenure as a graduate student. I would also like to thank Dr. Jayne C. Harder, Dr. Roger M. Thompson and Dr. Robert L. Curran, members of the supervisory committee, for their valuable guidance in my work. Mention should also be given to Ralph Partridge, a graduate student in the Speech Department, who served as programmer and statistical consultant for my study. My gratitude goes also to Marla Lucchesi, one of my students at the English Language Institute for drawing the figure and map for my study, and to Leslie Hill for her efficient work in typing my dissertation. I also wish to thank my dear friends, Michael B. Montgomery and John C. Gross, also graduate students in Linguistics, for their suggestions and encouragement throughout the different phases of my work.




















iv














PREFACE



The present study resulted from my interest in the

attitudes of Puerto Rican students towards the learning of English as a second language on the island. I felt that a study of this kind would enable the Director and staff of the English Program of the Department of Education and of the universities to set priorities for finding solutions to some of the current problems.

Dr. Howard Giles, a Social Psychologist from the University of Bristol, England, was invited by the Department of Education of Puerto Rico to act as consultant because of his experience relating to motivational variables in second and foreign language acquisition. I had been a student of Dr. Giles at the State University of New York in Oswego during the LSA Summer Institute, where I took a course in intergroup relations and discussed some of the techniques used for the present study. In Puerto Rico, Dr. Giles advised me in the following areas:

1. designing questionnaires used as research

instruments

2. giving instructions to the English supervisors

who were going to help in the collection of the

data








3. designing a plan to interpret results, including

statistical methods needed for the different

studies

Dr. Giles and I met with the Director of the English Program, Mrs. Paquita ViSas de Vazquez, and the English Program staff at the Department of Education to discuss the proposed study of language attitudes of Puerto Rican students learning English as a second language on the island. Problems relating to ESL in Puerto Rico were explained and discussed. A series of meetings with regional and zone supervisors of English were planned to seek their advice in preparing and implementing the research design. They also helped in the selection of school districts representative of the six regions of the island. The choice of the schools was made according to the following criteria:

1. The schools linthe districts chosen had to be

public.

2. The schools had to be classified by the Department

of Education as 'typically' urban or rural.

3. The schools had to be located within the boundaries

of one of the six regions of the island.

In the six regions, the following districts were selected for the study: from the region of San Juan, R1o Piedras B-rural and Rio Piedras C-urban; from the region of Mayaguez, Maricao-rural, and Aguadilla-urban; from the region of Humacao, Rio Grande-rural and Humacao-urban; from the Ponce region, Santa Isabel-rural and Ponce-urban; from the Arecibo


vi









region, Ciales-rural and Vega Baja-urban; from the region of Caguas, Aibonito, rural and Cayey-urban. At the same meeting, the supervisors who would be needed to help administer the questionnaires were chosen. Some regional supervisors and the selected zone supervisors attended a subsequent meeting where they received a briefing. They also commented on the situation oi the island, identified problems they felt needed to be considered, suggested possible solutions to these problems, and indicated which schools could be used and which teachers were the most cooperative. The supervisors were then informed of the days they were expected to obtain materials and instructions at the Department of Education.

The supervisors attended three meetings at the

Department of Education: a planning meeting where they also received the Multi-Dimensional Scaling Study instructions (this study will not be included in this dissertation but will appear in a future publication); one at which they returned the MDS materials and received instructions for the Matched Guise Study; and one at which they returned the MG questionnaires and received the Language Attitude Study materials. These materials were returned by mail,

At each meeting the supervisors mentioned the problems they had had. They suggested possible modifications in the administration of the questionnaires. Supervisors stated that students and teachers were eager to learn what they had participated in. The supervisors were promised


vi.i








that all the students and teachers who helped with this study would be informed about the results at the earliest possible date.

The next phase of the study was to work on the statistical analyses. Dr. Jos6 L. Soto Padin, a statistician from the College of Education of the University of Puerto Rico, in collaboration with Edwin Blanco Pino, a Systems Programmer at the Computer Center of the University of Puerto Rico, helped me in this phase of my study. As I had to return to Gainesville to begin the next quarter, I continued my work at the Computer Center of the University of Florida, assisted first by Dr. Don Stacks, a graduate student from the Speech Department, and after his departure by Ralph Partridge, also a graduate student in Speech, who served as statistical consultants for my study.

In this study, I do not pretend to have offered final solutions to the existing problems concerning the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. Much more research is needed to find viable solutions to present needs. However, by analyzing responses obtained from the students themselves, this study does attempt to clarify the status of some of the stereotyped beliefs related to the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. My aim has been to open possibilities for future research, to encourage Spanish and English teachers to continue joining efforts to improve the teaching of English on the island, and to remind the Puerto Rican society to keep their faith in the young people. Gainesville, Florida Nitza Llad6 viii


















TABLE OF CONTENTS



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............. . 111

PREFACE . . . . . v

ABSTRACT. ............ ...... xii

CHAPTER

ONE ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
IN PUERTO RICO. ......... 1

1.1 Introduction ......... 1

1.2 Historical Background:
1898 1978 ......... 8

TWO THEORETICAL BASES OF LANGUAGE
ATTITUDE STUDY. ......... 23

2.1 Introduction: Methodological
Approaches to Language Study 23

2.2 Attitude Studies Concerning Speech Style and Social Evaluation ...... 26

2.3 Studies of the Linguistic
Attitudes of Students .... 55 THREE THE MATCHED GUISE STUDY ..... 71 3.1 Introduction ...... .. 71

3.2 Testing Procedure. ...... 73 3.3 Results. ......... .. 78

3.4 Discussion ......... 88




ix
















FOUR THE LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY. ..... 92

4.1 Introduction ......... .... 92

4.2 Method. ............. 94

4.3 Results ............ .102

4.4 Discussion. ....... .. .118

FIVE SUMMARY. . . . ...128

5.1 Introduction .. ........ .... .128

5.2 Discussion and Recommendations. 130 5.3 Suggestions for Future Research .137 APPENDIX

A MEAN SCORES OBTAINED ON CEEB
PROFICIENCY TEST. .... ...... 141

B STIMULUS PASSAGE FOR MATCHED GUISE
STUDY: ENGLISH VERSION AND
SPANISH TRANSLATION ... ... .143

C EVALUATION FORM FOR MATCHED GUISE
STIMULUS TAPE . ...... 148

D QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DESIGNING THE
MATCHED GUISE RATING SCALES:
SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS. ...151

E SUMMARY TABLES OF PILOT STUDY FOR
DESIGNING THE MATCHED GUISE
RATING SCALES . . .154

F MATCHED GUISE QUESTIONNAIRE:
SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS. ... .161

G INSTRUCTIONS FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY .166

H SUMMARY TABLES FOR MATCHED GUISE
STUDY . . . .173


x















APPENDIX

I LANGUAGE ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRES:
SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS. 183

J SUMMARY TABLES FOR LANGUAGE
ATTITUDE STUDY. ......... 202

REFERENCES ............ .... ..... 206

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............... 217










































xi
















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy




ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO:
A LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY AND ITS PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS



By

Nitza Llad6-Berrios

December 1978



Chairman: Norman N. Markel
Major Department: Linguistics

The long-debated language issue in Puerto Rico remains an issue of great concern to all sectors of Puerto Rican society. Although Puerto Rican students study English from the first grade through high school, there is a lack of an adequate environment in which to learn English, a situation which often affects a student's attitude and hinders his/her motivation to learn the language.

An adaptation of the Matched Guise technique, which has been used in other studies to elicit immediate evaluative reactions to tape-recorded speakers representing various accents, dialects, and languages, was employed to determine student preference for speakers of Spanish, Spanish-accented


xii








English, near-native English and native English. Students rated the speakers in terms of various semantic factors. The results indicated that although Spanish is always rated most positively, the ratings for English vary according to school level.

A Language Attitude Questionnaire was designed to

explore the attitude of students concerning teaching methods, materials, the importance of learning English, frequency of usage of English and other related factors. The student responses were used to discover to what degree each of these attitudes affects their motivation to learn English. An analysis of the results obtained for the hypotheses tested revealed that there were no significant differences between the attitudes of urban and rural students for learning English as a second language. Both groups found that the advantages of learning English justify the time and effort involved in teaching it. It was also found that attitudes students may have towards the methods and materials used for the teaching of English do not directly affect their positive attitude towards learning the language. They may have a negative attitude towards English as a class subject or towards a particular teacher, but not to the English language as such. Student attitude towards learning English is also independent of student views on the political status of Puerto Rico.

Several recommendations are made to improve the teaching of English cn the island. These include intensifying the X __iii








teaching of Spanish giving due importance to English, making political decisions independent of language policy decisions for the island, and implementing teacher-training programs which reinforce positive attitudes towards the American culture and the English language.












































xiv














CHAPTER ONE

ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO



1.1 Introduction

The language situation of Puerto Rico seems to be

simple to summarize. Spanish is the first language of all Puerto Ricans, and English is the second language, taught simultaneously with Spanish from the first grade on through high school. Not only is Spanish the main language of instruction in the schools, but also it is used by most people in social and business affairs. English is taught because of the very close political, economic and cultural ties with the United States. Yet in spite of the fact that Puerto Rican students study English for twelve years, many students do not know enough English to be able to communicate in the target language. Great efforts have been made by all those interested in having Puerto Rican students learn English, but many problems still exist.

The means of scores obtained by students of the public schools on the Proficiency in English Test administered each November by the College Entrance Examination Board during the years 1966 1976 reveal an overall general lowering of scores (See Appendix A, Figure 1). Even though the fluctuations are minimal in some cases, the overall pattern is a descending one, which might be of some significance.
1I








Celeste Benitez de Rexach, a former Secretary of

Education, at the Seventh Annual Convention of TESOL in

San Juan, Puerto Rico, summarized the situation of Puerto

Rico from more than 75 years ago to the present day.

You have come to a society which, although it cherishes very close political, economic, and
cultural ties with the United States, is nevertheless, a Spanish speaking society with a
personality and culture of its own in Puerto Rico.

With all the changes in language policy in Puerto
Rico, it is not difficult to understand why the
students become increasingly ambivalent, even hostile, to the learning of English. Official
policy dictated that they study it and all about
them they saw the need to speak English to get better-paying jobs. And yet at the same time,
they felt that to study English, to speak it, was
to deny their identity as Puerto Ricans.

The result of this early linguistic policy in
Puerto Rico, with its emphasis on the "Americanization" of our people, was that the teaching of
English in Puerto Rico became a political question. To a large extent it still is.

For some independence advocates, learning English in schools smacks of "colonialism" and is a tacit acceptance of American domination of our economic development and of our close political ties. For some statehood advocates, the mastery of English
is a necessary step towards the cultural and
political integration that they believe essential
for the advent of statehood.

A summary of the major problems affecting the teaching

of English on the island will be summarized here so that

people unaware of the present-day situation can understand

the intentions of this study.

1. In Puerto Rico, the environment does not lend

itself to using English as often as would be

desirable to promote learning it effectively.

A non-English speaking environment makes it








very difficult for teachers to keep students motivated. If a student lives in one of the

many low income housing projects in Puerto

Rico, the learning of English is definitely

not a status symbol. For such students, English is not a language which they feel that they will

ever use in the future. Their situation is

radically different from that of students who

come from families of a socio-economic level

where English is valued as a means of moving up

the financial scale. Students who go to private schools will also have a high motivation

to learn English. Yet the Puerto Rican student

in general often resents the fact that after

12 years of taking courses in English, he/she

still shows a deficiency in his knowledge of English, which often leads him/her to be unwilling to use the language.

2. English is being forced upon a student who

already has Spanish as a means of communicating in the society in which he/she lives.

Spanish is the language of instruction in the

schools and is used by most people for business

and social affairs.

3. There is sometimes a lack of cooperation between

the teachers of Spanish and the teachers of

English. Quintero Alfaro, a Puerto Rican





4


educator and writer, once said that to carry out the linguistic policy established in Puerto Rico, it is necessary to teach both English and Spanish

well. If this is going to be accomplished, both Spanish teachers and English teachers are going

to have to join efforts to make the languagelearning experience a more fruitful one.

4. A student's perception of teacher personality is

a factor which often impedes learning. Many teachers in Puerto Rico do not speak English

fluently enough to be qualified to teach it. But because English must be taught for 12 years to all

Puerto Rican students, unqualified teachers,

especially those at the elementary level, often find themselves teaching English. Students who

dislike a teachers personality or who have no

respect for the teacher as a language model may

soon lose their motivation to learn the target

language.

5. The methods used by some teachers for the teaching

of English are not often the most adequate for

teaching a second language. The lack of appropriate materials is also often said to be a cause of the students' lack of motivation. Despite the

efforts made to prepare and adapt materials in tune

with the Puerto Rican reality, a lot more still

needs to be done. The materials used are not








always meaningful to the students. The way in which teachers present these materials is also

a factor which could hinder their learning English. 6. The attitudes of the Puerto Rican community toward

the learning of English often influence the attitudes of our students and hamper their motivation to learn the language. Negative publicity, often

not based in fact, is frequently disseminated

through the mass means of communication concerning the attitudes of politicians and others toward the

teaching of English on the island. The following is a typical example. In a press release in El Vocero

(1969), a former Secretary of Education, Ram6n

A. Cruz, summarized the efforts that the Department

of Education had made regarding the teaching of

English in Puerto Rico. This was done in response

to the unfortunate expressions of a local critic,

Gary Hoyt, and in reference to the educational

orientation of the country. Dr. Cruz assured

the public that the Department of Education did not wish to eliminate the teaching of English in Puerto Rico as Mr. Hoyt had claimed. To support this, he

mentioned the increase in personnel for the teaching

of English. At that time, there were over 8,000 teachers of English at all levels on the island,

which was about 30% of all the teachers in the

public school system of Puerto Rico. In the last








few years, many bilingual teachers had been trained

to teach in the primary level and the teaching

was being departmentalized at all levels, elementary, intermediate and high school.

Regarding the preparation of teachers of

English in intermediate and high school, Dr. Cruz

said that the Department of Education offered scholarships to teachers to finish their bachelor's

and master's degrees in the Universities of Puerto Rico and the University of Illinois. In San Juan, 84% of the teachers in the intermediate level and

88% in the high school level held bachelor's

degrees; in the region of Ponce, 76% in the intermediate level and 90% in the high school level;

and in the Arecibo region, 60% in the intermediate

level and 93% in the high school level. He went

on to point out that in the Humacao region, 50% of

the teachers had B.A. degrees in English in the

intermediate school and 73% in the high school

level. The Mayaguez region had 84% in the intermediate level and 98% in the high school level,

while Caguas region had 71% of the teachers

with B.A. degrees in English in the intermediate

level and 93% in the high school level.

7. The idea that the learning of English affects the

learning of Spanish can be another factor hampering

the students' motivation to learn English. It has





7


been said by some prominent Puerto Ricans that learning English can be detrimental to Spanish

and that it will ultimately make the people lose

their identity as Puerto Ricans.

8. The attitudes of members of different political

sectors often affect the attitudes of Puerto Ricans

toward learning the language. The changes in

political parties bring about changes in policy

which affect the teaching of English. Consequently,

teachers and students, who are the ones mainly

affected by the resulting changes, develop negative attitudes.

9. By 1975, there were close to 45,000 children (perhaps more) who had difficulty with Spanish. These

are the children of Puerto Ricans who emigrated to the United States in the 40's and later, and

who are returning at present to the island. These

children may (1) speak both English and Spanish, with one of the two as the dominant language; or

(2) may speak only English, and have some oral

Spanish with which they communicate with grandparents. However, these children seem to be weak in reading skills as well as in writing skills in

both languages. Even though the Department of

Education is trying to take care of the educational needs of these children, there still is a lot to be done. This situation in the classroom








may affect some students' motivation to learn

either language.

1.2 Historical Background: 1898 1978

Puerto Rico is one of a chain of islands known as the Antilles, which extend from Florida to the northern coast of South America. The Antilles are divided into 2 groups, called the Greater and the Lesser Antilles. Puerto Rico is the smallest and easternmost of the 4 Greater Antilles, islands which, include Cuba, Hispaniola and Jamaica. Puerto Rico was of great military value to the Spaniards, who used it in defense of the Spanish Empire in the New World.

The island was originally inhabited by the Tainos, a peaceful Indian tribe. From the Taino Indian culture we got many Taino words like canoa, tabaco, and maiz, which were later absorbed into both Spanish and English. The Tainos were not well prepared either practically or emotionally for the invasion of the Spaniards. They had few weapons, and they thought that the Spaniards were immortal.

Spanish colonization of Puerto Rico began in 1508, when Ponce de Le6n was appointed governor of San Juan. The Tainos soon became part of a feudal system in which they were assigned to serve the Spaniards in the island's gold mines or at other tasks. The Spaniards 'taught' the Indians to adjust to the Spanish culture and converted them to Christianity. The Talnos could not resist the harsh slave labor and many died, while others fled to neighboring





9


islands. They were soon replaced by African slaves who came to till the land, for agriculture had now been introduced. Spanish colonists married these African slaves and from them we get the mulatto, a blend of white and black.

Puerto Rico over the centuries has gone through a

series of political and economic changes. The island passed from a Spanish colony to a possession of the United States in 1898, when it was ceded by Spain as part of the Treaty of Paris. After 4 centuries of Spanish rule, Puerto Rico had a tiny educated elite class, a small middle class, and a mass-of peons. Only 13% of the population was literate.

Aida Negr6n de Montilla (1971) presents a very good account of the language situation in Puerto Rico during the years 1900-1930 and the many things that happened during the years in which the language issue was temporarily settled. Because of the thoroughness of her research and completeness of her work, a summary of her major findings will be presented to enable the reader to understand some of the problems that caused resentments in many sectors of the Puerto Rican population.

Between 1898 and 1900, three North American military men, totally ignorant of the customs, traditions, and language of Puerto Rico, served as governors. The Foraker Act passed by Congress in 1900, 'essentially a compromise between the need to end military occupation and the lack of a clear concise intention in regard to Puerto Rico's future,' (Negr6n de Montilla 1971:21) established a civil government but did not





10


recognize Puerto Rico as a United States territory. Under this act, the job of the Commissioner of Education, held by Martin Brumbaugh, became a very big task which gave one man far-reaching power. The first action under the Foraker Act relating to education was taken by newly appointed- Commissioner of Education Dr. Brumbaugh. It was he who prepared the new school law known as 'An Act to Establish a System of Public Schools in Puerto Rico.' This law was approved and its Section 18 gave the Commissioner the power to select English teachers, who were to perform all the duties that he wished to assign to them.

During the time when the Foraker Act was in force, 5 Commissioners of Education held office. The appointees by the President during these years were; Martin Brumbaugh, 1900-1901; Samuel M. Lindsay, 1902-1904; Roland P. Falkner, 1904-1907; Edwin G. Dexter, 1907-June 1912; and Edward M. Bainter, July 1912 to 1915.

They all generally believed that

1. The teachers in the public schools should, in

great part, be Americans who are familiar with

the methods, system and books of the American

schools, and they should instruct the children in

the English language,

2. The same system of education and the same character of books as used in American schools should be

given to pupils in the public schools of Puerto

Rico (Negron de Montilla 1975:35-36).








Spanish had been the official language of Puerto Rico up until 1898. Dr. Brumbaugh, who became Commissioner of Education in 1900, started a policy which provided for the teaching of English and Spanish as subjects beginning in the first grade. Spanish was to be used as the medium of instruction in the elementary grades 1 through 8 while English was to be the medium of instruction in the secondary grades 9 through 12. Spanish was to be taught as a special subject in the secondary grades.

Commissioner Brumbaugh stated in a report that public schools were to be named in honor of Washington, Franklin, Johnson, Webster, Peabody, Hamilton, and other famous Americans. Every school was named either in honor of the great Spanish explorers, Columbus and Ponce de Leon, or in honor of the great American statesmen, Brumbaugh had one major preoccupation, that of instilling good Americanism in the children of Puerto Rico. The raising of the flag was the symbol that the school had commenced, Pupils sang 'America,' '.The Star-Spangled Banner,' and other patriotic American songs, Washington's Birthday became a legal holiday. Flag Day was also an important day, which was celebrated with speeches and recitations, patriotic songs, marches, etc. Unfortunately, American holidays were given more importance on the island than any local celebration and, in spite of growing protest, still are, to some extent,

In Brumbaugh's report the first glimpses of dissatisfaction among Puerto Rican teachers are evident, The native




12


teachers objected to the English Supervisor who at the outset knew no Spanish. There were mutual misunderstandings. The motives of the English Supervisor were questioned and much friction arose. The insecurity of the teachers in their jobs came to be another problem. However, on the day after Commissioner Brumbaugh ended his term of office on November 15, 1901, his biography appeared on the front page of the Puerto Rican Herald along with the following eulogy of his work in Puerto Rico. Notwithstanding early criticism to Brumbaugh's administration,the organ of the Federal Party stated that:

he had a deep interest in the intellectual
progress of the island. From the time of his
arrival he labored strenuously.. for the diffusion of education .
He reconstructed the Department of Education
out of the ruins which he found; through the
failures of Eaton and Clark in company with Valle
Atiles and Degetau (sic) .
The Commissioner is an American who has won for
the nation affection and sympathy, while others, in
other times, did their best by their injustice and cruelty to render the new sovereignty odious. Let functionaries of this kind and of this capacity be
sent to Puerto Rico and there will be an end to the
sufferings of her people, to their complaints, and
their tears (Negron de Montilla 1971:59-60).

During the administration of Commissioner Lindsay

(1902-1904), special attention was given to the administration of an annual English examination designed to improve the competence of the Puerto Rican teachers. The first Circular Letter dealing with this subject was issued on April 18, 1902. Circular Letter No. 21 reads as follows:

On Saturday, July the 7th of this year, English examinations will be given in every town of the
island with the purpose that everyone of you might





13


show the knowledge you have of this language.
The grade that you will get will be written on the
Certificates which will be granted to you for the next school year. It is for sure that the grade
you get in a language as important as English will be accounted for by the School Board when the time comes to select teachers, and because I have the conviction that you will understand
it also, I hope that all will present themselves
to take this examination (Negron de Montilla 1971:71).

This letter caused great discomfort among the English teachers of Puerto Rico, who feared losing their jobs.

During Lindsay's term, following the pattern set by his predecessor, American holidays were used as a means of building good 'patriotic feelings.' In Circular Letter No. 83, dated May 12, 1904, it is stated that 'Every effort should be made to have Memorial Day fittingly observed as a patriotic holiday' (Negron de Montilla 1971:87). In contrast, Circular Letter No. 11, dated October 15, 1903, referring to the anniversary of the discovery of Puerto Rico, said that some recognition of this day should occur in public schools.

I do not think it advisable that we should have any
elaborate exercises at that time and no special
program will be issued by the Department. Exercises should be of a historical character making specially
prominent the life and discoveries of Columbus
(Negron de Montilla 1971:87).

Commissioner Falkner (1904-1907) tried to improve the situation and made proposals such as having reading materials translated into Spanish and adapting them to Puerto Rican settings. But he also made many mistakes which caused much unhappiness and brought about a lot of criticism on the island. In an article evaluating the work of the early





14


Commissioners of Education, Gonzalez Ginorio states that

Commissioner Falkner committed two errors, one of which was

the establishment of English as a medium of instruction.

It was Falkner, a man of wide learning and a renowned statistical expert, but not an educator, who delayed the progress of the islands' schools, committing two errors. The first was to propose and obtain legislation creating a new type of teacher, called preparatory teacher. The second error was the
initiation of the teaching of all subjects in English.
To oblige the teachers to do all the teaching in
English, meant limiting them to a reduced vocabulary, which only permitted a determined number of questions by reason of slight knowledge and information on the means of instruction. The result was that the teacher had to resort to the textbook and become its
slave. .. (Negr6n de Montilla 1971:110)

Luis Munoz Souffront, who was for many years President

of the Teacher's Association, makes the same reference to

Falkner's errors:

English was taught since the first grade, according to the plan established by Commissioner Falkner in
1905. This constituted a violation of the most
elementary pedagogical principles. School work was thus hard, monotonous and unpleasant for the child
whose only medium of communication was Spanish, and
to the teacher whose knowledge of the English language
was so limited that it reduced extremely the effectiveness of the teaching process. (Negr6n de Montilla
1971:110).

On August 9, 1907, Edwin Dexter assumed the duties of

Commissioner of Education. Four days after his oath, he

issued the first Circular Letter relating to the teaching of

the English language. One sentence in this Circular Letter

that had a particular significance was, 'Failure on the part

of teachers to pass the coming examination may result in a

suspension from duty' (Negr6n de Montilla 1971:117).





15


Under Commissioner Dexter, school celebrations continued to have particular significance. Even though the 4th of July was not a date within the school calendar, the children celebrated the event dressed in red, white and blue.

Memorial Day in 1908 fell on a Saturday, so teachers were told that they had to emphasize the day by giving appropriate exercises. These were to be based on the lives and deeds of American leaders in Peace and War.

In the whole list of school holidays the Three Kings Day, or Epiphany, which is the main Christmas celebration on the island, was not listed as such. Teachers were not to expect pupils to come to school but had to be there themselves to fill registers and to take care of any students who might come.

Commissioner Paul Miller introduced the third major

change in 1916. Spanish became the language of instruction in grades 1 4, both English and Spanish in grade 5, and English in the remaining grades 6 12. The study of both English and Spanish as subjects continued in both the elementary and high school.

Juan B. Huyke, whose term as Commissioner of Education was one of the longest in the history of the Department of Education, 1921 30, was heavily criticized for his open claim when he declared, 'Our schools are agencies of Americanism. They must implant the spirit of America within the hearts of our children' (Negrcn de Montilla 1971:181). He pushed the teaching of English more than any other





16


Commissioner. All high school seniors were obliged to pass an oral English examination before they were given diplomas. Regulations issued by the Department made English the required language at teachers' meetings and suggested that conversations between pupils and teachers should be in English. Double time was given to English in the rural schools. All official documents addressed to the teachers were required to be in English. Any teacher 'unable or unwilling to teach in English may be asked to resign' (Negron de Montilla 1971:259).

Students reacted negatively to statements such as the one made by Commissioner Huyke at the University of Puerto Rico (1922) when he advised all those who were not in agreement with the educational policies of the Department not to apply as teachers because 'though I cannot take your diplomas away. .. I assure you that I won't contract any teacher who does not think as the Department thinks' (Negron de Montilla 1971:261).

When the Teacher's Association opposed him openly, his power began to decline. When Huyke chose not to be available for a third term and Dr. Jose Padin was appointed as his successor in the year 1930, the first 30 years of the educational system under the American flag came to an end.

Dr. Aida Negr6n de Montilla (1971:262-63) summarizes

the importance of this period of 30 years in the Americanization process of Puerto Rico and comes to the following conclusions:





17



1. The public school system in Puerto Rico played

a significant role in the process of the Americanization of Puerto Rico.

2. The Commissioners of Education utilized the

public school system in their attempts to Americanize Puerto Rico.

3. Americanization, as understood by the various

Commissioners of Education, meant molding the

minds of the Puerto Rican children and inspiring

them with the American spirit, transmitting to

Puerto Ricans the spirit and ideals of the

American people, and extending to Puerto Rico the American ideals of government, of conduct,

and of life.

In 1934, Dr. Jose Padin introduced the fourth major

change. Spanish became the language of instruction in the elementary level (grades 1 8) and he doubled the time devoted to English as a subject from 45 to 90 minutes in the seventh and eighth grades.

Dr. Jose Gallardo in 1937 introduced a fifth major change. In an effort to integrate both languages,some subjects were taught in Spanish and others were taught in English. The final outcome was instruction in the vernacular in the elementary school. But after 4 decades of American control, the majority of Puerto Ricans were still illiterate. Even though education was compulsory, only half of the school age population was in school.





18


In 1947, Commissioner Mariano Villaronga made a

sixth major attempt to deal with the language problem on the island. He made Spanish the medium of instruction at all levels in the public school system. In 1948, he initiated the English Program which is in effect today. The Villaronga policy was said to be the culmination of a long struggle for settling the language issue that caused Puerto Rican education so many setbacks. It became obvious that Spanish must be the medium of instruction for all Puerto Ricans and English a second language because of the political ties with the United States. Spanish has continued to be the medium of instruction in all the grades of the public school system and English has remained as a subject for all grades from the first grade to second year of college.

At present, there is no doubt that the system of

public education in Puerto Rico recognizes the importance of English on the island owing to the unique relation between the island and the mainland, the constant exchange of persons between these 2 countries, the greater use of English in the mass media and the need to communicate with other people from other English-speaking countries. In view of this, the Department of Education has outlined several goals for the teaching of English on the island which are part of the Philosophy of the English Program.

1. To develop in all students the necessary skills

for communication with their fellow citizens in





19


the United States, with English speakers of the

Caribbean, and speakers of English from other

parts of the world.

2. To develop in all students skills of reading in

English which will prepare them to acquire information and knowledge as well as for the enjoyment

of literature itself.

3. To promote a greater understanding among the

Puerto Rican people, the American people, and

others through the study of the culture of English

speakers.

4. To equip the Puerto Rican student to participate

more gainfully in the economic development of the

country, and

5. To equip him for living in the United States and

other English speaking countries.

Paquita Vinas de Vazquez (1973), Director of the English Program of the Department of Education, summarizes the work done to reach the above goals and to help solve the problems related to the teaching of English in Puerto Rico

1. To alleviate the problem of teacher shortage,

in 1968, with the help of the United States

government funds, the English Program started several teacher-training projects, such as the

Bilingual Teacher's Program which has had excellent

results on the island. As a result of this workstudy program which started in 1969, more than





20

1000 provisional teachers are teaching in grades 1 through 3, thus beginning the departmentalization of the primary level.

2. The Adult Program of the Department of Education

started its English Program for Adults in 1953.

Since then over 120,000 adults including secretaries, sales clerks, hotel employees, farm

laborers, policemen, etc, have profitted from the English courses offered from these programs. Some

of these are Conversational English courses,

the teaching of English through TV, the teaching

of English to farm laborers at their place of

employment, and a course on North American culture.

3. In coordination with the English Program for

Adults, night courses in Conversational English

are being organized for parents. Also being

formulated are future courses that will provide parents with the basic skills to enable them to

help their children with school work. This

activity is expected to result in improved scholastic achievement by the students.

4. A Technical Assistance Project for the 1977-78

school year provided for a census on an islandwide basis to identify school districts and

individual schools with the greatest concentration

of students who can benefit from the bilingual

education projects. This census is being





21


implemented by the Department of Education's

Center of Programming and Information.

5. Zone supervisors have been assigned to work directly

on the local level with the approximately 7,000

teachers teaching English in the public schools in the first through twelfth grade. These zone supervisors have considerable experience teaching English

and have graduate degrees in Linguistics, English

as a Second Language, Supervision, etc. Coordinating the work of zone supervisors, providing consultant services to the local school organizations,

and channeling new materials to the zone supervisors and teachers are the regional zone supervisors: two

each assigned to the regional offices of Arecibo, Ponce, Mayagez, Caguas and Humacao, and four to

San Juan.

In a report prepared by the personnel of the Bilingual Education Projects of the Department of Education of Puerto Rico (June 22, 1978), there is mention of how the Department of Education has developed programs that serve the needs of students who have returned to Puerto Rico from the United States.

During the 1978 school year, beginning in January,
two projects that focus on bilingual education from
a new point of view were organized. Emphasis is
being given to bilingual training on the elementary school level, from kindergarten to the sixth grade.
These projects are not merely corrective but also
preventive. Their primary purpose is to develop in the participants the communication skills in English





22


to enable them to do well in school and in the social systems of the United States. A basic ingredient in the new projects is the use of bilingual teachers, aides who serve as models in the use of English during the experiences students are exposed to in their areas of study: mathematics, sciences, art, music, physical education and social studies. Studies are enriched with aspects of Puerto Rican and the United States history and culture as the locales of each of the languages being used.












CHAPTER TWO

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE STUDY



2.1 Introduction

The studies and reports which pertain to language

attitudes in current sociolinguistic literature fall into three major categories:

1. those dealing with language-oriented or languagedirected attitudes;

2. those dealing with community-wide stereotyped

impressions toward particular languages or language

varieties (and, in some cases, their speakers,

functions, etc.) and,

3. those concerned with the implementation of different types of language attitudes. (Agheyisi and

Fishman 1970:141)

Studies in the first category report primarily on

evaluations or ratings of language or language variables as being 'rich' or 'poor,' 'beautiful' or 'ugly,' 'sweet and smooth sounding' or 'harsh.'

Studies in the second major category are generally concerned with the social significance of language or language varieties, attitudes towards speakers of situationally peculiar or appropriate language varieties, attitudes towards speakers of different languages in multilingual settings, and the like.


23





24


The third category comprises studies dealing with all kinds of language behavior, or behavior towards language, resulting, at least in part, from specific attitudes or beliefs. Major topics in this category include: language choice and usage, language reinforcement and planning, language learning, and so on. Some of the most frequently quoted studies and a few others of relevance to the Puerto Rico English as a Second Language study will be the main concern of this chapter.

The subject of attitudes toward learning a second language has recently been much discussed in the literature. It has been stated in many studies that different kinds of motivation to learn a target language may produce different rates and ultimate levels of proficiency. Gardner (1972a:199) speaks of an integrative orientation, which can be taken to mean 'a high level of drive on the part of the individual to acquire the language of a valued second language community in order to facilitate communciation with that group.' An instrumental orientation, on the other hand, is known to be a desire to acquire someone else's language system in order to use that language to achieve other goals such as material advantages, a better job, or a better education.

Gardner and Lambert (1972a:24) also mention the fact

that several studies have shown 'that measures of motivation and attitudes toward the second language community account for more of the variance in continuing versus dropping the course than does language aptitude.'





25


The questions that seem relevant at this point are: 1. What features of a group give its language high

prestige? Nader (1968:279) suggests that 'the prestige factor which may encourage admiration, borrowing or emulation in language need not be

related to the affluent position of one group or

another, or of one individual or another.'

2. To what extent do responses to aural stimuli, such

as matched guise or mirror image responses, reflect

attitudes toward a language as a symbol of a group and to what extent do they reflect attitudes toward

the language itself?

Responses have typically been interpreted as representing reactions to groups (and thus to language as a symbol). However, there may be present in these responses a component of attitudes toward the language itself.

3. What are the circumstances under which a language

comes to be negatively evaluated by its speakers?

Conversely, what are the circumstances under which speakers who formally devalued their language come

to revalue it positively?

4. Do indirect measures of attitude (i.e., measures

whose purpose is not apparent to the respondent)

have higher validities than direct measures?

(Cooper and Fishman 1974:8-11).

Lambert (1967:94) claims that the matched guise





26


technique 'appears to reveal judges' more private reactions to the constrating group than direct attitude questionnaires do, but much more research is needed to adequately assess its power in this regard.'

In recent research on the identification of linguistic attitudes, Williams (1976:5) claims that 'many types of measures have obscured the concept of linguistic attitude in that they have focused more upon the attitudes being evaluated than they have lent insight into the psychological responses of the perceiver. In briefer terms, attitude is a response predisposition.'

2.2 Attitude Studies Concerning Speech Style and Social Evaluation

2.2.1 General Studies

A person's social identity involves self-evaluation, which derives from being a member of a specific group. A group's evaluative attachment to its membership is reflected in its feelings about its speech style. For instance, the Quebecois, Mexican-Americans, and American Blacks until quite recently had a relatively negative social identity which was reflected in the evaluations they made of their own distinctive speech styles. (Giles and Powesland 1975:19) It has been found in Quebec, among Franco-Americans in Maine, and in Wales (Taylor, Bassili and Aboud, 1973; Giles, Taylor, Lambert and Bourhis, 1974) that ethnic group members identify more closely with someone who shares their cultural background. For instance, Welsh bilinguals would consider themselves more similar to an Englishman who spoke Welsh than






27


to a Welshman who spoke only English. It appears to be that one's verbal behavior is a truer reflection of one's ethnic allegiance than one's cultural heritage, or so it is perceived by others. The reason as Giles states it is a valuable one in that one has no choice over one's ethnicity in terms of heritage, but one can expect more control over which language variety one can learn and use in addition to the mother tongue.

The matched guise technique was first developed by

Lambert and his colleagues at McGill University, and since 1960 there have been several studies in which the technique has been used to measure group evaluation reactions to particular languages (or language varieties) and their representative speakers. The studies have involved such languages as: French, English, Hebrew, Arabic, Tagalog, Welsh, etc., dialects and speech varieties (accented and unaccented English) as well as racial (e.g.,Negro vs White) and religious populations (Canadian, Protestant, and Roman Catholic) within some of the above language groups.

This technique requires that selected groups or judges evaluate the personality traits of speakers whose taperecorded voices are played to them. The recorded voices are generally those of individuals, who, because of their nativelike speaking ability in the two languages or varieties represented, have each recorded translated versions of the same text. The fact is, of course, concealed from the judges who believe that each language or variety is spoken





28


by a different speaker. There must be an adequate control of every other variable in the experimental situation, such as the voice quality of speaker, content of text, and most especially, personality of speaker. The judge's evaluations must be prompted by his general reactions to the speakers of that particular language, rather than by his reaction to the specific speaker in the experimental situation.

A special adaptation of the matched guise technique was used by Kimple (1969). He called it the 'mirror image' technique, and used it to measure how bilinguals interpret the use of different languages. Two different conversations were used, each involving a special set of role relations, setting or location, and topic. Bilingual interlocutors made recordings of each of the conversations in each of their languages, and from the two sets of recordings, four different versions of each of the original conversations were made, preserving the original role relations, setting and topic, but making the following changes in language:

1. All characters spoke in language A for the entire

length of the conversations;

2. Some of the characters spoke in language A for

particular role relations, and in language B in

others;

3. All the characters spoke in language B for the

entire length of the conversations;

4. A mirror image of (2) i.e., the role relations that

were originally associated with language B were





29


then used in language A. Four sets of judges, each set listening to only one version of each

conversation were then asked to indicate on

questionnaires the following:

a. The role relationship of the speakers (e.g.,
mother-son as opposed to husband-wife);

b. The setting of the conversations (where they
took place);

c. Manifest content (the surface events of the
story);

d. Social and latent content (the occupational
status of the speakers);

e. The appropriateness of language usage.

The results of this study suggest most firmly that

speakers do have certain systematic notions about language with respect to factors such as topic, role-relation, and setting, and that these factors operate in varying degrees to arouse stereotyped impressions about speakers.

Lambert (1967), in his theoretical review of the work using the matched guise technique, showed how listener's personality judgments from voice, even though they may be objectively inaccurate, were particularly valuable as a measure of group biases in evaluative reactions. Lambert and his associates set about investigating how each group perceived the other in evaluative, personality terms. They (Lambert, Hodgson, Gardner, and Fillenbaum, 1960) asked two groups of university students, French-Canadian (FC) and English-Canadian (EC) to rate four male bilingual speakers reading the same two and a half minute passage of prose






30


once in English and once in French, on fourteen bipolaradjective, six-point rating scales. The subjects were led to believe that they were actually eight different personalities. This procedure was the first use of the matched guise technique. The results indicated that both groups of judges rated the speakers more favorably in their English guises than in their corresponding French guises. The EC subjects viewed their own group as superior to the French group, and the FC group seemed to have adopted the inferior position assigned to them by the majority culture around them.

Anglejan and Tucker (1973) studied the state of the

French language in Quebec from a sociolinguistic perspective. French is today the mother tongue of more than 5 million Canadians, 75% of whom live in the province of Quebec. English is rapidly replacing French as the language of the French ethnic group in all areas other than Quebec. In Quebec, the high proportion of French Canadians plus the strong retention of French in the province has served to maintain the position of French as one of Canada's two official languages and to provide an important shield against linguistic and cultural assimilation.

Anglejan and Tucker studied the sociolinguistic

correlates of speech style of French Canadians born and raised in Quebec. A group of teachers and students at the high school level were selected as subjects. The control group were factory workers who were less language conscious.





31


Students were from the working class and the lower middle class.

A questionnaire with 40 multiple choice and semantic differential items was used. A pilot study determined the appropriateness of questions. Questions focused on: subject's awareness of speech style differences; importance they attributed to language; and awareness of government language policy.

As a complementary measure, subjects were asked to evaluate the speech style of 12 speakers and to indicate preferable occupational status--their being four lower class and four upper class French-Canadians and four French speakers. A sample of free speech was selected so as not to control syntax and lexical items.

The results demonstrated that teachers in each setting showed relatively more awareness of variation (90% answered positively) than did students (85%) or workers (75%) when asked if they noticed that certain people in their own community speak a style of French different from their own. All groups showed a preference for the educated FC speech model. All groups evidenced difficulty in understanding Europeans and all groups reported some degree of difficulty making themselves understood by Europeans. All were conscious that the French spoken in Quebec did need improvement. French-Canadians, on the whole, tend to model their speech on those with whom they identify.





32


Markel, Eisler, and Reese (1967) demonstrated in similar studies that United States regional dialects aBe-.a significant factor in judging personality from speech style. Tucker (1968) reported that speakers of American English were viewed more favorably than speakers of Filipino English or Tagalog by listeners in the Philippines. Labov (1966) found that upwardly mobile people tend to adopt the linguistic style of the socio-economic group just above their own.

Tucker (1968) carried out similar work in the

Philippines where English can be regarded as having superior status to the many local languages, including the somewhat prestigious language, Tagalog. Tucker required a group of Tagalog listeners to rate three types of taped speakers on 12 personality traits. The stimulus speakers were native American, local Filipino-accented American and Tagalog speakers. The last two voices were presented by the same speakers using the matched guise technique. The results indicated that the Tagalog listeners rated the American voices more favorably than the Filipino-accented voices on 11 out of 12 scales, and the latter more favorably than the Tagalog speakers on four scales. Tucker (1968:57) summarizes his results in the following manner:

The general downgrading of Filipino Tagalog relative to American English and to Filipino English probably represent harsh economic reality. In the Philippines
social mobility now depends upon the acquisition of
skills in English. Higher education, better employment opportunities and travel abroad are easily
accessible only to those who possess the necessary





33


skills in English. The subjects, all prospective
teachers, were particularly sensitive to these
facts of life. It is not all surprising, therefore, that the Filipino-Tagalog speakers, were
downgraded expecially on those rating scales
relevant to success and advancement. What is more surprising is that this downgrading also extended to the more personal characteristics.
There may exist then, not only an acceptance of
economic reality but also a type of ethnic
inferiority complex.

Anisfeld and Lambert (1972) have shown that the

listener's language background is another factor affecting evaluation of personality from speech. These authors used ten-year-old monolingual and bilingual French-Canadians, who were instructed to listen to tape recordings of children's voices, some in English and some in French, from children of the same age. Children then rated each speaker's personality on 15 different traits. Differences were found in the stereotypes held by these two groups of children such that French-speaking monolinguals upgraded the personalities of the FC speakers on all traits, whereas the bilinguals tended to see fewer differences between the personalities of French and English speakers. The results indicate that, unlike college age students, FC bilingual children at the age of ten do not have a negative bias against their own group.

Lambert (1967:59-60) comments with regard to evaluative reactions of spoken language that, 'The type and strength of impressions of the speakers--their sex, age, the dialect they use, and very likely the social class background as this is revealed in speech style affects the





34


reaction of the listener. The impression also seems to depend on characteristics of the audience of judges--their age, sex, socio-econcmic background, their bilinguality and their own speech style.'

Bourhis, Giles, and Tajfel (1973) designed a matched guise study to determine how different groups of Welshmen perceived members of their own group to adopt various speech styles.

Three groups of Welshmen acted as listener-subject;

(1) Welsh-English bilinguals, (2) those who were learning the Welsh language and (3) those who neither could speak the language nor were learning it. These subjects were given a questionnaire taping their social and language attitudes in order to validate their assignments to groups. As their reported ability to use Welsh declined significantly across the three groups, so also did their ability to speak English, their use of Welsh at work and at home, and their dissatisfaction with the government's handling of Welsh autonomy. It was found that the learners of Welsh had significantly more of a Welsh accent in their English than either the Welsh bilinguals or the non-learners of Welsh. The authors suggest that a Welshman is able to assert his Welsh identity by making an effort to learn his national language and uses the Welsh accent to emphasize this identity until such a time as it can be replaced by the language itself.





35


All three groups of listeners were asked to evaluate the personalities of various Welshmen they would hear on tapes. They were told that those speakers who were bilingual chose to read the standard passage of prose in Welsh while those who could speak only English would read it in that language. Actually the passages were read by the same two male bilinguals in each of the following guises: in Welsh, in English, in English with an RP (received pronunciation) accent, and in English with a South Welsh accent. All groups upgraded the Welsh language speaker on most traits. However, the Welsh language speakers on tape were rated the most nationalistic and patriotic of all. These results suggest that the Welsh have a favorable image of themselves as a group: they do not appear to seek the prestigious English RP mode of speaking. Even those Welshmen who express doubts about the value of speaking Welsh nevertheless acceed to this view.

There is some evidence that language and speech style are closely bound up with feelings of group identity. For example, Taylor, Bassili, and Aboud (1973) showed that French Canadians perceive English Canadians who spoke mainly French as more similar to themselves than the FC or EC who spoke mainly English. Equivalent criteria of identity were found for bilingual Franco-Americans by Giles, Taylor, Lambert and Albert (in press) and for Welshmen by Giles, Taylor and Bourhis (1974). There are also indications that speech style is becoming an





36


increasingly important dimension of ethnic identity for Black Americans. Bourhis, Giles, Tajfel and Taylor (1974) have proposed that the more positively a group views its own identity, the greater will be the range of social situations in which it is acceptable for members of the group to use the speech style peculiar to it.

A group with very positive self-esteem will feel able to use its characteristic speech style in most social situations. In contrast, a group with feelings of inferiority will restrict its particular speech style to very informal situations. In the more formal situations, it will feel obliged to use the group's language varieties. Bourhis, Giles and Lambert (1975) have shown that Welshmen, a group with a supposedly positive self-esteem,have a favorable attitude concerning the broadening of the Welsh accent in English by one of their own group in a public radio interview. French Canadians, however, a group thought to have low self-esteem, do not upgrade an in-group speaker on affective dimensions when he emphasizes his ethnic accent in a comparable situation. Obviously, the complexity of the interrelationship between language variety and ethnic identity is very great, and more research is needed before an adequate theoretical framework can be constructed.

The results of a study related to the speech of

Mexican-American children which also included the speech of Blacks was reported by Natalicio and Williams (1972) in an attempt to assess which characteristics of the speech





37



of Black and Mexican-American children (grades K-2) could be reliably evaluated by experts specializing in dialect study. Tapes of ten Black and ten Mexican-American children who had responded to a set of commercially available test materials were evaluated by the experts. Evaluations for both groups were in terms of judgments (scale ratings) of language dominance, comprehension, production, phonology, intonation, inflectional endings, syntax, language pathologies and predictions of reading achievement. Results indicated high reliability of scale judgments except for ratings of intonation and language pathologies and for predictions of reading achievement. By being informed of the bases of the experts' evaluations, teachers should be able to gain some practical degree of familiarity with the special characteristics of the speech of linguistically different children and to be able to evaluate such characteristics.

Further research on the attitudes of Mexican-Americans towards speakers of English or Spanish was done by Bouchard, Ryan and Carranza (1975). In one study, sixty-three Mexican-American, Black, and Anglo adolescent female subjects rated the personalities of male speakers of standard English and Mexican-American accented English. In order to demonstrate that the functional separation of speech styles would be reflected in these evaluative reactions, two speech contexts, home and school, and two sets of rating scales, status stressing and solidarity stressing,





38


were employed. Although standard English speakers received more favorable ratings in every case, the differences were significantly greater in the school context than in the home context and for status ratings than for solidarity ratings. Although Carranza and Ryan (1975) found Spanish to be the preferred home language, they did not observe an overall preference of Mexican-Americans for Spanish on the solidarity scales.

The lack of expected group differences in this study could be attributable to individual differences with ethnic groups. A number of personality and background characteristics (e.g., linguistic abilities, language history, degree of ethnic loyalty, ethnocentrism, and prejudice) may be relevant.

Among the studies of speaker'-s attitudes towards their native language, Labov's (1966) investigation of New York is the most widely known. Labov contends that most of the informants in his survey of the speech of New York City have strong opinions about language 'but only of those items that have risen to social consciousness.' It was common for the informants to condemn the language of a person, a group, or a whole city in very general terms: 'sloppy,' 'careless,' 'hurried,' 'loud,' or 'harsh.'

The questions on linguistic attitudes which were used in the survey were:

1. What do you think of your own speech?

2. Have you ever tried to change your speech? What
particular things about it?





39


3. Have you ever taken any courses in speech? What
did the teacher mention in connection with pronunciation?

4. a. What do you think of New York City speech?

b. Have you traveled outside of New York City?
If so, did people pick you out as a New
Yorker by your speech?

c. Do you think that out-of-towners like New
York City speech? Why?

d. What do you think of Southern speech as
compared to New York City speech?

e. Have you heard Mayor Wagner talk? As far
as his speech is concerned, not his politics,
but his way of talking, how do you like it?
(Same question for Rockefeller). Which do
you like better?

5. Going back to the time when you were growing up,
I'd like to get some idea of the kind of speech
that your friends used. Were most of your
friends (same race or religion as informant)?
Did you have any friends who were (other races
and religions)?

6. (If time permits, probe any other incidents where
speech was a factor in disagreements of the group.)
(Labov 1966)

When the informants were asked if they had traveled outside of New York City, and if they had been recognized as New Yorkers by their speech, those who had left the city said they were recognized at times as New Yorkers by the evidence of their speech alone. Three-quarters of the lower class and working class informants reported that they had been recognized as New Yorkers, but only half of the middle class informants reported this.

Immediately after the question of recognition, the

subjects were asked if people who lived outside of the city liked New York City speech, and why these outsiders felt as





40



they did. Two-thirds of the New York City respondents thought that outsiders did not like New York City speech. Only three thought that the speech of the city was looked on with interest or approval of outsiders; the balance thought that the outsiders were neutral, or did not care much one way or the other.

Labov also analyzed the attitudes of New York respondents toward New York speech. He claims that when most New Yorkers say that outsiders dislike New York City speech, they are describing an attitude which is actually their own. 'Whether or not their opinion about outsiders' views is a projection of their own feelings, New Yorkers show a general hostility towards New York City speech which emerges in countless ways. The term 'linguistic self-hatred' is not too extreme to apply to the situation which emerges from the interviews' (Labov 1966:488-89). Only 14 New Yorkers expressed themselves favorably towards New York City speech; 9 were neutral; and 23 expressed dislike quite plainly.

The terms which New Yorkers apply to the speech of the city give some indication of the violence of these reactions. 'It's terrible." 'Distorted,' 'Terribly careless.' "Sloppy.' 'It's horrible.' Men seem to express less of this attitude than women.

Labov presents the differences in linguistic attitudes of speakers based on their sex, social class, ethnic






41


identity, and age. In comparing the sexes, Labov found that outsiders dislike New York speech, but women were more consistent in this feeling. Women showed much greater linguistic insecurity than men in all cases.

In relation to class differences, Labov points out how the linguistic goal of most middle class speakers is to lose all resemblance to New Yorkers; almost all of them stated that they would be complimented if someone told them they did not sound like New Yorkers.

With regard to New Yorkers' attitude towards their own speech, Labov found that the working class showed the smallest percentage of respondents who reacted negatively. Working class speakers showed the least linguistic insecurity. It was the middle class speakers who tried to change their language.

In examining the results based on ethnic differences, the Jews were shown to have a greater tendency to think that outsiders disliked New York City speech, and to dislike it themselves. The Italians were almost unanimous in their report that they had been recognized as New Yorkers. Both groups showed equal dislike of their own speech, and an equal effort to change it.

While most white New Yorkers thought that outsiders disliked New York City speech, almost all the Negroes who expressed an opinion thought that out-of-town residents did not dislike the speech of the city. While most white New Yorkers showed negative attitudes towards the New York





42


speech patterns themselves, only three out of 20 Negro respondents expressed this opinion, and nine reported that they liked it.

In the limited data available, Labov found no differences by age in the respondents' reports of being recognized as New Yorkers, nor in their views of outsiders' evaluations of New York City speech. 'The younger respondents did not seem to have absorbed as much negative feeling about New York City speech as the older subjects' (Labov 1966:498). Labov also reported that the younger people made more efforts to change their language than any other age group.

The overall feeling about New York City speech is seen to be 'one of a profound linguistic insecurity which is connected with a long standing pattern of negative prestige for New York City speech' (Labov 1966:500).

Wolfram (1973), in his continued studies of social dialects in American society, also studied Puerto Rican English (PRE), the English spoken by second generation Puerto Rican teenage males living predominantly in East Harlem, New York. Puerto Ricans living in East Harlem have contact with a number of other groups, especially Negroes, which accounts for some of the linguistic similarity between the two groups. Black and Puerto Rican children have considerable interaction in the schools. Wolfram demonstrates in his study how some features normally associated in northern urban areas with BE have been taken over by second generation PRE speakers, regardless of how extensive their





43


contacts with Blacks may be; other characteristics show up only in the speech of those Puerto Ricans who have extensive black contacts; and, of course, there are features which might be derived historically from Spanish but that must be described synchronically as an integral part of PRE.

The data represented in the study are based on the

speech of 29 Puerto Rican and 15 Black teenage males from East Harlem and the Bronx. Several informants who had considerable status among their peers and who could thus facilitate other interviews were interviewed first. Having established contacts with some of the peer leaders, Wolfram and assistants then selected informants on the basis of their acquaintance with them through informant contacts, references to other individuals from the initial interviews, and recommendations from workers who knew the informants from day to day interaction. The informants were not chosen randomly but were selected to approximate the racial distribution of the teenagers served by YDI (Youth Development Incorporated), a club-like organization in East Harlem at the time when the fieldwork was being done, August, 1969.

The use of Black English by Puerto Ricans was the main concern of the research being examined here. Puerto Ricans with extensive Black contacts tended to minimize differences that existed between the two groups. For some of the informants, there was a great deal of objective similiarity between the varieties of English used by the two groups: 'An interesting assessment of the unity of Blacks and





44


Puerto Ricans by members of these groups has been observed in relation to the use of Spanish in peer group situations. Several informants cited the fact the Blacks learn to speak Spanish' CWolfram 1973:37).

In conclusion, it seems that, despite their perception of speech differences, Puerto Ricans with restricted Black contacts do show some influence on certain aspects of their speech. There is some phonological influence regardless of the extent of contact. There is evidence that some Puerto Ricans are not conscious of the extent to which Black speech may have influenced their own speech. Any negative reactions toward the assimilation of Black English on the part of teenagers with restricted Black contacts was clearly reinforced in the home. Many parents demanded that their children speak to them in Spanish. The use of the dialect of English known as Black English by the children aroused even a stronger reaction from the parents than did the use of the mainstream or standard English. One parent was quoted as saying, 'You can talk English, but normal English.' Parents viewed their children's acquisition of Black English features as quite insulting.

Concluding remarks about the reactions of Puerto

Ricans with restricted Black contacts straightforwardly portrays how they handle the ambivalence of their reactions:

On the one hand, they are quite aware of the
differences that exist between the two groups in
a number of areas of culture, and they tend to
perceive these differences in speech as in other
areas. On the other hand, they are faced with





45


the reality of the social situation in which it is very difficult to avoid some influence from
the Black community that surrounds them. By
perceiving the amount of influence on their own
speech as insignificant, they do not have to
deal with this limited assimilation while reacting negatively toward the amount of assimilation that takes place among their counterparts with extensive Black contacts (Wolfram 1973:43).

A number of other studies based on true bilingual

situations have uncovered similar language attitudes among the speakers studied. Joan Rubin studied the Spanish Guarani situation in Paraguay (Rubin 1961). According to the 1951 census, approximately 52% of the population of Paraguay speak both Spanish and Guarani (Rubin 1961:52). Spanish was found to be used in schools, in formal situations, in speaking to government officials, and in speaking to strangers, and Guarani is used in speaking to friends, to servants, in speaking of love, and in the confessional. Paraguayans of any class claim to prefer to use Guarani with their fellow countrymen when they were overseas regardless of what their pattern of linguistic usage was at home.

Other findings from studies of solidarity done by Rubin (1961) were that:

1. In Asuncion, people tend to speak much more
Spanish than anywhere else in the country
because of business and educational influences.

2. The 4% monolingual Spanish speakers tend to come
from the lower and interior areas. In Luke,
called the "bedroom suburb" of Asuncion, monolingual Spanish speakers constitute 2.5% of the
total population, while monolingual Guarani
speakers constitute 35%.





46



3. People in the country and smaller towns, regardless of power status, tend to speak more Guarani
than Spanish.

4. Schools have traditionally required the use of
only Spanish while children are in the classroom. Parents are urged to use Spanish with their children at home so that the children
get more practice.

5. Men tended to use Guarani more often with other
men. Women, in the upper class, tended to
speak Spanish to other women more often.

6. People of the lower classes tended to use more
Guarani while people of the upper class tended
to use more Spanish (Rubin 1961:56-57).

Attitudes towards Spanish and Quechua in bilingual

Peru were studied by W1lck (1973). The situation he found there was that Quechua, the language of the pre-colonial Inca empire, is still spoken by approximately 7 million people in Andean republics, with the bulk of the speakers in the Peruvian Andes. Of the other indigenous languages only Aymara, the closest relative to Quechua, occupies a clearly recognized slot. Trilingualism is frequent with the addition of Spanish, the country's national language.

The speakers used for test stimuli were chosen from

two social and two linguistic groups. Two Quechua Spanish bilinguals of different social status were used, one of whom might be called a member of the middle class. The other was a driver who had not finished secondary school.

The most interesting results in relation to Quechua versus Spanish was the affective loyalty of bilingual speakers to Quechua. Spanish always received a higher ranking in the characteristics 'higher class,' 'urban,' and





47


'more educated'. The affective rating shows a clear preferencee for Quechua--the speaker being considered stronger, more sincere, less arrogant, and smarter than when he speaks Spanish. Results of the test indicated that by identifiable social status criteria, Quechua is stigmatized, but there is a great deal of native language loyalty shown to it.

In examining the differences between groups of raters, what Wolck found was that:

1. Quechua dominant bilinguals rate Quechua speakers

as less lazy, or more industrious, smarter,

stronger, more honest, less arrogant, etc.

2. Stable or matched bilingualism brought about a

positive evaluation for Quechua speakers on

strength, ability and smartness scales.

3. Spanish dominant speakers show positive evaluation

for Quechua speakers only on strength and bonito

scales (W61ck 1973:139).

In analyzing Quechua versus non-Quechua speakers, a

jury composed of University speakers found that the Quechua Spanish bilinguals among the respondents showed a high and accurate degree of sensitivity to bilingual interference with regard to both languages,the monolinguals much less so.

Ros and Giles (1977) recently did some sociolinguistic research on the multilingual context of Spain where languages other than Spanish, namely CatalAn, Gallego, Basque, Valencian, and Mallorquin, are flourishing. The bilingual situation of Valencia was the one examined in their paper.




48


In the Valencian province, four distinct sociolinguistic groups can be identified: Spanish and Valencian monolingual speakers; two bilingual groups; those who speak predominantly Spanish and some Valencian; and those who speak predominantly Valencian and Spanish.

The Spanish group is located mainly in the city. It includes both upper class immigrants from other provinces in Spain and those of Valencian cultural background whose attitudes toward the Valencian language are of ignorance and deprecation. They have no interest whatsoever in learning or speaking Valencian and are characterized by access to higher education and a wide range of cultural resources. The Valencian Spanish group include middle class speakers living in urban settings. They acquired mastery of Spanish through the educational system and the mass media and through interaction with Spanish or Spanish Valencian speakers. They used Spanish in most contexts and Valencian when a formal situation required it. The Valencian group includes working class speakers in urban and rural areas who have little access to education or have few opportunities for upward mobility. It was difficult to find more monolingual Valencian individuals because the majority of Valencians have access to the Spanish dominated media and therefore are able to comprehend some Spanish.

The theory of speech accomodation (Giles, 1973, 1977;

Giles and Powesland, 1975) is concerned with the motivations






49


and social consequences which underlie changes in peoples' speech styles. A basic postulate of the theory is that people are motivated to adjust their language variety, or accomodate as a means of expressing values, attitudes, and behavior towards others. Giles proposes that the extent to which individuals shift their speech styles toward (convergence) or away from (divergence) the speech style of their interlocutors is the mechanism by which social approval or disapproval is communicated. People will reduce linguistic disimilarities between themselves and others, that is, convergence, if they desire their approval and wish to integrate with them.

In analyzing the Valencian situation, it was found

that the social identity of group members will become more negative or inadequate as one moves 'down' from Spanish to Spanish Valencian to Valencian Spanish to Valencian. The more prestige the members of a particular group possess, the more likely it is that they command not only the respect of a lower-ranking group but also control their own economic and political resources. In Valencia, speakers are found to converge towards the dominant language of the speaker who has a relative social and/or economic advantage. However, Valencian is considered 'prestigious' for the maintenance of a particular set of beliefs and way of life. At present, a number of individuals have begun to consider the low status assigned to the Valencian language as being unjust and unfair, and have perceived the situation to be





50


potentially changeable. The time seems to be approaching when Valencians will demand, through group action institutional support, more and more exposure for their language in the mass media, religion, and the governmental domains.

2.2.2 Studies Among Teachers

Frederick Williams has undertaken research into the attitudes of teachers in several regions of the United States. The Chicago research was the first major effort to capture the attitudes of teachers as a group. The semantic differential format discussed in earlier studies was used in this study. Response data from at least six teachers were obtained for each of the 80 stimulus tapes. This was accomplished by dividing the teachers into five subgroups of listeners, and by assigning 16 tapes to each subgroup. Each set of 16 tapes represented 16 subsets of the language sample (all combinations of the two levels of status, sex, race and topic). Testing took place in four one-half sessions in which four tapes were played and rated each time. Each listener was provided with a 16 page booklet of semantic differential scales, sufficient for responding to his section of the tapes. The booklet was distributed just prior to each listening session (the four tapes for a day) and collected at its conclusion.

All White children, whether rated high or low in

status, or by Negro or White teachers, were rated as being White. As for Negro children, nine(out of 20) were located in the high category by White teachers, but six of





51


these children were also rated as being White. Of the 8 Negro children placed in the high category by Negro teachers, only 2 were rated on the White half of the race scale, and just marginally so.

In short, the bias in the White teachers' rating might be summarized as: sounding hite is equated with high status. A point which needs to be clarified about this study is that it deals with a highly specific population and this may place restrictions on the generality of the model and the results of its application beyond the kinds of situations represented in its samples.

Although both groups of teachers were relatively similar in terms of the results of status judgments, White teachers' status judgments seemed to reflect a more direct association between race and status, both in terms of judged race and the child's actual pace. The researchers say that it could probably be assumed that most of the Negro teachers, through the language experiences of their childhood coupled with the language of their educational programs, had developed a sensitivity to Negro and hite styles of speech and were more able than their White counterparts to differentiate levels of effectiveness and status in both styles. By contrast, the White teachers' experience with Negro speech has presumably been mostly confined to the classroom, where standardness is a key criterion. It is not unusual, then, that they exhibited judgmental behavior more tied to a child's actual race, and to





52


perceptions of race, in their status evaluations of speech

and language.

The Naremore (1971) study of teacher differences

emerged from the above mentioned Chicago studies. The

specific aim of the investigation was to try to find out

"to what extent could the teachers be grouped together in

terms of commonality in their attitudinal responses and

also to see to what extent could they be contrasted and

compared in teacher characteristics, child characteristics,

rating scale characteristics, and selected characteristics

of the speech samples themselves' (Williams 1975:41-42).

The data from the Chicago study were used for analysis here.

The conclusions arising from the results of the study

were summarized in the following manner:

1. To what extent can teachers be grouped in terms
of the commonality of their attitudinal responses
to children's speech? The present analysis yielded 4 types of teachers, differing from
one another in various dimensions of judgment.

2. To what extent can groups of teachers be contrasted and compared in terms of teacher
characteristics, child characteristics, rating scale characteristics of the children's speech?
Three conclusions of the present study relate
to this question. First, the teacher types
found in this study were divided, both between
and within types, roughly along lines of teacher race. Second, the teacher types differed in kinds of judgments they made
and in the accuracy of those judgments across
different kinds of children and different semantic differential scales. Third, oronunciation deviations and pausal phenomena
were correlates of the subjective ratings for all teacher types, but teacher types
differed, roughly along lines of race, in
the correlations between subjective judgments and qualitative versus quantitative variables
in the children's speech (Williams 1971:50).





53


The Texas Research, another of Williams' projects,

was brought about by the need to answer a number of questions that were left unanswered after obtaining the results of the Chicago research. The main questions which arose were:

1. Could dialect attitudes be associated with expectations of pupils' performance in particular
subject matter areas?

2. The issue of whether the two-factor judgmental
model of confidence-eagerness and ethnicitynonstandardness would emerge with videotapes
and with different populations of teachers
and pupils. If the model were obtained, how would judgments vary as a function of teacher
experience and ethnicity?

3. To what degree might a teacher simply report
her attitudinal predispositions in evaluating
a child from a particular ethnic group, rather than carefully evaluating the details of what
is presented for assessment? (Williams 1971:51-52)

Teachers from schools selected within central Texas evaluated speech samples of Black, Anglo, and MexicanAmerican children sampled from middle and low status homes. Although the emphasis in the main study was on Anglo and Black teachers, Miller (1972) undertook a detailed analysis of the Mexican-American teachers, comparing them with a matched group of Anglo teachers. The first portion of the main Texas study is an account of ways in which teachers differentiated the performance, Language evaluation could be included as part of the teacher training process.

A number of further studies were motivated from the

results of the Texas and Chicago projects. Using the same language samples as were employed in the Chicago study,





54


Williams and Shamo (1972) compared the ratings of the Chicago teachers on the scale 'sounding disadvantaged' with ratings by teachers in Memphis, Tennessee.

Ethnic stereotyping was further studied by Williams, Whitehead and Miller (1971) in a design where ratings of the same standard English audio samples were compared when matched with varying images of a Black, White, and MexicanAmerican child.

A study by Williams and Miller (1971) examined the effects of a dialect switching of a mature Black and a Mexican-American speaker relative to ratings of both of these speakers in terms of language and personality traits. Hopper and Williams (1973) employed a semantic differential scaling approach to assess interviewers' attitudes toward speech representative of prospective employees. Such attitudes were then used in an attempt to predict hiring decisions.

In examining the studies as a whole as discussed by Williams, we find that:

1. the particular ratings that a child receives are
probably closely related to the nature of the
speech situation.

2. In almost all cases, the child's speech represented a language style that he might bring to bear
when a high degree of standard English is expected in a semi-formal situation. In the Chicago study,
it was the conversation with a linguistic field
worker; in the Texas studies it was conversation
with a person presented to them as a teacher.

3. The strategy used in most of the projects previously discussed can be used in many other areas of investigation of types of speakers,
speech situations, and listeners.





55



The overall strategy to be used if we are investigating the linguistic attitudes in some particular situation where populations of speakers, speech and listeners may be sampled has been summarized by Williams as:

1. sampling representative language samples from
the situation.

2. eliciting free discussion from representatives
of the listener population in response to
those language samples.

3. developing prototype semantic differential instruments and gaining pilot data in ratings of
speech samples.

4. analyzing listeners' use of the scales to
determine if there are basic dimensions of
evaluations, and

5. applying a refined instrument in the analysis
of varieties of speech found in that particular
situation.

2.3 Studies of the Linguistic Attitudes of Students 2.3.1 The Louisiana, Maine and Connecticut Studies:
American Students Studying French

The Montreal students begin their formal training

in French in the elementary schools and with due application can develop high-level skills by the end of their high school years enabling them to be able to interact smoothly with members of the other language community. Gardner and Lambert (1972c) suggest that perhaps environmental supports such as frequent interaction with native French speakers are necessary for the integrative-instrumental distinction to have a relevance.

In order to test this suggestion, Lambert and Gardner extended their study to the United States, first examining





56


groups of non-French high school students studying French The regions selected for their study were one community in Louisiana, another in Maine, and a third in Connecticut. The first two they saw as being interesting to compare because in Maine there was an active minority subculture of French Americans, making it somewhat similar to the bicultural Quebec scene. Louisiana also had a reputation of having a French American subculture of some importance and, even though they had doubts about its state of vitality, Gardner and Lambert realized that the non-French community would very likely have a relatively clear stereotype of French people and the French ways of life. Thus the Louisiana and Maine sites were meant to be somewhat like the Montreal community with regard to students having personal experience with French people as they begin their study of French.

The choice of Connecticut was meant to be a stiffer test because there the reference group for high school students studying French should be more vague, possibly based on stereotypes of France and its peoples. In all three studies English speaking American students who were studying French were tested for their attitudes towards French speakers. The measuring instruments were over 50 separate tests or indices.

In the 3 studies, the results are evidence that students with a strong motivation and desire to learn French obtained good grades in their French courses at





57



school. There was apparently a different social or attitudinal foundation for this motivation. In Louisiana, the motivation appeared to derive from a strong parental encouragement and personal satisfaction for the student himself in his attempts to learn the language. In Maine, the motivation was apparently fostered by the student's identification with his French teacher and depended in part on being sensitive to the feelings of other people. In Connecticut the strong motivation to learn French seemed to stem from the student's integrative orientation toward the study of the language as well as a realization of the potential usefulness of the language.

2.3.2 French-American Students Studying French

Gardner and Lambert (1972:59ff) also wanted to investigate how members of a linguistic minority group in the United States approached the learning of "their own" language at school. French-American high school students in the same Louisiana and Maine communities they had previously surveyed were used as subjects. The Maine students had a mean of 9.91 years of French instruction in their schools while the Louisiana students had only 1.05. In the Maine area study, courses in French started at grade

1 whereas in the Louisiana public schools they started at grade 10.

In comparing French-American and American students, Gardner and Lambert (95-96) found that the Maine group of French-American students were far superior to the Louisiana






58


group in French proficiency. French-Americans are more authoritarian and ethnocentric than American students and, although more sympathetic to the French-American culture, they nevertheless express a strong preference for the American over the European way of life.

Both groups of French-American students did decidedly poorer than American students on the Modern Language Association Test (MLAT). But both groups were, however, generally superior to American students in French comprehension skills, even though the Maine group of FrenchAmericans were superior to the Louisiana group in this respect. In French oral proficiency, the Maine group was markedly superior to American students, whereas the Louisiana group was no better than and in some respects inferior to the American students.

The fact that the attitudes of American students

toward the French-American people and their culture were favorable was encouraging to the authors of this study, although they realized that American students still hold pejorative stereotypes about French speaking people that counteract their favorable attitudes. The ingenuity of French-Americans in making various sorts of adjustments to their nationality was claimed by the authors to be the highlight of their investigation.

2.3.3 The Philipoine Studies

In the Philippine studies (Gardner and Lambert

1972a:121ff), there is evidence that English has a very





59


special status in the Philippines. Not only is it the world language adopted by Filipinos as the language of economic life, but it also has become the major medium of instruction in this multi-ethnic nation, although it is rarely a home language. They found that students who approach the study of English with an instrumental outlook and who receive parental support in their views are clearly more successful in developing proficiency in the language. The importance of an instrumental form of motivation for progress in language study was also evident in their analysis of the French-Americans and their orientations to learning English. The same type of relationship did not turn up in their studies of American and Canadian students learning French. It seems that when there is a vital need to master a second language, the instrumental approach is very effective, perhaps more so than the integrative.

The implications for teachers and directors of language programs is clear: in North American
settings, students of foreign languages will profit more if they can be helped to develop an integrative outlook toward the group whose
language is being studied. For members of ethnic minority groups in North America or
citizens in developing nations where imported
foreign languages become one of the national languages, the story iS different. Learning
a second language with national and worldwide
recognition is for them of vital importance,
and both instrumental and integrative approaches
to the learning task must be developed. The
fascinating challenge for these groups however,
is to keep their own cultural and linguistic identity while mastering the second language.
(Gardner and Lambert 1972:130)

The authors were satisfied to find throughout their investigations that one can, with the proper attitudinal





60


orientation and motivation, become bilingual without losing one's identity. In fact, striving for a comfortable place in two cultures seems to be the best motivational basis for becoming bilingual.

2.3.4 The Jordan Study

Harrison, Prator and Tucker (1975) recently undertook a large scale language policy survey of Jordan, examining especially the instruction of English in the schools. The present goals for English teaching in Jordan are summarized in 2 curriculum guides. At the compulsory stage, "'the English course aims at producing a cultured, informed, useful and perceptive citizen, through his ability to understand, speak, read and write, in this case English, with a measure of ease, finesse and discrimation'" (English Curriculum: Compulsory Stage, 1969:5 in Harrison, Prator, and Tucker 1975:1). 'Furthermore, a knowledge of English should provide Jordanians with a better awareness of the values and traditions of diverse peoples from disparate regions of the world' (Harrison et al 1975:1).

Jordan has a situation where an overwhelming majority of the population speaks Arabic as their mother tongue and where English, by historical coincidence and by present day consensus, is taught in all schools in grades 5 12 as a foreign language.

The following recommendations are made by the authors regarding the Jordan language program:

1. That the explicit aims for English instruction
at the compulsory stage be stated in the form
of operationally defined behavioral objectives.





61


2. That these objectives be realistically chosen
to reflect the perceived needs of the students
as well as the resources available to meet these
needs.

3. That the newly developed explicit aims for
English instruction at the secondary level be critically evaluated and, if necessary,
revised in terms of the actual English
needs of secondary school graduates.

4. That the aims for English instruction at the
secondary level reflect the different needs
of secondary graduates, and at the same
time complement the stated aims of Jordanian
education in general.

5. That a closer correspondence be developed
between the aims for teaching English and
the public examination system.

The following basic questions were posited by the

authors as meriting strong consideration. 'Has the very considerable Jordanian investment in English paid off in terms of tangible results? To what extent do the policies with regard to English followed in the public schools permit the achievement of the stated and implicit aims of instruction? Since the major aim of the academic secondary school is to prepare students for higher education. how well have they done so in respect to English?' (Harrison et al 1975:16)

In response to this last question, the authors believe that the answer must be that whatever active command of English students acquire in secondary school is definitely needed and used at the University and other institutions of higher education. According to their instructors at the University, however, most secondary school graduates have not acquired a sufficient command of English. They





62


may know a great deal about English grammar and be able to translate from English to Arabic with the aid of a dictionary, but their practical ability to read and speak English is said to be insufficient for their needs. They are largely unacquainted with the vocabulary and structures that are used in their fields of academic specialization and are usually deficient in specific skills such as rapid reading for comprehension, note-taking, and summarizing, that are needed when English is used as the medium of instruction. The University and post-secondary institutes all find it necessary to teach them more English. To the question of the extent to which the policies followed in the public schools have permitted the achievement of the aims of English instruction, only a partial answer was given. It seems that, although the stated and implicit aims have remained high, the means for achieving them have grown progressively more meager. The number of years during which English is studied, the number of weekly periods, and the length of the periods have all been reduced. Yet many students must still receive a substantial part of their higher education in English. The more flexible policies that the Ministry of Education has followed in the foreign private schools seems to have been more successful, at least in achieving the aims of the English instruction.

To the question regarding the tangible results of

the great Jordanian investment in English, the safest conclusion was felt to be that the magnitude of the investment





63


justifies giving all possible consideration to any opportunities that may exist to get more English for less money.

The following recommendations are worth quoting at this

point:

1. That the Ministry of Education consider the
possibility of providing more instruction in English in the secondary industrial schools.
(The language needs of the students in these schools seem to justify such a step. Added
weekly periods might not be necessary if the
extra instruction could take the form of
practical vocational activities carried out
in English.)

2. That the possibility also be examined of
adding 2 weekly periods of studying scientific texts in English to the present
program of students in the scientific stream during their last 2 years in academic secondary schools. (These students' need for English is particularly great when they
reach university level, and they now have less exposure to English than do students in the literary stream. The 2 periods of studying scientific texts would parallel the 2 extra periods of literary readings that students in the academic stream now
have.)

3. That all possible alternatives be considered
before a further reduction is carried out in
the number of weekly periods of English in academic and commercial secondary schools.
(Even with the present number of periods,
these schools are falling far short of their major aim of "preparing students for higher
education.")

4. That an experiment be conducted in one or more
academic secondary schools in which at least 1 year of the mathematics course for students
in the scientific stream would be taught in
English, and that the achievement in English and mathematics of students in this school or schools be compared with that of children in other schools at the time of their graduation
from grade 12.

5. That every effort be continued to reduce the
average number of students in English classes.





64


6. If the attempt to carry out the above
recommendations is unsuccessful, that serious
consideration be given to modifying the method of English instruction used in the schools in
the compulsory cycle so as to put more emphasis
on the teaching of reading, and that emphasis
on oral activities be postponed until the secondary level. (We believe that such a
shift of emphasis would not violate any valid
methodological principle and that it might
rather, under the conditions of instruction
now prevailing in Jordan, result in more
effective learning of both written and oral
skills.)

7. That the possibilities be explored of using
films, radio, and television as means of
teaching in English some small portion of
the content of courses in various subjects
at all pre-university levels. (This should
help the public academic and commercial
secondary schools to achieve their major aim.)

2.3.5 The Puerto Rico Studies

The language issue on the island has been debated from the time when the first Commissioner of Education, Dr. Brumbaugh, issued the first language policy until the present day. This issue is one of great concern to all sectors of Puerto Rican society. Some of the problems involved in this issue have been discussed repeatedly through the years and possible solutions and recommendations have been offered. But the situation is still being looked into and new solutions to the yet unsolved problems are being sought. The first problem to be solved is the need to create a better environment for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. Students, especially at the high school level, are questioning the need to learn a second language. Their claim is that, if they haven't needed it so far, they have no reason to believe that they will need it later in their lives.





65


In studying the history of the development of English

on the island, one finds what seems to be a general feeling

of rejection of or at least apathy towards the English

language. Some people feel that English is damaging their

Spanish and that they no longer know what they speak.

(Principe Galarza 1973)

A study on the attitudes of a group of students from

secondary schools toward the teaching of English in Puerto

Rico revealed:

1. That there were no negative attitudes among the
students in the sample in terms of the negative
influence that the factor of making mistakes and being penalized for them can have in the
learning of the English language.

2. There was no difference between the attitudes
of males and females.

3. There was no significant difference found between the attitudes of students in the rural
area and those of the urban zone to the learning
of English, although the attitudes of the
students of the urban zone were slightly more
negative than those of the rural zone.

4. A factor that influences their attitudes was
the low grades they got in English.

5. The books used for the teaching of English
seemed to be inadequate because students did
not understand them.

6. Students in general realized the importance of
learning English.

7. Teachers played an important role in the attitudes
of students.

8. No significant difference in attitudes toward
English was found between intermediate school
and high school students. (Diaz Padilla
1971:39ff).




66


The attitudes of the Gabriela Mistral High School

students towards English and the English class were tested (Olmeda 1973:4) and the fundamental findings provided evidence for the hypothesis that there is a negative attitude towards the English class on the part of the students who participated in the study. Ninety-eight percent of the students tested reflected negative attitudes towards the English class. These negative attitudes varied in intensity and in rationale. The first of the major reasons given was that, in general, the students did not view their final objective of studying English as a second language, a language which they were learning in order to be able to communicate with native speakers of the language, as being realistic. English was seen as a 'tool' that should render a service after they graduated from high school, but a 'tool' which they did not consider valuable because they felt they had in fact not learned English.

The second generalized attitude expressed was that English in no way represented a language that could substitute for the Spanish language in Puerto Rico; that the Spanish of Puerto Rico is the one and only official language of Puerto Rico and the Puerto Ricans.

When students were asked about their use of English

and Spanish, they assumed almost automatically a defensive attitude towards English with respect to the English language within the Puerto Rican community.





67


Students in the Gabriela Mistral study felt that the

English program had failed them, that they had wasted their time and that, on top of all that, they had received grades that had not benefited their graduation average. But coupled with this, they also expressed an awareness of how English is relevant for them within the Puerto Rican community and what the objectives should be.

In a study of the relationship between achievement in English of students of the Ana Roque High School in Humacao and their attitudes toward the English language and the United States Continental Community (Arus de Figueroa, 1970) the results obtained indicated that independent of the grade point average of the students included in the sample, the students did not seem to have a noticeable feeling of hostility or rejection toward English or against the United States continental individual. The students of Ana Roque did not seem to connect in any way political considerations with their learning of English, as when they showed a favorable attitude to items that suggested that Puerto Rico continue to be associated with the United States or that, if the status would change, they still would consider English important. It was also evident from the study that the students with a higher grade point average had most positive attitudes towards English or the American individual.

The teachers consulted in this study agreed that the students did not seem to have a positive attitude toward





68


learning English, but they attributed this apparent dislike not to a feeling of rejection but to their own frustration when the student was not able to cope with the requirements of the English courses. They also agreed that adequate motivation and a better presentation of teaching materials together with proper facilities to use modern techniques and methods, which they admitted were lacking in the Ana Roque High School, would bring better results.

The English teachers also suggested that a revision of the English program was imperative since they thought that the textbooks were not the most adequate for Spanishspeaking students and that the existing program did not provide for practice on conversational English. Other factors that they thought might have a relation with achievement in English in Puerto Rico were: aptitude, intelligence of the student, interests, and better learning environments.

In general, this study revealed that the student does not seem to reject the learning of English in the Ana Roque High School, but that the student would like to have a better command of the second language when he finishes high school.

The attitudes of Puerto Ricans concerning English

vary. Some people feel that English should be learned for its potential value. Others feel that English should be learned as a means of learning about the American culture. The definite prestige of being bilingual positively





69


influences the attitudes of many Puerto Ricans toward learning English, especially those who belong to the upper and middle classes.

On the other hand, people who have negative attitudes claim that, if one comes from a low income family, learning English provides no status symbol. If one lives in a house where no one speaks English, where there are no books, magazines, or newspapers to read in English, the motivation will be very low.

The methods that have been used for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico have also been highly criticized (Bonilla, 1972). Often all students are treated in like manner and the same methods are used for all of them. Teachers also play an important role in fostering attitudes toward English learning.

The growing nationalism is also an important factor. It has made many Puerto Ricans aware of their culture and importance. It has stressed the fact that the American culture and the learning of English may be a threat to the Puerto Rican personality and Latin heritage.

In a report on the teaching of English in Puerto Rico (Division de Investigaciones Pedagogicas n.d.), part of the failure of the teaching of English in Puerto Rico was attributed to trying to use the same methods and materials used in the United States. This failure brought about so many rapid changes in techniques and procedures that it has been difficult to adopt a well-oriented





70


methodology for the effective teaching of English on the island.

Yet the teaching of English in Puerto Rico is now

and will continue to be a major goal as long as the island is associated with the United States. Spanish will never occupy a second place to English since it is Puerto Rico's principal means of communication and connection to the hispanic world, to which it is tied historically and culturally.















CHAPTER THREE

THE MATCHED GUISE STUDY



3.1 Introduction

The Matched Guise technique has been used in a number of studies, e.g. Lambert et al. (1960, 1965, 1972, 1975); Anisfeld et al. (1962); Anisfeld and Lambert (1964); Webster and Kramer (1968); Silverman (1969); Tucker (1969); Tucker and Lambert (1969); Tajfel (1973); Giles (1973); Giles et al. (1974) and, Giles and Powesland (1975). This technique elicits immediate evaluative reactions to taperecorded speakers using various accents, dialects and languages. A group of judges listening to an apparently different group of speakers recording the same neutral passage are asked to evaluate the speakers on various rating scales. The speaker is usually the same person using different 'realistic' guises of the particular dialects under study, and 'filler voices' are included to distract the judges from this fact. (Giles, 1975). In the present study, the speakers represented both language and accent differences, therefore, these groups were referred to as 'speech groups'.

The Puerto Rico Matched Guise Study consisted of the

recording of four speech groups: Spanish, Spanish-accented



71





72


English, near-native English and native English. A 'true' Matched Guise Study could not be carried out because of the unavailability of speakers who could convincingly represent each of the four speech groups, (i.e. Spanish, Spanishaccented English, near-native English, and native English). Speakers selected for speech group 1, Spanish, were male and female Puerto Ricans who were born and raised on the island.

Speech group 2, Spanish-accented English speakers, were the same individuals as those of speech group 1, native Spanish speakers. As group 1, these speakers read the passage in their native Spanish and as group 2 they read the stimulus passage in their Spanish-accented English. Puerto Ricans who have learned the grammar and the phonology of English well enough to speak it fluently, but who have a Spanish accent, however slight, when speaking English were the speakers in groups 1 and 2. The voices of speakers of speech groups 1 and 2 were disjunctively positioned on the recording to avoid recognition of the fact that the Spanish and the English versions were from the same speaker. Near-native speakers of English made up speech group 3. These speakers are Puerto Ricans who have an almost native ability in the English language with minimal if any interference from Spanish. Most of these speakers learned English as children from native or near-native teachers or else lived in the United States and acquired an American accent. Speech group 4 consisted of native speakers of English, Americans who are currently living in Puerto Rico.





73


The four factors used to test the hypotheses were the following: evaluative, dynamism, citizenship and teacher value. The 'evaluative' factor included the items: intelligent, responsible, sure of him/herself, sincere, courteous, understanding, honest, respectful, reliable, educated, and good citizen. The 'dynamism' factor included the items: arrogant, selfish, and ambitious. The 'citizenship' factor was made up of only one item: patriotic. The 'teacher value' factor was made up of the items: person I would like to look like, person I would like to have as a teacher, helpful teacher, organized teacher, teacher who loves his students, and hard-working teacher.

3.2 Testing Procedure

3.2.1 Preparation of Stimulus Tape

A neutral passage from the Reader's Digest, Student's Edition, titled 'An Exciting Plane Ride,' was selected for the reading. The passage was translated into Spanish for the purpose of this study. Seventeen voices were recorded reading the passage in English and in Spanish. These voices were divided as follows:

1. a practice voice to clarify instructions

2. two male and two female native English speakers
reading the passage in English

3. two male and two female near-native English
speakers reading the passage in English

4. two male and two female Spanish-accented speakers
of English reading the passage in Spanish and
later in English





74


A total of one practice and 16 test voices were recorded on the tape. The voice selection process for the stimulus tape included the following steps:

1. recording 35 voices

2. selecting a practice voice

3. selecting 16 representative voices, 2 male and 2
female in the 4 speech groups

The speakers representing each speech group were instructed to familiarize themselves with the story until it could be read fluently. They were told that if they made an error, the tape would be stopped and the sentence would be recorded again. The recording would be played back to the speaker to make sure that it was acceptable. This point is very important as nonfluencies in recording style can have deleterious effects on social evaluations for any particular voice (Iiller and Hewgill, 1964). The final 34-minute tape was judged to be satisfactory by the recorded speakers and by myself. The reliability of the stimulus tape was established by testing 15 English as a Second Language Methodology Course students at the University of Puerto Rico. The voices were judged to be representative of the four speech groups and the tape to be of satisfactory technical quality so that the students would not be distracted. The U.P.R. students were also asked to judge the following things: 'Is the person speaking a Puerto Rican? Anglo? Other? 'How clear is the recording of this speaker?' 'How fluently is the passage read?' 'How expressively is the passage read?' Finally, they were asked to make general comments on the task as a whole (See Appendix C).





75



Twelve copies of the stimulus tape were made and distributed to each supervisor to be administered in selected classrooms. The classroom teacher and zone supervisor cooperated in administering the questionnaires. Subjects

The participants in this study were selected from one urban and one rural school district in each of the six regions of the island. The students had to have been born and raised in Puerto Rico. They also had to have studied English as a second language from the first grade, while Spanish continued to be the language of instruction for all school subjects. Students had to be of at least average intelligence and had to be able to follow instructions. Subjects were both male and female, ages 10, 12, 15 and 17 (fifth, seventh, ninth and twelfth grades respectively). These grades were chosen because the public school system is divided into three levels: elementary, intermediate and high school. One of the purposes of this study was to test whether there were any significant differences in the ratings of students across these three levels. The fifth grade is a high elementary level, the seventh grade is the beginning of the intermediate level, and the twelfth grade is the end of the high school level. The samples were drawn from selected classrooms in twelve of the school districts distributed through the six regions of the island (See map of Puerto Rico in Figure 1 on page 76).









76


















(..












ku
o W
8 a S i o




2- 0


... 4: 1












(I-h
wO
Univ -, -




77


Administration of Rating Scales

The rating scales were written in Spanish. Students were asked to rate speakers on a seven-point rating scale according to how they perceived the person that they were listening to on tape. The teacher read the instructions to the students (See Appendeces F and G for a copy of the rating scales and instructions).

To prepare the Matched Guise rating scales, a pilot study was conducted to see what qualitative adjectives were used by students in describing the following people: a 'good' Puerto Rican, a 'bad' Puerto Rican, someone they would like, someone they would dislike, a teacher whom they would admire, a teacher whom they would not admire. A random sample of students (N=394) from the sixth, ninth and twelfth grades of the public schools of Puerto Rico responded to the questions on the pilot study. The answers to those questions were then tabulated and the adjectives with the highest frequency (See Appendix E, Tables 2-7) were combined with the adjectives already established by Gardner and Lambert (1972) in their studies of FrenchAmerican students. These adjectives were put on bipolar rating scales. (The scales used in this study are listed in Appendix F). A total of 21 bipolar adjective scales were included in the test. The five remaining scales measured teacher value as perceived by students rating the four speech groups.





78


3.3 Results

A factor analysis was used to extract common factor variances among the sets of measures used in the Matched Guise Study. The three obtained were based on the results of the factor analysis and were labeled 'evaluative,' 'dynamism' and 'teacher value'. Minimum strength criterion for acceptance was a factor loading of 0.60; the purity criterion required that a scales' factor loading be at least twice the same scale's loading on any other factor (See Appendix H, Table 8 ). Another factor that was considered independently was 'citizenship' which was represented by the adjective 'patriotic'. Although the factor loading was not large enough (.55), it was considered a sufficiently important variable for the present study to be included as an additional factor. The following hypotheses were examined in this study:

H1: Secondary school students will rate Spanish and
Spanish-accented speakers of English higher on
the citizenship factor than elementary school
students.

H2: Secondary school students will rate native
Spanish speakers higherthan Spanish-accented speakers on the citizenship factor, Spanishaccented speakers higher than near-native English speakers, and near-native English speakers higher
than native English speakers.

H3: Elementary school students will rate female
speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than male speakers for all speech
groups.

H4: Secondary school students will rate male speakers
higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors
than female speakers for all speech groups.





79


H5: Elementary school subjects will rate Spanishaccented speakers lower on the evaluative factor
than native Spanish, native English and nearnative English speakers.

H6: Secondary school students will rate Spanishaccented speakers of English lower than Spanish
speakers on the evaluative factor but higher than
native and near-native English speakers.

H7: Elementary school students will rate native English
and near-native English speakers higher on the
evaluative factor than native Spanish and
Spanish-accented speakers of English.

Hg: Secondary school subjects will rate Spanish and
Spanish-accented speakers of English higher on
dynamism and evaluative factors than elementary
school students will.

H9: Students from rural areas, regardless of age, will
give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism
and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers
than to all other speakers of the three speech
groups.

H10: Students from urban areas, regardless of age, will
give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism,
and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers
than to all other speakers of the three speech
groups.

H11: Secondary school students from urban areas will
rate native Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers
higher on dynamism and citizenship factors than
secondary school students from rural areas.

H12: Students from both urban and rural areas will rate
the Spanish speech group significantly higher than
all other speech groups for the teacher value
factor.

H13: Elementary school students will rate female voices
of all speech groups significantly higher than
male voices for the teacher value factor.

H14: Secondary school students will rate male voices
of all speech groups significantly higher than
female voices.





80


Analysis of variance was then employed to test the twelve hypotheses. The dependent variables evaluative, dynamism, citizenship and teacher value, were tested against the independent variables of grade (elementary and secondary), sex (male and female), zone (urban and rural), speech group (Spanish, Spanish-accented English, near-native English and native English). Duncan's Multiple Range Test was used as a statistical test of significance (2 <.05) to indicate the different levels of the independent variables.

3.3 Results

3.3.1 The Statistical Tests of the Hypotheses Hypothesis 1.

Hypothesis 1, which posited that secondary school

students would rate Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English higher on the citizenship factor than elementary school students was not supported. Results indicate that there is a significant difference F(l,l) 160.4, 2 <.05) in the rating of Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English by elementary and secondary school students on the citizenship factor, but in the opposite direction of that predicted (See Appendix H, Table 9 for Analysis of Variance summary table). An analysis of the difference between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test found that elementary school students rated these speakers higher (X = 5.3) than secondary school students (X = 4.6) on the citizenship factor.





81

Hypothesis 2.

Hypothesis 2, which predicted that secondary school students would rate native Spanish speakers higher than Spanish-accented English speakers on the citizenship factor, Spanish-accented speakers higher than near-native English speakers, and near-native English speakers higher than native English speakers was only partially supported F(3,3) 5.03,p < .05) (See Appendix H, Tablel0-YerAnalysis of Variance summary table). An examination of the differences between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that there is a difference in the ratings of the four speech groups by secondary school students regarding the citizenship factor (X = 4.8 for Spanish; 4.7 for native English; 4.6 for near-native English and 4.5 for Spanish-accented English). Yet, although Spanish speakers were rated higher than the other speech groups, the rest of the order of the predicted hierarchy was not supported. Hypothesis 3.

The third hypothesis predicted that elementary school students would rate female speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than male speakers for all speech groups. Analysis of variance test results indicate that there are no significant differences for sex among elementary school student ratings of speakers for the citizenship factor. Yet there are near significant differences for sex on the evaluative factor F(1,1,11.5,p = 0.0007; See Appendix H, Tablell ifr Analysis of Variance summary






82


table). However, the hypothesis was not even partially supported because the results indicate differences but in the opposite direction of that predicted. An analysis of the difference between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test found that male speakers of all speech groups were rated higher than female speakers on the evaluative factor (X = 5.5 for males and 5.3 for females). Hypothesis 4.

The fourth hypothesis predicted that secondary

school students would rate male speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than female speakers for all speech groups. Results indicate that there is a significant difference F(l,l)-,85.2,{ .05) for the citizenship factor (See Appendix H, Tables 12, 13 for Analysis of Variance summary tables). An analysis of the differences between the means found that males of the four speech groups were rated higher than females (p ( 05) on both the citizenship and evaluative factors by secondary school students (X = 4.8 for males and 4.4 for females on the citizenship factor; X = 5.2 for males and 5.0 for females on the evaluative factor).

Hypothesis 5.

The fifth hypothesis, which posited that elementary

school students would rate Spanish-accented speakers lower on the evaluative factor than native Spanish, native English and near-native English speakers was only partially supported F(3,3) = 4.4,p < .05; See Appendix H, Table 14




83


for Analysis of Variance summary table). An analysis of the differences between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that Spanish-accented speakers of English were rated lower than Spanish and near-native English, but not lower than native English. There are no significant differences between the near-native and native English and the Spanish-accented English groups for the evaluative factor (X = 5.6 for Spanish, 5.5 for near-native English, 5.5 for Spanish-accented English and

5.4 for native English).

Hypothesis 6.

Hypothesis 6, which posited that secondary school

students would rate Spanish-accented English speakers lower than Spanish speakers on the evaluative factor but higher than native and near-native English speakers was only partially supported F(3,3),6.6,L ( .05; See Table 15 for Analysis of Variance summary table). An analysis of the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that secondary school students rated Spanish speakers higher than all speech groups (X = 5.2) and Spanish-accented English speakers the lowest of all (X = 5.0). There were no significant differences in the ratings of native and near-native English speakers for this factor (X = 5.1 for native English and

5.1 for near-native English). Hypothesis 7.

Hypothesis 7, which posited that elementary school

students would rate native and near-native English speakers higher on the evaluative factor than native Spanish and





84

Spanish-accented speakers of English was not supported. An analysis of the difference between the means found that there are significant differences (p < 05) between ratings of speech group combinations but in a reverse order (X = 5.5 for Spanish and Spanish-accented English and 5.4 for nearnative and native English).

Hypothesis 8.

The eighth hypothesis predicted that secondary school students would rate Spanish and Spanish-accented English speakers higher on dynamism and evaluative factors than elementary school students would. Results indicated that there are no significant differences in ratings of speech group combinations by grade for the evaluative and dynamism factors.

Hypothesis 9.

The ninth hypothesis, which predicted that students from rural areas, regardless of age, would give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism, and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers than to all other speakers of the three speech groups was supported. Results indicate that there are significant differences F(3,3),4.7, E < .05; in the ratings (See Appendix H, Tables lE,17,18 for Analysis of Variance summary tables). Duncan's Multiple Range Test for analysis of differences between the means, indicated that rural subjects, regardless of age, gave a higher rating (p < .05) to Spanish speakers than to all other speakers on the evaluative, dynamism, and citizenship





85


factors (X = 5.4 for Spanish, 5.3 for native English, 5.2 for near-native English and 5.2 for Spanish-accented English for the evaluative factor; X = 4.2 for Spanish, 4.1 for native English, 4.1 for Spanish-accented English and 4.0 for near-native English for the dynamism factor; X = 5.0 for Spanish, 4.8 for near-native English, 4.8 for native English and 4.8 for Spanish-accented English for the citizenship factor).

Hypothesis 10.

Hypothesis 10, which posited that students from urban areas, regardless of age, would give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers than to all other speakers of the three speech groups was supported. Results indicated that there is a significant difference F(3,),4.05,p = .007 for the evaluative factor; no significant difference for the dynamism factor and a significant difference for the citizenship factor F(3,3),4.31,p ( .05; See Appendix H, Tables 19, 20 for Analysis of Variance summary tables). However, an analysis of the difference between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that urban subjects, regardless of age, gave a higher rating to Spanish speakers than to all other speech groups on all three factors (X = 5.4 for Spanish, 5.3 for near-native English, 5.3 for native English, and 5.2 for Spanish-accented English for the evaluative factor; X = 4.3 for Spanish, 4.2 for native English, 4.2 for near-native English and 4.2 for Spanishaccented English for the dynamism factor; X = 5.0 for





86

Spanish, 5.0 for near-native English, 4.9 for Spanishaccented English and 4.8 for native English for the citizenship factor).

Hypothesis 11.

The eleventh hypothesis, which posited that secondary school students from urban areas would rate native Spanish and Spanish-accented English speakers higher on the dynamism and citizenship factors than secondary school students from rural areas was not supported. There were no significant differences in ratings by secondary urban and rural school students on speech group combination 1 for either the dynamism or citizenship factors. Hypothesis 12.

The twelfth hypothesis, which stated that students from both urban and rural areas would rate the Spanish speech group significantly higher than all other speech groups for the teacher value factor was supported F(3,3), 4.6, p < .05). Results indicated that the Spanish group was rated significantly higher than all other speech groups, for the teacher value factor (See Appendix H, Table- 21 for Analysis of Variance summary table). An analysis of the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test, found that although the Spanish speech group was rated the highest, there were no significant differences among the three other speech groups (X = 5.0 for Spanish, 4.8 for near-native English,

4.8 for native English and 4.7 for Spanish-accented English). Reported values are F(3,3),6.02, p < .05; See Appendix H, Table 22.




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID ELJE5A2GB_UZ2VER INGEST_TIME 2014-12-01T20:58:20Z PACKAGE AA00026450_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES



PAGE 1

ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO: A LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY AND xTS PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS BY NITZA LLADO-BERRICS A DISSERTATION PPJESENTSD TO TEI OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLiMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNI'^/ERSITY OF FLORIDA 1978

PAGE 2

Copyright 1978 by Nitza Llado-Berrios

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my gratitude to all who in one way or another helped and encouraged me in some phase of my research In Puerto Rico, I wish to thank my parents for their constant encouragement and support; my English supervisor and dearest friend. Dr. Laudalina Varona, for her invaluable help and encouragement throughout my work; Mrs. Paquita Vinas de Vazquez, Director of the English Program of the Department of Education, who suggested that I do this study and petitioned for funding, and who also gave me her full cooperation the English staff and English supervisors who made their suggestions and helped collect the data for the present study, and to the four students at the University cf Puerto Rico, Rafael, Ita, Evelyn and Anita, who helped in the tabulation of the pilot questionnaires. My special thanks go to Dr. Jose L. Soto Padin, assistant professor at the University of Puerto Rico, who first helped in the statistical aspect of my study. I am also grateful to Mariles Reyes, Director of the Educational Division cf the Computer Center of the Department of Education and to Edwin Blanco Pino, Systems Programmer at the Computer Center of the University of Puerto Rico. Special mention should be given to Dr. Howard Giles, Social Psychologist at the University of Bristol,

PAGE 4

England, who helped me in the design of the attitude studies included in my disserration. Here in Gainesville, I wish to express my gratitude to my adviser, Dr. Norman Markel for his encouragement and guidance throughout my tenure as a graduate student. I would also like to thank Dr. Jayne C. Harder, Dr. Roger M. Thompson and Dr. Robert L. Curran, members of the supervisory committee, for their valuable guidance in my work. Mention should also be given to Ralph Partridge, a graduate student in the Speech Department, who served as programmer and statistical consultant for my study. My gratitude goes also to Maria Lucchesi, one of my students at the English Language Institute for drawingthe figure and map for my study, and to Leslie Hill for her efficient work in typing my dissertation. I also wish to thank my dear friends, Michael B. Montgomery and John C. Gross, also graduate students in Linguistics, for their suggestions and encouragement throughout the different phases of my work. iv

PAGE 5

PREFACE The present study resulted from my interest in the attitudes of Puerto Rican students towards the learning of English as a second language on the island. I felt that a study of this kind would enable the Director and staff of the English Program of the Department of Education and of the universities to set priorities for finding solutions to some of the current problems. Dr. Howard Giles, a Social Psychologist from the University of Bristol, England, was invited by the Department of Education of Puerto Rico to act as consultant because of his experience relating to motivational variables in second and foreign language acquisition. I had been a student of Dr. Giles at the State University of New York in Oswego during the LSA Summer Institute, where I took a course in intergroup relations and discussed some of the techniques used for the present study. In Puerto Rico, Dr. Giles advised me in the following areas: 1. designing questionnaires used as research instruments 2. giving instructions to the English supervisors who were going to help in the collection of the data

PAGE 6

3. designing a plan to interpret results, including statistical methods needed for the different studies Dr. Giles and I met with the Director of the English Program, iMrs. Paquita Vinas de Vazquez, and the English Program staff at the Department of Education to discuss the proposed study of language attitudes of Puerto Rican students learning English as a second language on the island. Problems relating to ESL in Puerto Rico were explained and discussed. A series of meetings with regional and zone supervisors of English were planned to seek their advice in preparing and implementing the research design. They also helped in the selection of school districts representative of the six regions of the island. The choice of the schools was made according to the following criteria: 1. The schools-in the districts chosen had to be public 2. The schools had to be classified by the Department of Education as 'typically' urban or rural. 3. The schools had to be located within the boundaries of one of the six regions of the island. In the six regions, the following districts were selected for the study: from the region of San Juan, Rio Piedras B-rural and Rio Piedras C-urban; from the region of Mayagiiez Maricao-rural and Aguadilla-urban ; from the region of Humacao Rio Grande-rural and Humacao-urban ; from the Ponce region, Santa Isabel-rural and Ponce-urban; from the Arecibo vi

PAGE 7

region, Ciales-rural and Vega Baja-urban; from the region of Caguas, Aibonito, rural and Cayey-urban. At the same meeting, the supervisors who would be needed to help administer the questionnaires were chosen. Some regional supervisors and the selected zone supearvisors attended a subsequent meeting where they received a briefing. They also commented on the situation on the island, identified problems they felt needed to be considered, suggested possible solutions to these problems, and indicated which schools could be used and which teachers were the most cooperative. The super^/isors were then informed of the days they were expected to obtain materials and instr^ictions at the Department of Education. The supervisors attended three meetings at the Department of Education: a planning meeting where they also received the Multi-Dimensional Scaling Study instructions (this study will not be included in this dissertation but will appear in a future publication) ; one at which they returned the MDS materials and received instructions for the Matched Guise Study; and one at which they returned the MG questionnaires and received the Language Attitude Study materials. These materials were returned by mail. At each meeting the supervisors mentioned the problems they had had. They suggested possible modifications in the administration of th.e questionnaires. Supervisors stated that students and teachers were eager to learn what they had participated in. The supervisors were promised

PAGE 8

that all the students and teachers who helped with this study would be informed about the results at the earliest possible date. The next phase of the study was to work on the statistical analyses. Dr. Jos^ L. Soto Padin, a statistician from the College of Education of the University of Puerto Rico, in collaboration with Edwin Blanco Pino, a Systems Programmer at the Computer Center of the University of Puerto Rico, helped me in this phase of my study. As I had to return to Gainesville to begin the next quarter, I continued my work at the Computer Center of the University of Florida, assisted first by Dr. Don Stacks, a graduate student from the Speech Department, and after his departure by Ralph Partridge, also a graduate student in Speech, who served as statistical consultants for my study. In this study, I do not pretend to have offered final solutions to the existing problems concerning the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. Much more research is needed to find viable solutions to present needs. However, by analyzing responses obtained from the students themselves, this study does attempt to clarify the status of some of the stereotyped beliefs related to the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. My aim has been to open possibilities for future research, to encourage Spanish and English teachers to continue joining efforts to improve the teaching of English on the island, and to remind the Puerto Rican society to keep their faith in the young people. Gainesville, Florida Nitza Llad6

PAGE 9

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii PREFACE V ABSTRACT xii CHAPTER ONE ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Historical Background: 1898 1978 8 TWO THEORETICAL BASES OF LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY 23 2.1 Introduction: Methodological Approaches to Language Study 23 2.2 Attitude Studies Concerning Speech Style and Social Evaluation 26 2.3 Studies of the Linguistic Attitudes of Students 55 THREE THE MATCHED GUISE STUDY 71 3.1 Introduction 71 3.2 Testing Procedure 73 3.3 Results 78 3.4 Discussion 88 ix

PAGE 10

FOUR THE LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY 92 4.1 Introduction 92 4.2 Method 94 4.3 Results 102 4.4 Discussion 113 FIVE SUMMARY 128 5.1 Introduction 128 5.2 Discussion and Recoiranendations .130 5.3 Suggestions for Future Research .137 APPENDIX A MEAN SCORES OBTAINED ON CEE3 PROFICIENCY TEST 141 B STIMULUS PASSAGE FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY: ENGLISH VERSION AND SPANISH TRANSLATION 143 C EVALUATION FORM FOR MATCHED GUISE STIMULUS TAPE 148 D QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DESIGNING THE MATCHED GUISE RATING SCALES: SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS 151 E SUiMMARY TABLES OF PILOT STUDY FOR DESIGNING THE MATCHED GUISE RATING SCALES 154 F MATCHED GUISE QUESTIONNAIRE: SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS 161 G INSTRUCTIONS FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY .166 H SUMMARY TABLES FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY 17 3 X

PAGE 11

APPENDIX I LANGUAGE ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRES: SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS, 183 J SUMMARY TABLES FOR LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY 202 REFERENCES 206 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 217 xi

PAGE 12

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO: A LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY AND ITS PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS By Nitza Llad6-Berrios December 1978 Chairman: Norman N. Markel Major Department: Linguistics The long-debated language issue in Puerto Rico remains an issue of great concern to all sectors of Puerto Rican society. Although Puerto Rican students study English from the first grade through high school, there is a lack of an adequate environment in which to learn English, a situation which often affects a student's attitude and hinders his/her motivation to learn the language. An adaptation of the Matched Guise technique, which has been used in other studies to elicit immediate evaluative reactions to tape-recorded speakers representing various accents, dialects, and languages, was employed to determine student preference for speakers of Spanish, Spanish-accented

PAGE 13

English, near-native English and native English. Students rated the speakers in terms of various semantic factors. The results indicated that although Spanish is always rated most positively, the ratings for English vary according to school level. A Language Attitude Questionnaire was designed to explore the attitude of students concerning teaching methods, materials, the importance of learning English, frequency of usage of English and other related factors. The student responses were used to discover to what degree each of these attitudes affects their motivation to learn English. An analysis of the results obtained for the hypotheses tested revealed that there were no significant differences between the attitudes of urban and rural students for learning English as a second language. Both groups found that the advantages of learning English justify the time and effort involved in teaching it. It was also found that attitudes students may have towards the methods and materials used for the teaching of English do not directly affect their positive attitude towards learning the language. They may have a negative attitude towards English as a class subject or towards a particular teacher, but not to the English language as such. Student attitude towards learning English is also independent of student views on the political status of Puerto Rico. Several recoiranendations are made to improve the teaching of English on the island. These include intensifying the

PAGE 14

teaching of Spanish giving due importance to English, making political decisions independent of language policy decisions for the island, and implementing teacher-training programs which reinforce positive attitudes towards the American culture and the English language. xiv

PAGE 15

CHAPTER ONE ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN PUERTO RICO 1.1 Introduction The language situation of Puerto Rico seems to be simple to summarize. Spanish is the first language of all Puerto Ricans, and English is the second language, taught simultaneously with Spanish from the first grade on through high school. Not only is Spanish the main language of instruction in the schools, but also it is used by most people in social and business affairs. English is taught because of the very close political, economic and cultural ties with the United States. Yet in spite of the fact that Puerto Rican students study English for twelve years, many students do not know enough English to be able to communicate in the target language. Great efforts have been made by all those interested in having Puerto Rican students learn English, but many problems still exist. The means of scores obtained by students of the public schools on the Proficiency in English Test administered each November by the College Entrance Examination Board during the years 1966 1976 reveal an overall general lowering of scores (See Appendix A, Figure 1) Even though the fluctuations are minimal in some cases, the overall pattern is a descending one, which might be of some significance. 1

PAGE 16

2 Celeste Benitez de Rexach, a former Secretary of Education, at the Seventh Annual Convention of TESOL in San Juan, Puerto Rico, summarized the situation of Puerto Rico from more than 75 years ago to the present day. You have come to a society which, although it cherishes very close political, economic, and cultural ties with the United States, is nevertheless, a Spanish speaking society with a personality and culture ofits own in Puerto Rico. With all the changes in language policy in Puerto Rico, it is not difficult to understand why the students become increasingly ambivalent, even hostile, to the learning of English. Official policy dictated that they study it and all about them they saw the need to speak English to get better-paying jobs. And yet at the same time, they felt that to study English, to speak it, was to deny their identity as Puerto Ricans The result of this early linguistic policy in Puerto Rico, with its emphasis on the "i^iericanization" of our people, was that the teaching of English in Puerto Rico became a political question. To a large extent it still is. For some independence advocates, learning English in schools smacks of "colonialism" and is a tacit acceptance of American domination of our economic development and of our close political ties. For some statehood advocates, the mastery of English is a necessary step towards the cultural and political integration that they believe essential for the advent of statehood. A summary of the major problems affecting the teaching of English on the island will be summarized here so that people unaware of the present-day situation can understand the intentions of this study. 1. In Puerto Rico, the environment does not lend itself to using English as often as would be desirable to promote leax-ning it effectively. A non-English speaking environment makes it

PAGE 17

very difficult for teachers to keep students motivated. If a student lives in one of the many low income housing projects in Puerto Rico, the learning of English is definitely not a status symbol. For such students, English is not a language which they feel that they will ever use in the future. Their situation is radically different from that of students who come from families of a socio-economic level where English is valued as a means of moving up the financial scale. Students who go to private schools will also have a high motivation to learn English. Yet the Puerto Rican student in general often resents the fact that after 12 years of taking courses in English, he/she still shows a deficiency in his knowledge of English, which often leads him/her to be unwilling to use the language English is being forced upon a student who already has Spanish as a means of communicating in the society in which he/she lives. Spanish is the language of instruction in the schools and is used by most people for business and social affairs. There is sometimes a lack of cooperation between the teachers of Spanish and the teachers of English. Quintero Alfaro, a Puerto Rican

PAGE 18

4 educator and writer, once said that to carry out the linguistic policy established in Puerto Rico, it is necessary to teach both English and Spanish wellIf this is going to be accomplished, both Spanish teachers and English teachers are going to have to join efforts to make the languagelearning experience a more fruitful one. 4. A student's perception of teacher personality is a factor which often impedes learning. Many teachers in Puerto Rico do not speak English fluently enough to be qualified to teach it. But because English must be taught for 12 years to all Puerto Rican students, unqualified teachers, especially those at the elementary level, often find themselves teaching English. Students who dislike a teacher'-s personality or who have no respect for the teacher as a language model may soon lose their motivation to learn the target language 5. The methods used by some teachers for the teaching of English are not often the most adequate for teaching a second language. The lack of appropriate materials is also often said to be a cause of the students' lack of motivation. Despite the efforts made to prepare and adapt materials in tune with the Puerto Rican reality, a lot more still needs to be done. The materials used are not

PAGE 19

5 always meaningful to the students. The way in which teachers present these materials is also a factor which could hinder their learning English. 6. The attitudes of the Puerto Rican community toward the learning of English often influence the attitudes of our students and hamper their motivation to learn the language. Negative publicity, often not based in fact, is frequently disseminated through the mass means of communication concerning the attitudes of politicians and others toward the teaching of English on the island. The following is a typical example. In a press release in El Vocero (1969) a former Secretary of Education, Ram6n A. Cruz, summarized the efforts that the Department of Education had made regarding the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. This was done in response to the unfortunate expressions of a local critic, Gary Hoyt, and in reference to the educational orientation of the country. Dr. Cruz assured the public that the Department of Education did not wish to eliminate the teaching of English in Puerto Rico as Mr. Koyt had claimed. To support this, he mentioned the increase in personnel for the teaching of English. At that time, there were over 8,000 teachers of English at all levels on the island, which was about 3 0% of all the teachers in the public school system of Puerto Rico. In the last

PAGE 20

5 few years, many bilingual teachers had been trained to teach in the primary level and the teaching was being departmentalized at all levels, elementary, intermediate and high school. Regarding the preparation of teachers of English in intermediate and high school. Dr. Cruz said that the Department of Education offered scholarships to teachers to finish their bachelor's and master's degrees in the Universities of Puerto Rico and the University of Illinois. In San Juan, 34% of the teachers in the intermediate level and 88% in the high school level held bachelor's degrees; in the region of Ponce, 76% in the intermediate level and 90% in the high school level; and in the Arecibo region, 60% in the intermediate level and 93% in the high school level. He went on to point out that in the Humacao region, 50% of the teachers had B.A. degrees in English in the intermediate school and 73% in the high school level. The Mayaguez region had 84% in the intermediate level and 98% in the high school level, while Caguas region had 71% of the teachers with B.Adegrees in English in the intermediate level and 93% in the high school level. 7. The idea that the learning of English affects the learning of Spanish can be another factor hampering the students' motivation to learn English. It has

PAGE 21

7 been said by some prominent Puerto Ricans that learning English can be detrimental to Spanish and that it will ultimately make the people lose their identity as Puerto Ricans. 8. The attitudes of members of different political sectors often affect the attitudes of Puerto Ricans toward learning the language. The changes in political parties bring about changes in policy which affect the teaching of English. Consequently, teachers and students, who are the ones mainly affected by the resulting changes, develop negative attitudes. 9. By 1975, there were close to 45,000 children (perhaps more) who had difficulty with Spanish. These are the children of Puerto Ricans who emigrated to the United States in the 40 's and later, and who are returning at present to the island. These children may (1) speak both English and Spanish, with one of the two as the dominant language; or (2) may speak only English, and have some oral Spanish with which they communicate with grandparents. However, these children seem to be weak in reading skills as well as in writing skills in both languages. Even though the Department of Education is trying to take care of the educational needs of these children, there still is a lot to be done. This situation in the classroom

PAGE 22

8 may affect some students motivation to learn either language 1,2 Historical Background; 1898 1978 Puerto Rico is one of a chain of islands known as the Antilles, which extend from Florida to the northern coast of South America. The Antilles are divided into 2 groups, called the Greater and the Lesser Antilles. Puerto Rico is the smallest and easternmost of the 4 Greater Antilles r islands which, include Cuba, Hispaniola and Jamaica. Puerto Rico was of great military value to the Spaniards, who used it in defense of the Spanish Empire in the New World. The island was originally inhabited by the Talnos, a peaceful Indian tribe. From the Talno Indian culture we got many Taino words like canoa, tabaco and maiz which were later absorbed into both Spanish and English. The Tainos were not well prepared either practically or emotionally for the invasion of the Spaniards. They had few weapons, and they thought that the Spaniards were immortal Spanish colonization of Puerto Rico began in 1508, when Ponce de Le6n was appointed governor of San Juan. The Tainos soon became part of a feudal system in which they were assigned to serve the Spaniards in the island s gold mines or at other tasks. The Spaniards 'taught' the Indians to adjust to the Spanish culture and converted them to Christianity. The Tainos could not resist the harsh slave labor and many died, while others fled to neighboring

PAGE 23

9 islands. They were soon replaced by African slaves who came to till the land, for agriculture had now been introduced. Spanish colonisrs married these African slaves and from them we get the mulatto, a blend of white and black. Puerto Rico over the centuries has gone through a series of political and economic changes. The island passed from a Spanish colony to a possession of the United States in 1898, when it was ceded by Spain as part of the Treaty of Paris. After 4 centuries of Spanish rule, Puerto Rico had a tiny educated elite class, a small middle class, and a massof peons. Only 13% of the population was literate. Aida Negr6n de Montilla (1971) presents a very good account of the language situation in Puerto Rico during the years 1900-193 0 and the many things that happened during the years in which the language issue was temporarily settled. Because of the thoroughness of her research and completeness of her work, a sximmary of her major findings will be presented to enable the reader to understand some of the problems that caused resentments in many sectors of the Puerto Rican population. Between 1898 and 1900, three North American military men, totally ignorant of the customs, traditions, and language of Puerto Rico, served as governors. The Foraker Act passed by Congress in 19 00, 'essentially a compromise between the need to end military occupation and the lack of a clear concise intention in regard to Puerto Rico's future,' {Negr6n de Montilla 1971:21) established a civil government but did not

PAGE 24

10 recognize Puerto Rico as a United States territory, Under this act, the job of the Commissioner of Education, held by Martin Brumbaugh, became a very big task which gave one man far-reaching power. The first action under the Foraker Act relating to education was taken by newly appointed^^ Commissioner of Education Dr. Brumbaugh. It was he who prepared the new school law known as 'An Act to Establish a System of Public Schools in Puerto Rico.' This law was approved and its Section 18 gave the Commissioner the power to select English teachers, who were to perform all the duties that he wished to assign to them. During the time when the Foraker Act was in force, 5 Commissioners of Education held office. The appointees by the President during these years were; Martin Brumbaugh, 1900-1901; Samuel M. Lindsay, 1902-1904; Roland P. Falkner, 1904-1907; Edwin G. Dexter, 1907-June 1912; and Edward M. Bainter, July 1912 to 1915. They all generally believed that 1. The teachers in the public schools should, in great part, be Americans who are familiar with the methods, system and books of the American schools, and they should instruct the children in the English language, 2. The same system of education and the same character of books as used in American schools should be given to pupils in the public schools of Puerto Rico (Negron de Montilla 1975:35-36).

PAGE 25

11 Spanisli had been the official language of Puerto Rico up until 1898, Dr, Brumbaugh, who became Commissioner of Education in 1900, started a policy which provided for the teaching of English and Spanish as subjects beginning in the first grade. Spanish was to be used as the medium of instruction in the elementary grades 1 through 8 while English was to be the medium of instruction in the secondary grades 9 through 12 Spanish was to be taught as a special subject in the secondary grades. Commissioner Brumbaugh stated in a report that public schools were to be named in honor of Washington, Franklin, Johnson, Webster, Peabody, Hamilton, and other fam.ouS' Americans. Every school was named either in honor of the great Spanish explorers, Columbus and Ponce de Leon, or in honor of the great American statesmen, Brumbaugh had one major preoccupation, that of instilling good Americanisni in the children of Puerto Rico. The raising of the flag was the symbol that the school had commenced. Pupils sang 'America, '.The Star-Spangled Banner, and other patriotic American songs. Washington's Birthday became a legal holiday. Flag Day was also an important day, which was celebrated with speeches and recitations, patriotic songs, marches, etc. Unfortunately, American holidays were given more importance on the island than any local celebration and, in spite of growing protest, still are, to some extent. In Brximbaugh's report the first glimpses of dissatisfaction among Puerto Rican teachers are evident The native

PAGE 26

12 teachers objected to the English Supervisor who at the outset knew no Spanish. There were mutual mi sunder standings. The motives of the English Supervisor were questioned and much friction arose. The insecurity of the teachers in their jobs came to be another problem. However, on the day after Commissioner Brxambaugh ended his term of office on November 15, 1901, his biography appeared on the front page of the Puerto Rican Herald along with the following eulogy of his work in Puerto Rico. Notwithstanding early criticism to Brumbaugh's administration, the organ of the Federal Party stated that: he had a deep interest in the intellectual progress of the island. From the time of his arrival he labored strenuously. for the diffusion of education. He reconstructed the Department of Education out of the ruins which he found; through the failures of Eaton and Clark in company with Valle Atiles and Degetau (sic) . The Commissioner is an American who has won for the nation affection and sympathy, while others, in other times, did their best by their injustice and cruelty to render the new sovereignty odious Let functionaries of this kind and of this capacity be sent to Puerto Rico and there will be an end to the sufferings of her people, to their complaints, and their tears (Negron de Montilla 1971:59-60), During the administration of Commissioner Lindsay (1902-1904) special attention was given to the administration of an annual English examination designed to improve the competence of the Puerto Rican teachers. The first Circular Letter dealing with this subject was issued on April 18, 1902. Circular Letter No. 21 reads as follows: On Saturday, July the 7th of this year, English examinations will be given in every town of the island with the purpose that everyone of you might

PAGE 27

13 show the s knowledge you have of this language. The grade that you will get will be written on the Certificates which will be granted to you for the next school year. It is for sure that the grade you get in a language as important as English will be accounted for by the School Board when the time comes to select teachers, and because I have the conviction that you will understand it also, I hope that all will present themselves to take this examination (Negron de iMontilla 1971:71). This letter caused great discomfort among the English teachers of Puerto Rico, who feared losing their jobs. During Lindsay's term, following the pattern set by his predecessor, American holidays were used as a means of building good 'patriotic feelings.' In Circular Letter No. 83, dated May 12, 1904, it is stated that 'Every effort should be made to have Memorial Day fittingly observed as a patriotic holiday' (Negron de Montilla 1971:37) In contrast, Circular Letter No. 11, dated October 15, 1903, referring to the anniversary of the discovery of Puerto Rico, said that some recognition of this day should occur in public schools. I do not think it advisable that we should have any elaborate exercises at that time and no special program will be issued by the Department. Exercises should be of a historical character making specially prominent the life and discoveries of Columbus (Negron de Montilla 1971:87). Commissioner Falkner (1904-1907) tried to improve the situation and made proposals such as having reading materials translated into Spanish and adapting them to Puerto Rican settings. But he also made many mistakes which caused much unhappiness and brought about a lot of criticism on the island. In an arricle evaluating the work of the early

PAGE 28

14 Coinmissioners of Education, Gonzalez Ginorio states that Commissioner Falkner committed two errors, one of which was the establishment of English as a medium of instruction. It was Falkner, a man of wide learning and a renowned statistical expert, but not an educator, who delayed the progress of the islands' schools, committing two errors. The first was to propose and obtain legislation creating a new type of teacher, called preparatory teacher. The second error was the initiation of the teaching of all subjects in English. To oblige the teachers to do all the teaching in English, meant limiting them to a reduced vocabulary, which only permitted a determined number of questions by reason of slight knowledge and infoinnation on the means of instruction. The result was that the teacher had to resort to the textbook and become its slave. (Negr6n de Montilla 1971:110) Luis Munoz Souf front, who was for many years President of the Teacher's Association, makes the same reference to Falkner s errors : English was taught since the first grade, according to the plan established by Commissioner Falkner in 1905. This constituted a violation of the most elementary pedagogical principles. School work was thus hard, monotonous and unpleasant for the child whose only medium of communication was Spanish, and to the teacher whose knowledge of the English language was so limited that it reduced extremely the effectiveness of the teaching process. (Negr6n de Montilla 1971:110) On August 9, 1907, Edwin Dexter assumed the duties of Commissioner of EducationFour days after his oath, he issued the first Circular Letter relating to the teaching of the English language. One sentence in this Circular Letter that had a particular significance was, 'Failure on the part of teachers to pass the coming examination may result in a suspension from duty' (Negr6n de Montilla 1971:117).

PAGE 29

15 Under Commissioner Dexter, school celebrations continued to have particular significance. Even though the 4th of July was not a date within the school calendar, the children celebrated the event dressed in red, white and blue Memorial Day in 1908 fell on a Saturday, so teachers were told that they had to emphasize the day by giving appropriate exercises. These were to be based on the lives and deeds of American leaders in Peace and War. In the whole list of school holidays the Three Kings Day, or Epiphany, which is the main Christmas celebration on the island, was not listed as such. Teachers were not to expect pupils to come to school but had to be there themselves to fill registers and to take care of any students who might come. Commissioner Paul Miller introduced the third major change in 1916. Spanish became the language of instruction in grades 1-4, both English and Spanish in grade 5, and English in the remaining grades 6-12. The study of both English and Spanish as subjects continued in both the elementary and high school. Juan B. Huyke, whose term as Commissioner of Education was one of the longest in the history of the Department of Education, 1921 30, was heavily criticized for his open claim when he declared, 'Our schools are agencies of Americanism. They must implant the spirit of America within the hearts of our children' (Negrcn de Montilla 1971:181) He pushed the teaching of English more than any other

PAGE 30

16 Commissioner. All high school seniors were obliged to pass an oral English examination before they were given diplomas. Regulations issued by the Department made English the required language at teachers' meetings and suggested that conversations between pupils and teachers should be in English. Double time was given to English in the rural schools. All official documents addressed to the teachers were required to be in English. Any teacher 'unable or unwilling to teach in English may be asked to resign* (Negron de Montilla 1971:259). Students reacted negatively to statements such as the one made by Commissioner Huyke at the University of Puerto Rico (1922) when he advised all those who were not in agreement with the educational policies of the Department not to apply as teachers because 'though I cannot take your diplomas away. .... I assure you that I won't contract any teacher who does not think as the Department thinks (Negron de Montilla 1971:261). When the Teacher's Association opposed him openly, his power began to decline. When Huyke chose not to be available for a third term and Dr. Jose Padin was appointed as his successor in the year 1930, the first 30 years of the educational system under the Am.erican flag came to an end. Dr. Aida Negron de Montilla (1971:262-63) summarizes the importance of this period of 30 years in the Americanization process of Puerto Rico and comes to the following conclusions :

PAGE 31

17 1. The public school system in Puerto Rico played a significant role in the process of the Americanization of Puerto Rico. 2. The Commissioners of Education utilized the public school system in their attempts to Americanize Puerto Rico. 3. Americanization, as understood by the various Commissioners of Education, meant molding the minds of the Puerto Rican children and inspiring them with the American spirit, transmitting to Puerto Ricans the spirit and ideals of the American people, and extending to Puerto Rico the American ideals of government, of conduct, and of life. In 1934, Dr. Jose Padin introduced the fourth major change. Spanish became the language of instruction in the elementary level (grades 1-8) and he doubled the time devoted to English as a subject from 45 to 90 minutes in the seventh and eighth grades. Dr. Jose Gallardo in 1937 introduced a fifth major change. In an effort to integrate both languages, some subjects were taught in Spanish and others were taught in English. The final outcome was instruction in the vernacular in the elementary school. But after 4 decades of Ajnerican control, the majority of Puerto Ricans were still illiterate. Even though education was ::ompulsory, only half of the school age population was in school.

PAGE 32

18 In 1947, Commissioner Mariano Villaronga made a sixth major attempt to deal with the language problem on the island. He made Spanish the mediTom of instruction at all levels in the public school system. In 1948, he initiated the English Program which is in effect today. The Villaronga policy was said to be the culmination of a long struggle for settling the language issue that caused Puerto Rican education so many setbacks It became obvious that Spanish must be the medium of instruction for all Puerto Ricans and English a second language because of the political ties with the United States. Spanish has continued to be the medium of instruction in all the grades of the public school system and English has remained as a subject for all grades from the first grade to second year of college. At present, there is no doubt that the system of public education in Puerto Rico recognizes the importance of English on the island owing to the unique relation between the island and the mainland, the constant exchange of persons between these 2 countries the greater use of English in the mass media and the need to communicate with other people from other English-speaking countries. In view of this, the Department of Education has outlined several goals for the teaching of English on the island which are part of the Philosophy of the English Program 1. To develop in all students the necessary skills for communication with their fellow citizens in

PAGE 33

19 the United States, with English speakers of the Caribbean, and speakers of English from other parts of the world, 2. To develop in all students skills of reading in English which will prepare them to acquire information and knowledge as well as for the enjoyment of literature itself. 3. To promote a greater understanding among the Puerto Rican people, the American people, and others through the study of the culture of English speakers 4. To equip the Puerto Rican student to participate more gainfully in the economic development of the country and 5. To equip him for living in the United States and other English speaking countries. Paquita Viflas de Vazquez C1973) Director of the English Program of the Department of Education, summarizes the work done to reach the above goals and to help solve the problems related to the teaching of English in Puerto Rico 1. To alleviate the problem of teacher shortage, in 1968, with the help of the United States government funds, the English Program started several teacher -training projects, such as the Bilingual Teacher's Program which has had excellent results on the island. As a result of this workstudy program which started in 1969, more than

PAGE 34

20 1000 provisional teachers are teaching in grades 1 through 3, thus beginning the departmentalization of the primary level. 2. The Adult Program of the Department of Education started its English Progr am for Adults in 1953 Since then over 120,000 adults including secretaries, sales clerks, hotel employees, farm laborers, policemen, etc^ have profitted from, the English courses offered from these programs. Some of these are Conversational English courses, the teaching of English through TV, the teaching of English to farm laborers at their place of employment, and a course on North American culture. 3. In coordination with the English Program for Adults, night courses in Conversational English are being organized for parents. Also being formulated are future courses that will provide parents with the basic skills to enable them to help their children with school work. This activity is expected to result in improved scholastic achievement by the students. 4. A Technical Assistance Project for the 1977-78 school year provided for a census on an islandwide basis to identify school districts and individual schools with the greatest concentration of students who can benefit from the bilingual education projects. This census is being

PAGE 35

21 implemented by the Department of Education's Center of Programming and Information. 5. Zone supervisors have been assigned to work directly on the local level with the approximately 7,000 teachers teaching English in the public schools in the first through twelfth grade. These zone supervisors have considerable experience teaching English and have graduate degrees in Linguistics, English as a Second Language, Supervision, etc. Coordinating the work of zone supervisors, providing consultant services to the local school organizations, and channeling new materials to the zone supervisors and teachers are the regional zone supervisors: two each assigned to the regional offices of Arecibo, Ponce, Mayaguez, Caguas and Humacao, and four to San Juan. In a report prepared by the personnel of the Bilingual Education Projects of the Department of Education of Puerto Rico (June 22, 1978), there is mention of how the Department of Education has developed programs that serve the needs of students who have returned to Puerto Rico from the United States During the 1978 school year, beginning in January, two projects that focus on bilingual education from a new point of view were organized. Emphasis is being given to bilingual training on the elementary school level, from kindergarten to the sixth grade. These projects are not merely corrective but also preventive. Their primary purpose is to develop in the participants the communication skills in English

PAGE 36

22 to enable them to do well in school and in the social systems of the United States. A basic ingredient in the new projects is the use of bilingual teachers, aides who serve as models in the use of English^ during the experiences students are exposed to in their areas of study: mathematics, sciences, art, music, physical education and social studies. Studies are enriched with aspects of Puerto Rican and the United States history and culture as the locales of each of the languages being used.

PAGE 37

CHAPTER TWO METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE STUDY 2.1 Introduction The studies and reports which pertain to language attitudes in current sociolinguistic literature fall into three major categories: 1. those dealing with language-oriented or languagedirected attitudes; 2 those dealing with community-wide stereotyped impressions toward particular languages or language varieties (and, in some cases, their speakers, functions, etc,) and, 3. those concerned with the implementation of different types of language attitudes. (Agheyisi and Fishm.an 1970:141) Studies in the first category report primarily on evaluations or ratings of language or language variables as being 'rich' or 'poor,' 'beautiful' or 'ugly,' 'sweet and smooth sounding' or 'harsh.' Studies in the second major category are generally concerned with the social significance of language or language varieties, attitudes towards speakers of situationally peculiar or appropriate language varieties, attitudes towards speakers of different languages in multilingual settings, and the like. 23

PAGE 38

24 The third category comprises studies dealing with all kinds of language behavior, or behavior towards language, resulting, at least in part, from specific attitudes or beliefs. Major topics in this category include: language choice and usage, language reinforcement and planning, language learning, and so on. Some of the most frequently quoted studies and a few others of relevance to the Puerto Rico English as a Second Language study will be the main concern of this chapter. The subject of attitudes toward learning a second language has recently been much discussed in the literature. It has been stated in many studies that different kinds of motivation to learn a target language may produce different rates and ultimate levels of proficiency. Gardner (1972a:199) speaks of an integrative orientation, which can be taken to mean a high level of drive on the part of the individual to acquire the language of a valued second language community in order to facilitate communciation with that group. An instrumental orientation, on the other hand, is known to be a desire to acquire someone else's language system in order to use that language to achieve other goals such as material advantages, a better job, or a better education. Gardner and Lambert (197 2a: 24) also mention the fact that several studies have shown that measures of motivation and attitudes toward the second language community account for more of the variance in continuing versus dropping the course than does language aptitude.

PAGE 39

25 The questions that seem relevant at this point are: 1. What features of a group give its language high prestige? Nader (1968:279) suggests that 'the prestige factor which may encourage admiration, borrowing or emulation in language need not be related to the affluent position of one group or another, or of one individual or another.' 2. To what extent do responses to aural stimuli, such as matched guise or mirror image responses, reflect attitudes toward a language as a symbol of a group and to what extent do they reflect attitudes toward the language itself? Responses have typically been interpreted as representing reactions to groups (and thus to language as a symbol) However, there may be present in these responses a component of attitudes toward the language itself. 3. What are the circTimstances under which a language comes to be negatively evaluated by its speakers? Conversely, what are the circumstances under which speakers who formally devalued their language come to revalue it positively? 4. Do indirect measures of attitude (i.e., measures whose purpose is not apparent to the respondent) have higher validities than direct measures? (Cooper and Fishman 1974:8-11). Lambert (1967:94) claims that the matched guise

PAGE 40

26 technique 'appears to reveal judges' more private reactions to the constrating group than direct attitude questionnaires do, but much more research is needed to adequately assess its power in this regard.' In recent research on the identification of linguistic attitudes^ Williams (1976:5) claims that 'many types of measures have obscured the concept of linguistic attitude in that they have focused more upon the attitudes being evaluated than they have lent insight into the psychological responses of the perceiver. In briefer terms, attitude is a response predisposition. 2.2 Attitude Studies Concerning Speech Style and Social Evaluation 2.2.1 General Studies A person's social identity involves self -evaluation which derives from being a member of a specific group. A group's evaluative attachment to its membership is reflected in its feelings about its speech style. For instance, the Quebecois, Mexican-Americans, and American Blacks until quite recently had a relatively negative social identity which was reflected in the evaluations they made of their own distinctive speech styles. (Giles and Powesland 1975:19) It has beerfound in Quebec, among Franco-Americans in Maine, and in Wales (Taylor, Bassili and Aboud, 197 3; Giles, Taylor, Lambert and Bourhis, 197 4) that ethnic group members identify more closely with someone who shares their cultural background. For instance, Welsh bilinguals would consider themselves more similar to an Englishman who spoke Welsh than

PAGE 41

27 to a Welshman who spoke only English. It appears to be that one's verbal behavior is a truer reflection of one's ethnic allegiance than one's cultural heritage, or so it is perceived by others. The reason as Giles states it is a valuable one in that one has no choice over one's ethnicity in terms of heritage, but one can expect more control over which language variety one can learn and use in addition to the mother tongue. The matched guise technique was first developed by Lambert and his colleagues at McGill University, and since 1960 there have been several studies in which the technique has been used to measure group evaluation reactions to particular languages (or language varieties) and their representative speakers. The studies have involved such languages as: French, English, Hebrew, Arabic, Tagalog, Welsh, etc., dialects and speech varieties (accented and unaccented English) as well as racial (e.g., Negro vs White) and religious populations (Canadian, Protestant, and Roman Catholic) within some of the above language groups. This technique requires that selected groups or judges evaluate the personality traits of speakers whose taperecorded voices are played to them. The recorded voices are generally those of individuals who because of their nativelike speaking ability in the two languages or varieties represented, have each recorded translated versions of the same text. The fact is, of course, concealed from the judges who believe that each language or variety is spoken

PAGE 42

28 by a different speaker. There must be an adequate control of every other variable in the experimental situation, such as the voice quality of speaker, content of text, and most especially, personality of speaker. The judge's evaluations must be prompted by his general reactions to the speakers of that particular language, rather than by his reaction to the specific speaker in the experimental situation. A special adaptation of the matched guise technique was used by Kimple (1969). He called it the 'mirror image' technique, and used it to measure how bilinguals interpret the use of different languages. Two different conversations were used, each involving a special set of role relations, setting or location, and topic. Bilingual interlocutors made recordings of each of the conversations in each of their languages, and from the two sets of recordings, four different versions of each of the original conversations were made, preserving the original role relations, setting and topic, but making the following changes in language: 1. All characters spoke in language A for the entire length of the conversations; 2. Some of the characters spoke in language A for particular role relations, and in language B in others ; 3 All the characters spoke in language B for the entire length of the conversations; 4. A mirror image of (2) i.e., the role relations that were originally associated with language 3 were

PAGE 43

29 then used in language A. Four sets of judges, each set listening to only one version of each conversation were then asked to indicate on questionnaires the following: a. The role relationship of the speakers (e.g., mother-son as opposed to husband-wife) ; b. The setting of the conversations (where they took place) ; c. Manifest content (the surface events of the story) ; d. Social and latent content (the occupational status of the speakers) ; e. The appropriateness of language usage. The results of this study suggest most fiirmly that speakers do have certain systematic notions about language with respect to factors such as topic, role-relation, and setting, and that these factors operate in varying degrees to arouse stereotyped impressions about speakers. Lambert (1967) in his theoretical review of the work using the matched guise technique, showed how listener's personality judgments from voice, even though they may be objectively inaccurate, were particularly valuable as a measure of group biases in evaluative reactions. Lambert and his associates set about investigating how each group perceived the other in evaluative, personality terms. They (Lambert, Hodgson, Gardner, and Fillenbaum, 1960) asked two groups of university students, French-Canadian (FC) and English-Canadian (EC) to rate four male bilingual speakers reading the same two and a half minute passage of prose

PAGE 44

30 once in English and once in French, on fourteen bipolaradjective, six-point rating scales. The subjects were led to believe that they were actually eight different personalities. This procedure was the first use of the matched guise technique. The results indicated that both groups of judges rated the speakers more favorably in their English guises than in their corresponding French guises. The EC subjects viewed their own group as superior to the French group, and the FC group seemed to have adopted the inferior position assigned to them by the majority culture around them. Angle j an and Tucker (197 3) studied the state of the French language in Quebec from a sociolinguistic perspective. French is today the mother tongue of more than 5 million Canadians, 7 5% of whom live in the province of Quebec. English is rapidly replacing French as the language of the French ethnic group in all areas other than Quebec In Quebec, the high proportion of French Canadians plus the strong retention of French in the province has served to maintain the position of French as one of Canada's two official languages and to provide an important shield against linguistic and cultural assimilation. Angle j an and Tucker studied the sociolinguistic correlates of speech style of French Canadians born and raised in Quebec. A group of teachers and students at the high school level were selected as subjects. The control group were factory workers who were less language conscious.

PAGE 45

31 Students were from the working class and the lower middle class A questionnaire with 4 0 multiple choice and semantic differential items was used. A pilot study determined the appropriateness of questions. Questions focused on: subject'-E awareness of speech style differences; importance they attributed to language; and awareness of government language policy. As a complementary measure, subjects were asked to evaluate the speech style of 12 speakers and to indicate preferable occupational status — their being four lower class and four upper class French-Canadians and four French speakers. A sample of free speech was selected so as not to control syntax and lexical items The results demonstrated that teachers in each setting showed relatively more awareness of variation (90% answered positively) than did students (85%) or workers (75%) when asked if they noticed that certain people in their own community speak a style of French different from their own. All groups showed a preference for the educated FC speech model. All groups evidenced difficulty in understanding Europeans and all groups reported some degree of difficulty making them.selves understood by Europeans. All were conscious that the French spoken in Quebec did need improvement. French-Canadians, on the whole, tend to model their speech on those with whom they identify.

PAGE 46

32 iMarkel, Eisler, and Reese (1967) demonstrated in similar studies that United States regional dialects ase-.a significant factor in judging personality from speech style. Tucker (1968) reported that speakers of American English were viewed more favorably than speakers of Filipino English or Tagalog by listeners in the Philippines. Labov (1966) found that upwardly mobile people tend to adopt the linguistic style of the socio-economic group just above their own. Tucker (1968) carried out similar work in the Philippines where English can be regarded as having superior status to the many local languages, including the somewhat prestigious language, Tagalog. Tucker required a group of Tagalog listeners to rate three types of taped speakers on 12 personality traits. The stimulus speakers were native American, local Filipino-accented American and Tagalog speakers. The last two voices were presented by the same speakers using the matched guise technique. The results indicated that the Tagalog listeners rated the American voices more favorably than the Filipino-accented voices on 11 out of 12 scales, and the latter more favorably than the Tagalog speakers on four scales. Tucker (1968:57) summarizes his results in the following manner: The general downgrading of Filipino Tagalog relative to American English and to Filipino English probably represent harsh economic reality. In the Philippines social mobility now depends upon the acquisition*" of skills in English. Higher education, better employment opportunities and travel abroad are easily accessible only to those who possess the necessary

PAGE 47

33 skills in English. The subjects, all prospective teachers, were particularly sensitive to these facts of life. It is not all surprising, therefore, that the Filipino-Tagalog speakers, were downgraded expecially on those rating scales relevant to success and advancement. What is more surprising is that this downgrading also extended to the more personal characteristics. There may exist then, not only an acceptance of economic reality but also a type of ethnic inferiority complex. Anisfeld and Lambert (1972) have shown that the listener's language background is another factor affecting evaluation of personality from speech. These authors used ten-year-old monolingual and bilingual French-Canadians, who were instructed to listen to tape recordings of children's voices, some in English and some in French, from children of the same age. Children then rated each speaker's personality on 15 different traits. Differences were found in the stereotypes held by these two groups of children such that French-speaking monolinguals upgraded the personalities of the FC speakers on all traits, whereas txhe bilinguals tended to see fewer differences between the personalities of French and English speakers. The results indicate that, unlike college age students, FC bilingual children at the age of ten do not have a negative bias against their own group. Lambert (19 67:59-6 0) comments with regard to evaluative reactions of spoken language that, 'The type and strength of Lmpressions of the speakers — their sex, age, the dialect they use, and very likely the social class background as this is revealed in speech style affects the

PAGE 48

34 reaction of the listener. The impression also seems to depend on characteristics of the audience of judges^-their age, sex, socio-economic background, their bilinguality and their own speech style. Bourhis, Giles, and Taj f el (1973) designed a matched guise study to determine how different groups of Welshmen perceived members of their own group to adopt various speech styles. Three groups of Welshmen acted as listener-subject; (1) Welsh-English bilinguals, (2) tiaose who were learning the Welsh language and (3) those who neither could speak the language nor were learning it. These subjects were given a questionnaire taping their social and language attitudes in order to validate their assignments to groups. As their reported ability to use Welsh declined significantly across the three groups, so also did their ability to speak English, their use of Welsh at work and at home, and their dissatisfaction v/ith the government s handling of Welsh autonomy. It was found that the learners of Welsh had significantly more of a Welsh accent in their English than either the Welsh bilinguals or the non-learners of Welsh. The authors suggest that a Welshman is able to assert his Welsh identity by making an effort to learn his national language and uses the Welsh accent to emphasize this identity until such a time as it can be replaced by the language itself

PAGE 49

35 All three groups of listeners were asked to evaluate the personalities of varioias Welshmen they would hear on tapes. They were told that those speakers who were bilingual chose to read the standard passage of prose in Welsh while those who could speak only English would read it in that language. Actually the passages were read by the same two male bilinguals in each of the following guises: in Welsh, in English, in English with an RP (received pronunciation) accent, and in English with a South Welsh accent. All groups upgraded the Welsh language speaker on most traits. However, the Welsh language speakers on tape were rated the most nationalistic and patriotic of all. These results suggest that the Welsh have a favorable image of themselves as a group: they do not appear to seek the prestigious English RP mode of speaking. Even these Welshmen who express doubts about the value of speaking Welsh nevertheless acceed to this view. There is some evidence that language and speech style are closely bound up with feelings of group identity. For example, Taylor, Bassili, and Aboud (1973) showed that French Canadians perceive English Canadians who spoke mainly French as more similar to themselves than the FC or EC who spoke mainly English. Equivalent criteria of identity were found for bilingual Franco-Americans by Giles, Taylor, Lambert and Albert (in press) and for Welshmen by Giles, Taylor and Bourhis (1974) There are also indications that speech style is becoming an

PAGE 50

36 increasingly important dimension of ethnic identity for Black Americans. Bourhis, Giles, Taj f el and Taylor (1974) have proposed that the more positively a group views its own identity, the greater will be the range of social situations in which it is acceptable for members of the group to use the speech style peculiar to it. A group with very positive self-esteem will feel able to use its characteristic speech style in most social situations. In contrast, a group with feelings of inferiority will restrict its particular speech style to very informal situations. In the more formal situations, it will feel obliged to use the group's language varieties. Bourhis, Giles and Lambert (1975) have shown that Welshmen, a group with a supposedly positive self-esteem, have a favorable attitude concerning the broadening of the Welsh accent in English by one of their own group in a public radio interview. French Canadians, however, a group thought to have low self-esteem, do not upgrade an in-group speaker on affective dimensions when he emphasizes his ethnic accent in a comparable situation. Obviously, the complexity of the interrelationship between language variety and ethnic identity is very great, and more research is needed before an adequate theoretical framework can be constructed. The results of a study related to the speech of Mexican-American children which also included the speech of Blacks was reported by Natalicio and Williams (1972) in an attempt to assess which characteristics of the speech

PAGE 51

37 of Black and MexicanAmerican children (grades K-2} could be reliably evaluated by experts specializing in dialect study. Tapes of ten Black and ten Mexican -American children who had responded to a set of commercially available test materials were evaluated by the experts. Evaluations for both groups were in terms of judgments (scale ratings) of language dominance, comprehension, production, phonology, intonation, inflectional endings, syntax, language pathologies and predictions of reading achievement. Results indicated high reliability of scale judgments except for ratings of intonation and language pathologies and for predictions of reading achievement. By being informed of the bases of the experts' evaluations, teachers should be able to gain some practical degree of familiarity with the special characteristics of the speech of linguistically different children and to be able to evaluate such characteristics Further research on the attitudes of Mexican -Americans towards speakers of English or Spanish was done by Bouchard, Ryan and Carranza (197 5) In one study, sixtythree Mexican-American, Black, and Anglo adolescent female subjects rated the personalities of male speakers of standard English and Mexican-American accented English. In order to demonstrate that the functional separation of speech styles would be reflected in these evaluative reactions, two speech contexts, home and school, and two sets of rating scales, status stressing and solidarity stressing.

PAGE 52

38 were employed. Although standard English speakers received more favorable ratings in every case, the differences were significantly greater in the school context than in the home context and for status ratings than for solidarity ratings. Although Carranza and Ryan (1975) found Spanish to be the preferred home language, they did not observe an overall preference of Mexican-Americans for Spanish on the solidarity scales. The lack of expected group differences in this study could be attributable to individual differences with ethnic groups. A number of personality and background characteristics (e.g., linguistic abilities, language history, degree of ethnic loyalty, ethnocentrism, and prejudice) may be relevant. Among the studies of speaker'-s attitudes towards their native language, Labov s (1966) investigation of New York is the most widely known. Labov contends that most of the informants in his survey of the speech of New York Citv have strong opinions about language "but only of those items that have risen to social consciousness.' It was common for the informants to condemn tiae language of a person, a group, or a whole city in very general terms: 'sloppy,' 'careless,' 'hurried,' 'loud,' or 'harsh.' The questions on linguistic attitudes which were used in the survey were: 1. What do you think of your own speech? 2. Have you ever tried to change your speech? What particular things about it?

PAGE 53

39 3. Have you ever taken any courses in speech? What did the teacher mention in connection with pronunciation? 4. a. What do you think of New York City speech? b. Have you traveled outside of New York City? If so, did people pick you out as a New Yorker by your speech? c. Do you think that out-of-towners like New York City speech? Why? d. What do you think of Southern speech as compared to New York City speech? e. Have you heard Mayor Wagner talk? As far as his speech is concerned, not his politics, but his way of talking, hew do you like it? (Same question for Rockefeller) Which do you like better? 5. Going back to the time v/hen you were growing up, I'd like to get some idea of the kind of speech that your friends used. Were most of your friends (same race or religion as informant) ? Did you have any friends who were (other races and religions) ? 6. (If time pemits, probe any other incidents where speech was a factor in disagreements of the group.) (Labov 1966) When the informants were asked if they had traveled outside of New York City, and if they had been recognized as New Yorkers by their speech, those who had left the city said they were recognized at times as New Yorkers by the evidence of their speech alone. Three-quarters of the lower class and working class informants reported that they had been recognized as New Yorkers, but only half of the middle class informants reported this. Immediately after the question of recognition, the subjects were asked if people who lived outside of the city liked New York City speech, and why these outsiders felt as

PAGE 54

40 they did. Two-thirds of the New York City respondents thought that outsiders did not like New York City speech. Only three thought that the speech of the city v/as looked on with interest or approval of outsiders; the balance thought that the outsiders were neutral, or did not care much one way or the other. Labov also analyzed the attitudes of New York respondents toward New York speech. He claims that when most New Yorkers say that outsiders dislike New York City speech, they are describing an attitude which is actually their own. 'Whether or not their opinion about outsiders views is a projection of their own feelings. New Yorkers show a general hostility towards New York City speech which emerges in countless ways. The term 'linguistic self-hatred' is not too extreme to apply to the situation which emerges from the interviews' (Labov 1966:488-89). Only 14 New Yorkers expressed themselves favorably towards New York City speech; 9 were neutral; and 23 expressed dislike quite plainly. The terms which New Yorkers apply to the speech of the city give some indication of the violence of these reactions. "It's terrible.* 'Distorted,' 'Terribly careless.* '"Sloppy.* 'It's horrible.' Men seem to express less of this attitude than women. Labov presents the differences in linguistic attitudes of speakers based on their sex, social class, ethnic

PAGE 55

41 identity, and age. In comparing the sexes, Labov found that outsiders dislike New York speech, but women were more consistent in this feeling. Women showed much greater linguistic insecurity than men in all cases. In relation to class differences, Labov points out how the linguistic goal of most middle class speakers is to lose all resemblance to New Yorkers; almost all of them stated that they would be complimented if someone told them they did not sound like New Yorkers. With regard to New Yorkers attitude towards their own speech, Labov found that the working class showed the smallest percentage of respondents who reacted negatively. Working class speakers showed the least linguistic insecurity. It was the middle class speakers who tried to change t he ir 1 anguage In examining the results based on ethnic differences, the Jews were shown to have a greater tendency to think that outsiders disliked New York City speech, and to dislike it themselves. The Italians were almost unanimous in their report that they had been recognized as New Yorkers. Both groups showed equal dislike of their own speech, and an equal effort to change it. While most white New Yorkers thought that outsiders disliked New York City speech, almost all the Negroes who expressed an opinion thought that out-of-town residents did not dislike the speech of the city. While most white New Yorkers showed negative attitudes towards the New York

PAGE 56

42 speech patterns themselves, only three out of 20 Negro respondents expressed this opinion, and nine reported that they liked it. In the limited data available, Labov found no differences by age in the respondents reports of being recognized as New Yorkers, nor in their views of outsiders' evaluations of New York City speech. "The younger respondents did not seem to have absorbed as much negative feeling about New York City speech as the older subjects' (Labov 1966:498). Labov also reported that the younger people made more efforts to change their language than any other age group. The overall feeling about New York City speech is seen to be 'one of a profound linguistic insecurity which is connected with a long standing pattern of negative prestige for New York City speech' (Labov 1966:500). Wolfram (1973) in his continued studies of social dialects in American society, also studied Puerto Rican English (PRE) the English spoken by second generation Puerto Rican teenage males living predominantly in East Harlem, New York. Puerto Ricans living in East Harlem have contact with a number of other groups, especially Negroes, which accounts for some of the linguistic similarity between the two groups. Black and Puerto Rican children have considerable interaction in the schools. Wolfram demonstrates in his study how some features normally associated in northern urban areas with BE have been taken over by second generation PRE speakers, regardless of how extensive their

PAGE 57

43 contacts with Blacks may be; other characteristics show up only in the speech of those Puerto Ricans who have extensive black contacts; and, of course, there are features which might be derived historically from Spanish but that must be described synchronically as an integral part of PRE. The data represented in the study are based on the speech of 29 Puerto Rican and 15 Black teenage males from East Harlem and the Bronx. Several infomants who had considerable status among their peers and who could thus facilitate other interviews were interviewed first. Having established contacts with some of the peer leaders, Wolfram and assistants then selected informants on the basis of their acquaintance with them through informant contacts, references to other individuals from the initial interviews, and recommendations from workers who knew the informants from day to day interaction. The informants were not chosen randomly but were selected to approximate the racial distribution of the teenagers served by YDI (Youth Development Incorporated) a club-like organization in East Harlem at the time when the fieldwork was being done, August, 196 9. The use of Black English by Puerto Ricans was the main concern of the research being examined here. Puerto Ricans with extensive Black contacts tended to minimize differences that existed between the two groups. For some of the informants, there was a great deal of objective similiarity between the varieties of English used by the two groups: *An interesting assessment of the unity of Blacks and

PAGE 58

44 Puerto Ricans by members of these groups has been observed in relation to the use of Spanish in peer group situations. Several informants cited the fact the Blacks learn to speak Spanish^ CWolf ram 1973 : 37) In conclusion, it seems that, despite their perception of speech differences, Puerto Ricans with restricted Black contacts do show some influence on certain aspects of their speech. There is some phonological influence regardless of the extent of contact. There is evidence that some Puerto Ricans are not conscious of the extent to which Black speech may have influenced their own speech. Any negative reactions toward the assimilation of Black English on the part of teenagers with restricted Black contacts was clearly reinforced in the home. Many parents demanded that their children speak to them in Spanish. The use of the dialect of English known as Black English by the children aroused even a stronger reaction from the parents than did the use of the mainstream or standard English. One parent was quoted as saying, 'You can talk English, but normal English.' Parents viewed their children's acquisition of Black English features as quite insulting. Concluding remarks about the reactions of Puerto Ricans with restricted Black contacts straightforwardly portrays how they handle the ambivalence of their reactions : On the one hand, they are quite aware of the differences that exist between the two groups in a number of areas of culture, and they tend to perceive these differences in speech as in other areas. On the other hand, they are faced with

PAGE 59

45 the reality of the social situation in which it is very difficult to avoid some influence from the Black community that surrounds them. By perceiving the amount of influence on their own speech as insignificant, they do not have to deal with this limited assimilation while reacting negatively toward the amount of assimilation that takes place among their counterparts with extensive Black contacts (Wolfram 1973:43). A number of other studies based on true bilingual situations have uncovered similar language attitudes among the speakers studied. Joan Rubin studied the Spanish Guar an! situation in Paraguay (Rubin 1961) According to the 1951 census, approximately 52% of the population of Paraguay speak both Spanish and Guarani (Rubin 1961:52). Spanish was found to be used in schools, in formal situations, in speaking to government officials, and in speaking to strangers, and Guaranx is used in speaking to friends, to servants, in speaking of love, and in the confessional. Paraguayans of any class claim to prefer to use Guarani with their fellow countrymen when they were overseas regardless of what their pattern of linguistic usage was at home. Other findings from studies of solidarity done by Rubin (1961) were that: 1. In Asuncion, people tend to speak much more Spanish than anywhere else in the country because of business and educational influences. 2. The 4% monolingual Spanish speakers tend to come from the lower and interior areas In Luke called the "bedroom suburb" of Asuncion, monolingual Spanish speakers constitute 2.5% of the total population, while monolingual Guarani speakers constitute 3 5%.

PAGE 60

46 3. People in the country and smaller towns, regardless of power status, tend to speak more Guarani than Spanish. 4. Schools have traditionally required the use of only Spanish while children are in the classroom. Parents are urged to use Spanish with their children at home so that the children get more practice. 5. Men tended to use Guarani more often with other men. Women, in the upper class, tended to speak Spanish to other women more often. 6. People of the lower classes tended to use more Guarani while people of the upper class tended to use more Spanish (Rubin 1961:56-57). Attitudes towards Spanish and Quechua in bilingual Peru were studied by Wdlck (1973) The situation he found there was that Quechua, the language of the pre-colonial Inca empire, is still spoken by approximately 7 million people in Andean republics, with the bulk of the speakers in the Peruvian Andes. Of the other indigenous languages only Aymara, the closest relative to Quechua, occupies a clearly recognized slot. Trilingualism is frequent with the addition of Spanish, the country's national language. The speakers used for test stimuli were chosen from two social and two linguistic groups. Two Quechua Spanish bilinguals of different social status were used, one of whom might be called a member of the middle class. The other was a driver who had not finished secondary school. The most interesting results in relation to Quechua versus Spanish was the affective loyalty of bilingual speakers to Quechua. Spanish always received a higher ranking in the characteristics 'higher class,' 'urban,' and

PAGE 61

47 'more educated The affective rating shows a clear prefereacec for Quechua — the speaker being considered stronger, more sincere, less arrogant, and smarter than when he speaks Spanish. Results of the test indicated that by identifiable social status criteria, Quechua is stigmatized, but there is a great deal of native language loyalty shown to it. In examining the differences between groups of raters, what Wolck found was that: 1. Quechua dominant bilinguals rate Quechua speakers as less lazy, or more industrious, smarter, stronger, more honest, less arrogant, etc. 2. Stable or matched bilingualism brought about a positive evaluation for Quechua speakers on strength, ability and smartness scales. 3. Spanish dominant speakers show positive evaluation for Quechua speakers only on strength and bonito scales (Wolck 1973:139). In analyzing Quechua versus non-Quechua speakers, a jury composed of University speakers found that the Quechua Spanish bilinguals among the respondents showed a high and accurate degree of sensitivity to bilingual interference with regard to both languages, the monolinguals much less so. Ros and Giles (1977) recently did some sociolinguistic research on the multilingual context of Spain where languages other than Spanish, namely Catalan, Gallego, Basque, Valencian, and Mallorquxn, are flourishing. The bilingual situation of Valencia was the one examined in their paper.

PAGE 62

48 In the Valencian province, four distinct sociolinguistic groups can be identified: Spanish and Valencian monolingual speakers; two bilingual groups; those who speak predominantly Spanish and some Valencian; and those who speak predominantly Valencian and Spanish. The Spanish group is located mainly in the city. It includes both upper class immigrants from other provinces in Spain and those of Valencian cultural background whose attitudes toward the Valencian language are of ignorance and deprecation. They have no interest whatsoever in learning or speaking Valencian and are characterized by access to higher education and a wide range of cultural resources. The Valencian Spanish group include middle class speakers living in urban settings. They acquired mastery of Spanish through the educational system and the mass media and through interaction with Spanish or Spanish Valencian speakers. They used Spanish in most contexts and Valencian when a formal situation required it. The Valencian group includes working class speakers in urban and rural areas who have little access to education or have few opportunities for upward mobility. It was difficult to find more monolingual Valencian individuals because the majority of Valencians have access to the Spanish dominated media and therefore are able to comprehend some Spanish. The theory of speech accomodation (Giles, 1973, 1977; Giles and Powesland, 1975) is concerned with the motivations

PAGE 63

49 and social consequences which underlie changes in peoples' speech styles. A basic postulate of the theory is that people are motivated to adjust their language variety, or accomodate as a means of expressing values, attitudes, and behavior towards others. Giles proposes that the extent to which individuals shift their speech styles toward (convergence) or away from (divergence) the speech style of their interlocutors is the mechanism by which social approval or disapproval is communicated. People will reduce linguistic disimilarities between themselves and others, that is, convergence, if they desire their approval and wish to integrate with them. In analyzing the Valencian situation, it was found that the social identity of group members will become more negative or inadequate as one moves 'down' from Spanish to Spanish Valencian to Valencian Spanish to Valencian. The more prestige the members of a particular group possess, the more likely it is that they command not only the respect of a lower-ranking group but also control their own economic and political resources. In Valencia, speakers are found to converge towards the dominant language of the speaker who has a relative social and/or economic advantage. However, Valencian is considered 'prestigious' for the maintenance of a particular set of beliefs and way of life. At present, a number of individuals have begun to consider the low status assigned to the Valencian language as being unjust and unfair, and have perceived the situation to be

PAGE 64

50 potentially changeable. The time seems to be approaching when Valencians will demand, through group action institutional support, more and more exposure for their language in the mass media, religion, and the governmental domains. 2.2.2 Studies Among Teachers Frederick Williams has undertaken research into the attitudes of teachers in several regions of the United States. The Chicago research was the first major effort to capture the attitudes of teachers as a group. The semantic differential format discussed in earlier studies was used in this study. Response data from at least six teachers were obtained for each of the 80 stimulus tapes. This was accomplished by dividing the teachers into five subgroups of listeners, and by assigning 16 tapes to each subgroup. Each set of 16 tapes represented 16 subsets of the language sample (all combinations of the two levels of status, sex, race and topic) Testing took place in four one-half sessions in which four tapes were played and rated each time. Each listener was provided with a 16 page booklet of semantic differential scales, sufficient for responding to his section of the tapes. The booklet was distributed just prior to each listening session (the four tapes for a day) and collected at its conclusion. All White children, whether rated high or low in status, or by Negro or White teachers, were rated as being White. As for Negro children, nine (out of 20) were located in the high category by White teachers, but six of

PAGE 65

51 these children were also rated as being White. Of the 8 Negro children placed in the high category by Negro teachers only 2 were rated on the White half of the race scale, and just marginally so. In short, the bias in the White teachers' rating might be summarized as : sounding White is equated with high status. A point which needs to be clarified about this study is that it deals with a highly specific population and this may place restrictions on the generality of the model and the results of its application beyond the kinds of situations represented in its samples. Although both groups of teachers were relatively similar in terms of the results of status judgments. White teachers' status judgments seemed to reflect a more direct association between race and status, both in terms of judged race and the child's actual pace. The researchers say that it could probably be assumed that most of the Negro teachers through the language experiences of their childhood coupled with the language of their educational programs, had developed a sensitivity to Negro and ^fhite styles of speech and were more able than their White counterparts to differentiate levels of effectiveness and status in both styles. By contrast, the White teachers' experience with Negro speech has presumably been mostly confined to the classroom, where standardness is a key criterion. It is not unusual, then, that they exhibited judgmental behavior more tied to a child's actual race, and to

PAGE 66

52 perceptions of race, in their status evaluations of speech and language. The Naremore (1971) study of teacher differences emerged from the above mentioned Chicago studies. The specific aim of the investigation was to try to find out "to what extent could the teachers be grouped together in terms of commonality in their attitudinal responses and also to see to what extent could they be contrasted and compared in teacher characteristics, child characteristics, rating scale characteristics, and selected characteristics of the speech samples themselves' (Williams 1975:41-42). The data from the Chicago study were used for analysis here. The conclusions arising from the results of the study were summarized in the following manner: 1. To what extent can teachers be grouped in terms of the commonality of their attitudinal responses to children's speech? The present analysis yielded 4 types of teachers, differing from one another in various dimensions of judgment. 2. To what extent can groups of teachers be contrasted and compared in terms of teacher characteristics, child characteristics, rating scale characteristics of the children's speech? Three conclusions of the present study relate to this question. First, the teacher types found in this study were divided, both between and within types, roughly along lines of teacher race. Second, the teacher types differed in kinds of judgments they made and in the accuracy of those judgments across different kinds of children and different semantic differential scales. Third, pronunciation deviations and pausal phenomena were correlates of the subjective ratings for all teacher types, but teacher types differed, roughly along lines of race, in the correlations between subjective judgments and qualitative versus quantitative variables in the children's speech (Williams 1971:50).

PAGE 67

53 The Texas Research, another of Williams' projects, was brought about by the need to answer a number of questions that were left unanswered after obtaining the results of the Chicago research. The main questions which arose were: 1. Could dialect attitudes be associated with expectations of pupils performance in particular subject matter areas? 2. The issue of whether the two-factor judgmental model of confidence-eagerness and ethnicitynonstandardness would emerge with videotapes and with different populations of teachers and pupils. If the model were obtained, how would judgments vary as a function of teacher experience and ethnicity? 3. To what degree might a teacher simply report her attitudinal predispositions in evaluating a child from a particular ethnic group, rather than carefully evaluating the details of what is presented for assessment? (Williams 1971:51-52) Teachers from schools selected within central Texas evaluated speech samples of Black, Anglo, and MexicanAmerican children sampled from middle and low status homes. Although the emphasis in the main study was on Anglo and Black teachers. Miller (1972) undertook a detailed analysis of the Mexican-American teachers, comparing them with a matched group of Anglo teachers. The first portion of the main Texas study is an account of ways in which teachers differentiated the performance. Language evaluation could be included as part of the teacher training process. A number of further studies were motivated from the results of the Texas and Chicago projects. Using the same language samples as were employed in the Chicago study,

PAGE 68

54 Williams and Shamo (.1972) compared the ratings of the Chicago teachers on the scale 'sounding disadvantaged* with ratings by teachers in Memphis, Tennessee. Ethnic stereotyping was further studied by Williams, Whitehead and Miller (1971) in a design where ratings of the same standard English audio samples were compared when matched with varying images of a Black, White, and MexicanAmerican child. A study by Williams and Miller (1971) examined the effects of a dialect switching of a mature Black and a Mexican-American speaker relative to ratings of both of these speakers in terms of language and personality traits. Hopper and Williams (1973) employed a semantic differential scaling approach to assess interviewers' attitudes toward speech representative of prospective employees. Such attitudes were then used in an attempt to predict hiring decisions In examining the studies as a whole as discussed by Williams, we find that: 1. the particular ratings that a child receives are probably closely related to the nature of the speech situation. 2. In almost all cases, the child's speech represented a language style that he might bring to bear when a high degree of standard English is expected in a semi-formal situation. In the Chicago study, it was the conversation with a linguistic field worker; in the Texas studies it was conversation with a person presented to them as a teacher. 3. The strategy used in most of the projects previously discussed can be used in many other areas of investigation of types of speakers, speech situations, and listeners.

PAGE 69

55 The overall strategy to be used if we are investigating the linguistic attitudes in some particular situation where populations of speakers, speech and listeners may be sampled has been simimarized by Williams as : 1. sampling representative language samples from the situation. 2. eliciting free discussion from representatives of the listener population in response to those language samples 3. developing prototype semantic differential instruments and gaining pilot data in ratings of speech samples. 4. analyzing listeners' use of the scales to determine if there are basic dimensions of evaluations, and 5. applying a refined instr\iment in the analysis of varieties of speech found in that particular situation. 2.3 Studies of the Linguistic Attitudes of Students 2.3.1 The Louisiana, Maine and Connecticut Studies: American Students Studying French The Montreal students begin their formal training in French in the elementary schools and with due application can develop high-level skills by the end of their high school years enabling them to be able to interact smoothly with members of the other language community. Gardner and Lambert (1972c) suggest that perhaps environmental supports such as frequent interaction with native French speakers are necessary for the integrative-instrumental distinction to have a relevance. In order to test this suggestion, Lambert and Gardner extended their study to the United States, first examining

PAGE 70

56 groups of non-French high school students studying French The regions selected for their study were one community in Louisiana, another in Maine, and a third in Connecticut The first two they saw as being interesting to compare because in Maine there was an active minority subculture of French Americans, making it somewhat similar to the bicultural Quebec scene. Louisiana also had a reputation of having a French American subculture of some importance and, even though they had doubts about its state of vitality, Gardner and Lambert realized that the non-French community would very likely have a relatively clear stereo type of French people and the French ways of life. Thus the Louisiana and Maine sites were meant to be somewhat like the Montreal community with regard to students having personal experience with French people as they begin their study of French. The choice of Connecticut was meant to be a stiffer test because there the reference group for high school students studying French should be more vague, possibly based on stereotypes of France and its peoples. In all three studies English speaking American students who were studying French were tested for their attitudes towards French speakers. The measuring instruments were over 50 separate tests or indices. In the 3 studies, the results are evidence that students with a strong motivation and desire to learn French obtained good grades in their French courses at

PAGE 71

57 school. There was apparently a different social or attitudinal foundation for this motivation. In Louisiana, the motivation appeared to derive from a strong parental encouragement and personal satisfaction for the student himself in his attempts to learn the language. In Maine, the motivation was apparently fostered by the student s identification with his French teacher and depended in part on being sensitive to the feelings of other people. In Connecticut the strong motivation to learn French seemed to stem from the student's integrative orientation toward the study of the language as well as a realization of the potential usefulness of the language. 2.3.2 FrenchAmerican Students Studying French Gardner and Lambert (1972:59ff) also wanted to investigate how members of a linguistic minority group in the United States approached the learning of "their own" language at school. FrenchAmerican high school students in the same Louisiana and Maine communities they had previously surveyed were used as subjects. The Maine students had a mean of 9.91 years of French instruction in their schools while the Louisiana students had only 1.05. In the Maine area study, courses in French started at grade 1 whereas in the Louisiana public schools they started at grade 10. In comparing French-American and American students Gardner and Lambert (95-96) found that the Maine group of French-American students were far superior to the Louisiana

PAGE 72

58 group in French proficiency. French-Americans are more authoritarian and ethnocentric than American students and, although more sympathetic to the French-American culture, they nevertheless express a strong preference for the American over the European way of life. Both groups of French-American students did decidedly poorer than American students on the Modern Language Association Test (MLAT) But both groups were, however, generally superior to American students in French comprehension skills, even though the Maine group of FrenchAmericans were superior to the Louisiana group in this respect. In French oral proficiency, the Maine group was markedly superior to American students, whereas the Louisiana group was no better than and in some respects inferior to the American students. The fact that the attitudes of American students toward the French-American people and their culture were favorable was encouraging to the authors of this study, although they realized that American students still hold pejorative stereotypes about French speaking people that counteract their favorable attitudes. The ingenuity of FrenchAmericans in making various sorts of adjustments to their nationality was claimed by the authors to be the highlight of their investigation. 2.3.3 The Philippine Studies In the Philippine studies (Gardner and Lambert 1972a: 121ff) there is evidence that English has a very

PAGE 73

59 special status in the Philippines. Not only is it the world language adopted by Filipinos as the language of economic life, but it also has become the major medium of instruction in this multi-ethnic nation, although it is rarely a home language. They found that students who approach the study of English with an instrumental outlook and who receive parental support in their views are clearly more successful in developing proficiency in the language. The importance of an instrumental form of motivation for progress in language study was also evident in their analysis of the French-Americans and their orientations to learning English. The same type of relationship did not turn up in their studies of American and Canadian students learning French. It seems that when there is a vital need to master a second language, the instrumental approach is very effective, perhaps more so than the integrative. The implications for teachers and directors of language programs is clear: in North American settings, students of foreign languages will profit more if they can be helped to develop an integrative outlook toward the group whose language is being studied. For members of ethnic minority groups in North America or citizens in developing nations where imported foreign languages become one of the national languages, the story id different. Learning a second language with national and worldwide recognition is for them of vital importance, and both instr-umental and integrative approaches to the learning task must be developed. The fascinating challenge for these groups however, is to keep their own cultural and linguistic identity while mastering the second language. (Gardner and Lambert 1972:130) The authors were satisfied to find throughout their investigations that one can, with the proper attitudinal

PAGE 74

60 orientation and motivation, become bilingual without losing one's identity. In fact, striving for a comfortable place in two cultures seems to be the best motivational basis for becoming bilingual. 2.3.4 The Jordan Study Harrison, Prator and Tucker (1975) recently undertook a large scale language policy survey of Jordan, examining especially the instruction of English in the schools. The present goals for English teaching in Jordan are summarized in 2 curriculum guides. At the compulsory stage, "'the English course aims at producing a cultured, informed, useful and perceptive citizen, through his ability to understand, speak, read and write, in this case English, with a measure of ease, finesse and discrimation (English Curriculum: Compulsory Stage, 1969:5 in Harrison, Prator, and Tucker 1975:1). 'Furthermore, a knowledge of English should provide Jordanians with a better awareness of the values and traditions of diverse peoples from disparate regions of the world' (Harrison et al 1975:1). Jordan has a situation where an overwhelming majority of the population speaks Arabic as their mother tongue and where English, by historical coincidence and by present day consensus, is taught in all schools in grades 5 12 as a foreign language. The following recommendations are made by the authors regarding the Jordan language program: 1. That the explicit aims for English instruction at the compulsory stage be stated in the form of operationally defined behavioral objectives.

PAGE 75

61 2. That these objectives be realistically chosen to reflect the perceived needs of the students as well as the resources available to meet these needs 3. That the newly developed explicit aims for English instruction at the secondary level be critically evaluated and, if necessary, revised in terms of the actual English needs of secondary school graduates. 4. That the aims for English instruction at the secondary level reflect the different needs of secondary graduates, and at the same time complement the stated aims of Jordanian education in general. 5. That a closer correspondence be developed between the aims for teaching English and the public examination system. The following basic questions were posited by the authors as meriting strong consideration. 'Has the very considerable Jordanian investment in English paid off in terms of tangible results? To what extent do the policies with regard to English followed in the public schools permit the achievement of the stated and implicit aims of instruction? Since the major aim of the academic secondary school is to prepare students for higher education. how well have they done so in respect to English?' (Harrison et al 1975:16) In response to this last question, the authors believe that the answer must be that whatever active command of English students acquire in secondary school is definitely needed and used at the University and other institutions of higher education. According to their instructors at the University, however, most secondary school graduates have not acquired a sufficient command of English. They

PAGE 76

62 may know a great deal about English grammar and be able to translate from English to Arabic with the aid of a dictionary, but their practical ability to read and speak English is said to be insufficient for their needs. They are largely unacquainted with the vocabulary and structures that are used in their fields of academic specialization and are usually deficient in specific skills such as rapid reading for comprehension, notetaking, and summarizing, that are needed when English is used as the medium of instruction. The University and post-secondary institutes all find it necessary to teach them more English. To the question of the extent to which the policies followed in the public schools have permitted the achievement of the aims of English instruction, only a partial answer was given. It seems that, although the stated and implicit aims have remained high, the means for achieving them have grown progressively more meager. The number of years during which English is studied, the number of weekly periods, and the length of the periods have all been reduced. Yet many students must still receive a substantial part of their higher education in English. The more flexible policies that the Ministry of Education has followed in the foreign private schools seems to have been more successful, at least in achieving the aims of the English instruction. To the question regarding the tangible results of the great Jordanian investment in English, the safest conclusion was felt to be that the magnitude of the investment

PAGE 77

63 justifies giving all possible consideration to any opportunities that may exist to get more English for less money. The following recommendations are vrarth quoting at this point : 1. That the Ministry of Education consider the possibility of providing more instruction in English in the secondary industrial schools. (The language needs of the students in these schools seem to justify such a step. Added weekly periods might not be necessary if the extra instruction could take the form of practical vocational activities carried out in English. ) 2. That the possibility also be examined of adding 2 weekly periods of studying scientific texts in English to the present program of students in the scientific stream during their last 2 years in academic secondary schools. (These students' need for English is particularly great when they reach university level, and they now have less exposure to English than do students in the literary stream. The 2 periods of studying scientific texts would parallel the 2 extra periods of literary readings that students in the academic stream now have ) 3. That all possible alternatives be considered before a further reduction is carried out in the number of weekly periods of English in academic and commercial secondary schools. (Even with the present niomber of periods, these schools are falling far short of their major aim of "preparing students for higher education. ) 4. That an experiment be conducted in one or more academic secondary schools in which at least 1 year of the mathematics course for students in the scientific stream would be taught in English, and that the achievement in English and mathematics of students in this school or schools be compared with that of children in other schools at the time of their graduation from grade 12. 5. That every effort be continued to reduce the average number of students in English classes.

PAGE 78

64 6. If the attempt to carry out the above recommendations is unsuccessful, that serious consideration be given to modifying the method of English instruction used in the schools in the compulsory cycle so as to put more emphasis on the teaching of reading, and that emphasis on oral activities be postponed until the secondary level. (We believe that such a shift of emphasis would not violate any valid methodological principle and that it might rather, under the conditions of instruction now prevailing in Jordan, result in more effective learning of both written and oral skills ) 7. That the possibilities be explored of using films, radio, and television as means of teaching in English some small portion of the content of courses in various subjects at all pre-university levels. (This should help the public academic and commercial secondary schools to achieve their major aim.) 2.3.5 The Puerto Rico Studies The language issue on the island has been debated from the time when the first Commissioner of Education, Dr. Brumbaugh, issued the first language policy until the present day. This issue is one of great concern to all sectors of Puerto Rican society. Some of the problems involved in this issue have been discussed repeatedly through the years and possible solutions and recommendations have been offered. But the situation is still being looked into and new solutions to the yet unsolved problems are being sought. The first problem to be solved is the need to create a better environment for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. Students, especially at the high school level, are questioning the need to learn a second language. Their claim is that, if they haven't needed it so far, they have no reason to believe that they will need it later in their lives.

PAGE 79

65 In studying the history of the development of English on the island, one finds what seems to be a general feeling of rejection of or at least apathy towards the English language. Some people feel that English is damaging their Spanish and that they no longer know what they speak. (Principe Galarza 1973) A study on the attitudes of a group of students from secondary schools toward the teaching of English in Puerto Rico revealed: 1. That there were no negative attitudes among the students in the sample in terms of the negative influence that the factor of making mistakes and being penalized for them can have in the learning of the English language. 2. There was no difference between the attitudes of males and females. 3. There was no significant difference found between the attitudes of students in the rural area and those of the urban zone to the learning of English, although the attitudes of the students of the urban zone were slightly more negative than those of the rural zone. 4. A factor that influences their attitudes was the low grades they got in English. 5. The books used for the teaching of English seemed to be inadequate because students did not understand them. 6. Students in general realized the importance of learning English. 7. Teachers played an important role in the attitudes of students 8. No significant difference in attitudes toward English was found between intermediate school and high school students. (Diaz Padilla 1971:39ff )

PAGE 80

66 The attitudes of the Gabriela Mistral High School students towards English and the English class were tested (Olmeda 1973:4) and the fundamental findings provided evidence for the hypothesis that there is a negative attitude towards the English class on the part of the students who participated in the study. Ninety-eight percent of the students tested reflected negative attitudes towards the English class. These negative attitudes varied in intensity and in rationale. The first of the major reasons given was that, in general, the students did not view their final objective of studying English as a second language, a language which they were learning in order to be. able to communicate with native speakers of the language, as being realistic. English was seen as a 'tool' that should render a service after they graduated from high school, but a 'tool' which they did not consider valuable because they felt they had in fact not learned English. The second generalized attitude expressed was that English in no way represented a language that could substitute for the Spanish language in Puerto Rico; that the Spanish of Puerto Rico is the one and only official language of Puerto Rico and the Puerto Ricans. When students were asked about their use of English and Spanish, they assumed almost automatically a defensive attitude towards English with respect to the English language within the Puerto Rican community.

PAGE 81

67 Students in the Gabriela Mistral study felt that the English program had failed them, that they had wasted their time and that, on top of all that, they had received grades that had not benefited their graduation average. But coupled with this, they also expressed an awareness of how English is relevant for them within the Puerto Rican community and what the objectives should be. In a study of the relationship between achievement in English of students of the Ana Roque High School in Humacao and their attitudes toward the English language and the United States Continental Community (Arus de Figueroa, 1970) the results obtained indicated that independent of the grade point average of the students included in the sample, the students did not seem to have a noticeable feeling of hostility or rejection toward English or against the United States continental individual. The students of Ana Roque did not seem to connect in any way political considerations with their learning of English, as when they showed a favorable attitude to items that suggested that Puerto Rico continue to be associated with the United States or that, if the status would change, they still would consider English important. It was also evident from the study that the students with a higher grade point average had most positive attitudes towards English or the American individual. The teachers consulted in this study agreed that the students did not seem to have a positive attitude toward

PAGE 82

68 learning English, but they attributed this apparent dislike not to a feeling of rejection but to their own frustration when the student was not able to cope with the requirements of the English courses. They also agreed that adequate motivation and a better presentation of teaching materials together with proper facilities to use modern techniques and methods, which they admitted were lacking in the Ana Roque High School, would bring better results. The English teachers also suggested that a revision of the English program was imperative since they thought that the textbooks were not the most adequate for Spanishspeaking students and that the existing program did not provide for practice on conversational English. Other factors that they thought might have a relation with achievement in English in Puerto Rico were: aptitude, intelligence of the student, interests, and better learning environments In general, this study revealed that the student does not seem to reject the learning of English in the Ana Roque High School, but that the student would like to have a better command of the second language when he finishes high school. The attitudes of Puerto Ricans concerning English vary. Some people feel that English should be learned for its potential value. Others feel that English should be learned as a means of learning about the American culture. The definite prestige of being bilingual positively

PAGE 83

69 influences the attitudes of many Puerto Ricans toward learning English, especially those who belong to the upper and middle classes. On the other hand, people who have negative attitudes claim that, if one comes from a low income family, learning English provides no status symbol. If one lives in a house where no one speaks English, where there are no books, magazines, or newspapers to read in English, the motivation will be very low. The methods that have been used for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico have also been highly criticized (Bonilla, 1972) Often all students are treated in like manner and the same methods are used for all of them. Teachers also play an important role in fostering attitudes toward English learning. The growing nationalism is also an important factor. It has made many Puerto Ricans aware of their culture and importance. It has stressed the fact that the American culture and the learning of English may be a threat to the Puerto Rican personality and Latin heritage. In a report on the teaching of English in Puerto Rico (Division de Investigaciones Pedagogicas n.d.), part of the failure of the teaching of English in Puerto Rico was attributed to trying to use the same methods and materials used in the United States. This failure brought about so many rapid changes in techniques and procedures that it has been difficult to adopt a well-oriented

PAGE 84

70 methodology for the effective teaching of English on the island. Yet the teaching of English in Puerto Rico is now and will continue to be a major goal as long as the island is associated with the United States. Spanish will never occupy a second place to English since it is Puerto Rico's principal means of communication and connection to the hispanic world, to which it is tied historically and culturally.

PAGE 85

CHAPTER THREE THE MATCHED GUISE STUDY 3 1 Introduction The Matched Guise technique has been used in a number of studies, e.g. Lambert et al. (1960, 1965, 1972, 1975); Anisfeld et al. (1962); Anisfeld and Lambert (1964); Webster and Kramer (1968); Silverman (1969); Tucker (1969); Tucker and Lambert (1969); Tajfel (1973); Giles (1973); Giles et al. (1974) and, Giles and Powesland (1975) This technique elicits immediate evaluative reactions to taperecorded speakers using various accents, dialects and languages. A group of judges listening to an apparently different group of speakers recording the same neutral passage are asked to evaluate the speakers on various rating scales. The speaker is usually the same person using different 'realistic' guises of the particular dialects under study, and 'filler voices' are included to distract the judges from this fact. (Giles, 197 5) In the present study, the speakers represented both language and accent differences, therefore, these groups were referred to as 'speech groups'. The Puerto Rico Matched Guise Study consisted of the recording of four speech groups: Spanish, Spanish-accented 71

PAGE 86

72 English, near-native English and native English. A 'true' Matched Guise Study could not be carried out because of the unavailability of speakers who could convincingly represent each of the four speech groups, (i.e. Spanish, Spanishaccented English, near-native English, and native English) Speakers selected for speech group 1, Spanish, were male and female Puerto Ricans who were born and raised on the island. Speech group 2, Spanish-accented English speakers, were the same individuals as those of speech group 1, native Spanish speakers. As group 1, these speakers read the passage in their native Spanish and as group 2 they read the stimulus passage in their Spanish-accented English. Puerto Ricans who have learned the grammar and the phonology of English well enough to speak it fluently, but who have a Spanish accent, however slight, when speaking English were the speakers in groups 1 and 2 The voices of speakers of speech groups 1 and 2 were disjunctively positioned on the recording to avoid recognition of the fact that the Spanish and the English versions were from the same speaker. Near-native speakers of English made up speech group 3 These speakers are Puerto Ricans who have an almost native ability in the English language with minimal if any interference from Spanish. Most of these speakers learned English as children from native or near-native teachers or else lived in the United States and acquired an American accent. Speech group 4 consisted of native speakers of English, Americans who are currently living in Puerto Rico.

PAGE 87

73 The four factors used to test the hypotheses were the following: evaluative, dynamism, citizenship and teacher value. The 'evaluative' factor included the items: intelligent, responsible, sure of him/herself, sincere, courteous, understanding, honest, respectful, reliable, educated, and good citizen. The 'dynamism' factor included the items: arrogant, selfish, and ambitious. The 'citizenship' factor was made up of only one item: patriotic. The 'teacher value' factor was made up of the items: person I would like to look like, person I would like to have as a teacher, helpful teacher, organized teacher, teacher who loves his students, and hard-working teacher. 3 2 Testing Procedure 3.2.1 Preparation of Stimulus Tape A neutral passage from the Reader's Digest, Student's Edition, titled 'An Exciting Plane Ride, was selected for the reading. The passage was translated into Spanish for the purpose of this study. Seventeen voices were recorded reading the passage in English and in Spanish. These voices were divided as follows: 1. a practice voice to clarify instructions 2. two male and two female native English speakers reading the passage in English 3. two male and two female near-native English speakers reading the passage in English 4. two male and two female Spanish-accented speakers of English reading the passage in Spanish and later in English

PAGE 88

74 A total of one practice and 16 test voices were recorded on the tape. The voice selection process for the stimulus tape included the following steps : 1. recording 3 5 voices 2. selecting a practice voice 3. selecting 16 representative voices, 2 male and 2 female in the 4 speech groups The speakers representing each speech group were instructed to familiarize themselves with the story until it could be read fluently. They were told that if they made an error, the tape would be stopped and the sentence would be recorded again. The recording would be played back to the speaker to make sure that it was acceptable. This point is very important as nonfluencies in recording style can have deleterious effects on social evaluations for any particular voice (Ililler and Hewgill, 1964) The final 34-minute tape was judged to be satisfactory by the recorded speakers and by myself. The reliability of the stimulus tape was established by testing 15 English as a Second Language Methodology Course students at the University of Puerto Rico. The voices were judged to be representative of the four speech groups and the tape to be of satisfactory technical quality so that the students would not be distracted. The U.P.R. students were also asked to judge the following things: 'Is the person speaking a Puerto Rican? Anglo? Other?' 'How clear is the recording of this speaker?' •How fluently is the passage read?* 'How expressively is the passage read?* Finally, they were asked to make general comments on the task as a whole (See Appendix C)

PAGE 89

75 Twelve copies of the stimulus tape were made and distributed to each supervisor to be administered in selected classrooms. The classroom teacher and zone supervisor cooperated in administering the questionnaires. Subjects The participants in this study were selected from one urban and one rural school district in each of the six regions of the island. The students had to have been born and raised in Puerto Rico. They also had to have studied English as a second language from the first grade, while Spanish continued to be the language of instruction for all school subjects. Students had to be of at least average intelligence and had to be able to follow instructions. Subjects were both male and female, ages 10, 12, 15 and 17 (fifth, seventh, ninth and twelfth grades respectively) These grades were chosen because the public school system is divided into three levels: elementary, intermediate and high school. One of the purposes of this study was to test whether there were any significant differences in the ratings of students across these three levels. The fifth grade is a high elementary level, the seventh grade is the beginning of the intermediate level, and the twelfth grade is the end of the high school level. The samples were drawn from selected classrooms in twelve of the school districts distributed through the six regions of the island (See map of Puerto Rico in Figure 1 on page 76)

PAGE 91

77 Administration of Rating Scales • The rating scales were written in Spanish. Students were asked to rate speakers on a seven-point rating scale according to how they perceived the person that they were listening to on tape. The teacher read the instructions to the students [See Appendeces F and G for a copy of the rating scales and instructions) To prepare the Matched Guise rating scales, a pilot study was conducted to see what qualitative adjectives were used by students in describing the following people: a 'good' Puerto Rican, a 'bad' Puerto Rican, someone they would like, someone they would dislike, a teacher whom they would admire, a teacher whom they would not admire.. A random sample of students (N=3 94) from the sixth, ninth and twelfth grades of the public schools of Puerto Rico responded to the questions on the pilot study. The answers to those questions were then tabulated and the adjectives with the highest frequency (See Appendix E, Tables 2-7) were combined with the adjectives already established by Gardner and Lambert (1972) in their studies of FrenchAmerican students. These adjectives were put on bipolar rating scales. (The scales used in this study are listed in Appendix F) A total of 21 bipolar adjective scales were included in the test. The five remaining scales measured teacher value as perceived by students rating the four speech groups.

PAGE 92

78 3.3 Results A factor analysis was used to extract common factor variances among the sets of measures used in the Matched Guise Study. The three obtained were based on the results of the factor analysis and were labeled 'evaluative, 'dynamism' and 'teacher value'. Minimum strength criterion for acceptance was a factor loading of 0.60; the purity criterion required that a scales factor loading be at least twice the same scale s loading on any other factor (See Appendix H, Table 8 ) Another factor that was considered independently was 'citizenship' which was represented by the adjective 'patriotic'. Although the factor loading was not large enough (.55), it was considered a sufficiently important variable for the present study to be included as an additional factor. The following hypotheses were examined in this study: H-|_: Secondary school students will rate Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English higher on the citizenship factor than elementary school students Secondary school students will rate native Spanish speakers higher than Spanish-accented speakers on the citizenship factor, Spanishaccented speakers higher than near-native English speakers, and near-native English speakers higher than native English speakers. H : Elementary school students will rate female speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than male speakers for all speech groups : Secondary school students will rate male speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than female speakers for all speech groups.

PAGE 93

Elementary school subjects will rate Spanishaccented speakers lower on the evaluative factor than native Spanish, native English and nearnative English speakers. Secondary school students will rate Spanishaccented speakers of English lower than Spanish speakers on the evaluative factor but higher than native and near-native English speakers. Elementary school students will rate native English and near-native English speakers higher on the evaluative factor than native Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English. Secondary school subjects will rate Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English higher on dynamism and evaluative factors than elementary school students will. Students from rural areas, regardless of age, will give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers than to all other speakers of the three speech groups Students from urban areas, regardless of age, will give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism, and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers than to all other speakers of the three speech groups Secondary school students from urban areas will rate native Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers higher on dynamism and citizenship factors than secondary school students from rural areas. Students from both urban and rural areas will rate the Spanish speech group significantly higher than all other speech groups for the teacher value factor. Elementary school students will rate female voices of all speech groups significantly higher than male voices for the teacher value factor. Secondary school students will rate male voices of all speech groups significantly higher than female voices.

PAGE 94

80 Analysis of variance was then employed to test the twelve hypotheses. The dependent variables evaluative, dynamism, citizenship and teacher value, were tested against the independent variables of grade (elementary and secondary) sex (male and female) zone (urban and rural) speech group (Spanish, Spanish-accented English, near-native English and native English). Duncan's Multiple Range Test was used as a statistical test of significance (£<.05) to indicate the different levels of the independent variables. 3 3 Results 3.3.1 The Statistical Tests of the Hypotheses Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 1, which posited that secondary school students would rate Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English higher on the citizenship factor than elementary school students was not supported. Results indicate that there is a significant difference F(l,l) 160.4, £ ^.05) in the rating of Spanish and Spanish-accented speakers of English by elementary and secondary school students on the citizenship factor, but in the opposite direction of that predicted (See Appendix H, Table 9 for Analysis of Variance summary table) An analysis of the difference between the means by Duncan's iMultiple Range Test found that elementary school students rated these speakers higher (X = 5.3) than secondary school students (X = 4.6) on the citizenship factor.

PAGE 95

81 Hypothesis 2. Hypothesis 2, which predicted that secondary school students would rate native Spanish speakers higher than Spanish-accented English speakers on the citizenship factor, Spanish-accented speakers higher than near -native English speakers, and near-native English speakers higher than native English speakers was only partially supported F(3,3) 5.03,£ < .05) (See Appendix H, TablelO 3EQr Analysis of Variance suitimary table) An examination of the differences between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that there is a difference in the ratings of the four speech groups by secondary school students regarding the citizenship factor (X = 4.8 for Spanish; 4.7 for native English; 4.6 for near -native English and 4.5 for Spanish-accented English) Yet, although Spanish speakers were rated higher than the other speech groups the rest of the order of the predicted hierarchy was not supported. Hypothesis 3. The third hypothesis predicted that elementary school students would rate female speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than male speakers for all speech groups. Analysis of variance test results indicate that there are no significant differences for sex among elementary school student ratings of speakers for the citizenship factor. Yet there are near significant differences for sex on the evaluative factor F(l,l,11.5,£= 0.0007; See Appendix H, Tableli :iar Analysis of Variance summary

PAGE 96

82 table) However, the hypothesis was not even partially supported because the results indicate differences but in the opposite direction of that predicted. An analysis of the difference between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test found that male speakers of all speech groups were rated higher than female speakers on the evaluative factor (X = 5.5 for males and 5.3 for females). Hypothesis 4. The fourth hypothesis predicted that secondary school students would rate male speakers higher on the evaluative and citizenship factors than female speakers for all speech groups. Results indicate that there is a significant difference F (1 1) 85 2 ,£ { .05) for the citizenship factor (See Appendix H, Tables 12, 13 for Analysis of Variance summary tables) An analysis of the differ ences between the means found that males of the four speech groups were rated higher than females (£ < 05) on both the citizenship and evaluative factors by secondary school students (X = 4.8 for males and 4.4 for females on the citizenship factor; X = 5.2 for males and 5.0 for females on the evaluative factor) Hypothesis 5. The fifth hypothesis, which posited that elementary school students would rate Spanish-accented speakers lower on the evaluative factor than native Spanish, native English and near-native English speakers was only partially supported ?(3,3) = 4.4,£ < .05; See Appendix H, Table 14

PAGE 97

83 for Analysis of Variance summary table) An analysis of the differences between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that Spanish-accented speakers of English were rated lower than Spanish and near-native English, but not lower than native English. There are no significant differences between the near-native and native English and the Spanish-accented English groups for the evaluative factor (X = 5.6 for Spanish, 5.5 for near-native English, 5.5 for Spanish-accented English and 5.4 for native English) Hypothesis 6. Hypothesis 6, which posited that secondary school students would rate Spanish-accented English speakers lower than Spanish speakers on the evaluative factor but higher than native and near-native English speakers was only partially supported F(3,3),6.6,£ < .05; See Table 15 for Analysis of Variance summary table) An analysis of the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that secondary school students rated Spanish speakers higher than all speech groups (X = 5.2) and Spanish-accented English speakers the lowest of all (X = 5.0). There were no significant differences in the ratings of native and near-native English speakers for this factor (X = 5.1 for native English and 5.1 for near-native English) Hypothesis 7. Hypothesis 7, which posited that elementary school students would rate native and near-native English speakers higher on the evaluative factor than native Spanish and

PAGE 98

84 Spanish-accented speakers of English was not supported. An analysis of the difference between the means found that there are significant differences (p < 05) between ratings of speech group combinations but in a reverse order (X = 5.5 for Spanish and Spanish-accented English and 5.4 for nearnative and native English) Hypothesis 3 The eighth hypothesis predicted that secondary school students would rate Spanish and Spanish-accented English speakers higher on dynamism and evaluative factors than elementary school students would. Results indicated that there are no significant differences in ratings of speech group combinations by grade for the evaluative and dynamism factors Hypothesis 9 The ninth hypothesis, which predicted that students from rural areas, regardless of age, would give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism, and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers than to all other speakers of the three speech groups was supported. Results indicate that there are significant differences F(3,3),4.7, £ < .05; in the ratings (See Appendix H, Tables Iff, :L7 18 f or Analysis of Variance summary tables). Duncan's Multiple Range Test for analysis of differences between the means, indicated that rural subjects, regardless of age, gave a higher rating (d < .05) to Spanish speakers than to all other speakers on the evaluative, dynamism, and citizenship

PAGE 99

85 factors (X = 5.4 for Spanish, 5.3 for native English, 5.2 for near-native English and 5.2 for Spanish-accented English for the evaluative factor; X = 4.2 for Spanish, 4.1 for native English, 4.1 for Spanish-accented English and 4.0 for near-native English for the dynamism factor; X = 5.0 for Spanish, 4.8 for near-native English, 4.8 for native English and 4.8 for Spanish-accented English for the citizenship factor) Hypothesis 10. Hypothesis 10, which posited that students from urban areas, regardless of age, would give higher ratings on the evaluative, dynamism and citizenship factors to native Spanish speakers than to all other speakers of the three speech groups was supported. Results indicated that there is a significant difference F (3 ) 4 05 £_ = 007 for the evaluative factor; no significant difference for the dynamism factor and a significant difference for the citizenship factor F (3 3 ) 4 31 ,£ < .05; See Appendix H, Tables 19, 20 for Analysis of Variance summary tables) However, an analysis of the difference between the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that urban subjects, regardless of age, gave a higher rating to Spanish speakers than to all other speech groups on all three factors (X = 5.4 for Spanish, 5.3 for near-native English, 5.3 for native English, and 5.2 for Spanish-accented English for the evaluative factor; X = 4.3 for Spanish, 4.2 for native English, 4.2 for near-native English and 4.2 for Spanishaccented English for the dynamism factor; X = 5.0 for

PAGE 100

86 Spanish, 5.0 for near-native English, 4.9 for Spanishaccented English and 4.8 for native English for the citizenship factor) Hypothesis 11 The eleventh hypothesis, which posited that secondary school students from urban areas would rate native Spanish and Spanish-accented English speakers higher on the dynamism and citizenship factors than secondary school students from rural areas was not supported. There were no significant differences in ratings by secondary urban and rural school students on speech group combination 1 for either the dynamism or citizenship factors. Hypothesis 12 The twelfth hypothesis, which stated that students from both urban and rural areas would rate the Spanish speech group significantly higher than all other speech groups for the teacher value factor was supported F(3,3), 4.6, £ < .05). Results indicated that the Spanish group was rated significantly higher than all other speech groups, for the teacher value factor (See Appendix H, Table21 for Analysis of Variance summary table) An analysis of the means by Duncan's Multiple Range Test, found that although the Spanish speech group was rated the highest, there were no significant differences among the three other speech groups (X = 5.0 for Spanish, 4.8 for near-native English, 4.8 for native English and 4.7 for Spanish-accented English). Reported values are F(3,3),6.02, £ < .05; See Appendix K, Table 22.

PAGE 101

87 Hypothesis 13 The thirteenth hypothesis which posited that elementary school students would rate female voices of all speech groups higher than male voices for the teacher value factor was not supported as evidenced by the means. Hypothesis 14 The last hypothesis which stated that secondary school students would rate male voices of all speech groups significantly higher than female voices for the teacher value factor was supported F(l,l),70, £<.05. (See Appendix H, Table .33) An analysis of the differences between the means found that male voices were rated significantly higher than female voices by secondary school students on the teacher value factor (X = 4.6 for males and 4.3 for females). To summarize the results of the tests, males were rated more positively than females by both elementary and secondary school students for the evaluative and citizenship factors. Moreover, secondary school students, regardless of region, rated Spanish-accented English speakers lower than speakers from all other speech groups while elementary school students rated Spanish and Spanishaccented English more positively than native and near-native English. Spanish speakers were rated more positively than speakers from the three other speech groups by all students regardless of region or age.

PAGE 102

88 3.4 Discussion The following general conclusions can be derived from the results obtained. Spanish is definitely the preferred speech group of Puerto Ricans. The Spanish speech group was always rated higher by 10, 12, 15 and 17 year olds for the evaluative, dynamism, citizenship and teacher value factors. Speaking Spanish correctly may be seen by many as a symbol of Puerto Rican identity thus accounting for these higher ratings. Or it may be that these students rated Spanish higher for all factors because they have a better ability in Spanish than in English or because it is their language of everyday usage, the one that they learned in the home as children.. If speaking Spanish correctly is a symbol of Puerto Rican identity, then speaking English correctly may also be seen as a symbol of Anglo identity. If learning English would have been seen as a threat to their Puerto Rican identity, then English spoken natively should have been rated the lowest on the scale for all factors, and Spanishaccented English higher as it is more 'Puerto Rican sounding'. However, secondary school students rated all speech groups the same on the citizenship factor. Secondary school students also rated Spanish-accented English the lowest on the evaluative factor. Language preference seems to be an individual phenomena and not clearly an indicator of Puerto Rican identity. A preference for 'correct' Spanish or 'correct' English may be more important in learning a language. Bock and Saine (197 5) discuss the concept of

PAGE 103

89 'source credibility' referring to receiver perception of speakers' expertise or competence. It could be that the reason Spanish-accented speakers were rated lower than the other speech groups by secondary school students was that they perceived these speakers to be less competent in the use of English than native and near-native English speakers. Unfortunately, no other research has been done on the island using the Matched Guise technique, therefore, these results cannot be compared with other studies. Male voices were always rated more positively than female voices by both elementary and secondary school students for all factors. The reason may be that males play a predominant role in society. It is the man who occupies the most prominent positions in the government and business; and in the household, it is the father who is usually seen as the authority figure. Attributes such as 'sure of himself,' 'intelligent,' 'educated,' 'responsible,' 'respectful,' 'good citizen' are often more quickly attributed to the male. Qualities attributed to the female would be ones such as 'affectionate,' 'understanding,' 'kind' and other affective traits. It cannot be denied that 'sexist stereotypes' still predominate in our society and this is especially true of Latin societies. It would be interesting to see if American males would be rated more positively than American females if the same questionnaire were administered to Anglo students. In this study, males speaking English were rated more positively than females

PAGE 104

90 for the teacher value factor. It seems that even male voices are preferred over female voices in teaching. There are not many male teachers on the island as compared to females. Males who are in the teaching profession usually are in the fields of Mathematics and Science which are considered to be more difficult and more valuable. Male teachers who are good language models have been highly accepted by students according to comments made by English supervisors in the field. There were no significant differences in ratings between urban and rural students for the hypotheses tested. Students from urban areas are not significantly different from students in rural areas in terms of their perceptions of the variables tested in the present study. Language preference was not seen to be a clear indicator of 'patriotism'. To speak Spanish or Spanish-accented English was not judged by secondary school students from either urban or rural zones as being patriotic. Students may not have seen the relationship between speaking Spanish, for example, and being patriotic. The concept of 'patriotism' was not clearly defined and therefore, this may have accounted for the results obtained. Students may have asked themselves questions such as: 'Is rating native and near-native English speakers an indicator of being less patriotic?' This was unclear in the present study. There is a struggle in Puerto Rico between two cultures: the American and the Puerto Rican culture. The

PAGE 105

91 language issue on the island is clearly a reflection of this struggle and may account for the clear preference of Spanish over English. Whether this preference is related to the desire to preserve the Puerto Rican identity, because of feelings of patriotism or because of appreciation for language competence is not completely clear. What is evident, however, is that there is a marked preference for Spanish as the first language of all Puerto Ricans and varying degrees of preference for Spanish-accented, near-native, and native English.

PAGE 106

CHAPTER FOUR THE LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY 4.1 Introduction The language issue in Puerto Rico is one which has been long debated and. one which remains as an important issue of great concern to all sectors of the Puerto Rican society. Some of the problems concerning the teaching of English have long been focal points of discussion among educators, and possible solutions have been offered. But many of the problems still persist. For example, Puerto Rican students study English from the first grade on through high school. However, after 12 years of English, most Puerto Rican students attending public schools do not know enough English to communicate in the target language. This situation is often attributed to a lack of an adequate environment to learn English which often affects the student's attitude and hinders his motivation to learn the language. In the desire to explore this and other problems involved in the teaching of English in Puerto Rico, a Language Attitude Questionnaire was designed to examine the attitudes of students concerning teachers, teaching methods, materials, their estimation of the importance of learning English, their estimation of the importance of learning

PAGE 107

93 any second language, their ability to use English, their frequency of usage of the language, as well as their political ideology as it relates to their perception of the value of learning English. The questions were based on frequently mentioned problems concerning the teaching of English in Puerto Rico which seem to be affecting students' motivation to learn the language. Students were also asked questions concerning their Spanish language ability as well as general abilities. The following summary of the problems most frequently mentioned fay educators, supports the need for a study such as this on the island: 1. Lack of qualified teachers at all levels who can teach English as a second language effectively. 2. Lack of books and materials which are suitable for teaching English to Puerto Rican students. 3 Lack of an adequate environment in which to practice English. 4. Lack of appropriate methods for teaching English effectively. 5. Overcrowded classrooms. 6. Lack of a sufficient number of bilingual teachers who are proficient in both languages and who can teach the correct pronunciation patterns to our students 7. Lack of sufficient in-service training programs for teachers who are not qualified to teach English but who are required to do so because of English

PAGE 108

94 being a compulsory subject from first grade through high school. 8. Student attitude at the senior high school level, in that students often feel that learning English threatens their Puerto Rican identity, that Spanish should be the only vehicle of instruction, and that learning English or any other language should be optional. 9. Poor attitudes of some Puerto Ricans toward the American culture and the English language. 4.2 Methods Subj ects A total of 184 students, 108 from the rural zone and 76 from the urban zone, answered the Language Attitude QuestionnarieAll subjects were fourth year high school students, 17 years of age, born and raised in Puerto Rico, and attending one of the public schools of the districts selected for the study. Students were almost evenly distributed between male and female with the exception of students from the Aibonito and Humacao school districts which were predominantly female because of the scarcity of males in the particular classrooms chosen. These same students had previously participated in the matched guise study discussed in chapter three. Procedure A five-point rating scale questionnaire written in Spanish asked respondents to indicate their responses to questions concerning contact with Americans; the extent to

PAGE 109

95 which they felt their ethnic identity was threatened; the potential costs and rewards of learning English; their degree of language competence; their degree of Spanish competence (as compared to English) ; the degree in which they liked or disliked speaking the English language; their political ideologies in relation to the teaching of English on the island; the usefulness of books, materials, and teaching methods; and degree of competence of English teachers and motivational variables in learning a second language. An open question concerning what the students thought about the teaching of English in general was given to students to give them an opportunity to express themselves freely. The responses to this last question were summarized and a content analysis of these responses is discussed below. Contact Questions Eight questions were asked to elicit information regarding contact with Americans. The questions ranged from a general rating of contact to personal informal contacts to contacts through the mass media. Questions like, 'How often do you see American movies?' or 'How often do you listen to American music? were asked to obtain information for this variable. Ethnic Identity There were 5 questions which focused on various aspects of cultural identity. The students rated the degree to which each particular aspect of cultural identity might be

PAGE 110

96 threatened. Included were items which referred to speaking the target language as a threat to their identity and to cultural assimilation. Representive questions in this category are: 'To what extent do you feel that speaking English keeps you from being a good Puerto Rican? or 'To what extent do you feel that a greater use of English by Puerto Ricans contributes to the assimilation to the American culture? Value of Learning a Second Language Three items asked respondents about the positive values of learning any second language, (e.g., 'To what extent do you feel that learning a second language is important? or •To what extent do you feel that learning a second language should be optional?') Value of Learning English Students were asked the following question: 'If you could choose a second language to study, would you choose English? First Language Ability Respondents were asked 3 questions concerning their native language ability. These questions were: 'How did you do in your Spanish class last year?' 'How do you think is your understanding of reading in Spanish?' 'How do you think you write Spanish? English Language Ability A series of eleven items asked respondents about their ability to use English as their second language. Although

PAGE 111

97 English is taught from the first grade on, there is a wide range of language ability among Puerto Rican students even under similar learning environments. These questions examined how well they were able to understand, speak, read, and write English (e.g^ 'How well do you understand, speak, read, and write English?'). Second Language Usage Related to questions on general ability in English were questions on student usage of the language. Included were eight items questioning the frequency of English usage and in what environments English was used (e.g., 'Kow much English do you speak in the English class?' and 'How often do you use English (a) in your neighborhood, (b) outside the English class etc ? ) Positive Aspects of Learning English Many Puerto Ricans see positive as well as negative aspects to the learning of English. Nine items asked respondents about the positive aspects of learning English. The questions ranged from personal to economic, adademic and cultural rewards of learning English (e.g., 'How important is it for you to speak English?' and 'To what extent do you feel that learning English could be important for you in order to: (a) earn money, (b) get a better job, (c) enter college?'). Negative Aspects of Learning English The counterpart of the above questions asked respondents about the negative aspects of learning English, in terms

PAGE 112

98 of how they felt when they used the language. Examples of the five items included are: 'To what extent are you afraid to speak English in public?' and 'To what extent do you feel stupid when you speak English? Time and Effort Involved Students were asked to respond to the following: 'The advantages of learning English do not justify the time and effort involved.' Students Perceptions of How Adults Value the Learning of English Six items asked respondents about their perceptions of how different adults viewed the learning of English, (e.g., 'To what extent do you feel that the following people believe that learning English is advantageous: (a) your parents, (b) your friends, (c) your English teachers, (d) your Spanish teachers, (e) other teachers, and (f) community leaders? ) Methods and Materials Because Puerto Ricans often attribute their inability to use English adequately to the methods and materials used for teaching it in the schools, a series of 12 questions asked respondents to rate their likes or dislikes for the books and overall teaching methods used in their various schools. Samples of questions in this category are: 'To what extent do you feel that the teachers you have had have enriched their classes with varied materials?' and 'How much do you enjoy the way in which your teachers, in general, present the following activities in class:

PAGE 113

99 (a) listening comprehension, (b) conversation, (c) reading, and Cd) writing?' General Abilities Two items asked respondents about their general language ability and school performance (e.g., 'To what extent do you think that you have a natural ability to learn languages?' and 'In general, how well did you do in all your classes last year? ) Political Ideology Some Puerto Ricans have recently claimed that political ideology can be a determining factor in the value given to the learning of English as a second language on the island. Three questions were asked concerning the political ideologies of students which were later correlated with questions concerning language ability and usage (e.g., 'To what extent are you in favor of the following political ideologies for the island: (a) Commonwealth, (b) Statehood, and/or (c) independence? ) There were several dimensions of the Language Attitude Study which did not group as factors in the factor analysis. These dimensions were: contact with Anglo-Americans, personal and through mass media; value of learning a second language; value of learning English; first language ability; positive aspects of learning English; negative aspects of learning English; general abilities; and political ideologies of students. In the dimension of 'Contact with Anglo-Americans,' by means of personal contact or

PAGE 114

100 through the mass media, the following were the average responses given by the students as evidenced by means of responses to questions (See Appendix J, Table 25) Although many students may 'see' Anglo-Americans quite a lot — on the streets, in offices, at the airport, and so on — their personal contact with them was ranked as neutral, tending toward the 'not at all' end of the scale. Responses relating to 'Contact with the Mass Media, such as responses relating to the questions regarding the frequency of watching American films and/or listening to American music, were ranked much higher than other forms of contact such as watching television programs, or reading magazines, newspapers, comic strips, etc. Puerto Rican students listen to American music on the radio, and they watch American films quite often, as most of the movies are in English with occasional Spanish subtitles. The 'Value of Learning a Second Language' was an important dimension, as it measured the students' willingness to learn any second language, and not necessarily English. Responses indicate that students feel that learning any second language is very important, but that they also feel that it should be optional, and that they should be able to decide which language to study. However, their affirmative responses to the question used for the 'Value of Learning English' dimension, 'If you could choose any second language to study, would you choose English?' is evidence that the students on the island definitely do value the learning of English.

PAGE 115

101 students were asked questions concerning their 'First language Ability' to see if they perceived their ability in Spanish to be significantly superior to their ability in English. An examination of the means indicates that students believe that their use of Spanish is very good. The 'Positive Aspects of Learning English' was another important dimension of this study. When students were asked to what extent they felt that learning English could be important for them in order to enter college, get a better job and earn more money, the results obtained were very positive. Students in general understand the importance of learning English to move up the financial scale. The 'Negative Aspects of Learning English' was also another important dimension of this study. Students were asked if they were ashamed to speak English with Americans, to speak English in public, or if they felt 'stupid' while speaking English. Responses to these questions were neutral, except there was a slight inclination towards the positive end of the scale in relation to the question of being afraid to speak English in public. Another dimension aimed at getting student responses to the dimension of 'Time and Effort Involved in Learning English. Students value the learning of English enough to believe the time and effort involved justified and to consider it to be very necessary. Students were also asked questions concerning 'Student Perceptions of Adults' Estimation of the Value of Learning

PAGE 116

102 English. An examination of the means indicates that students feel that English teachers view learning "English as significantly more advantageous than do Spanish teachers. A dimension aiming at measuring the 'General Abilities of Students' revealed students rated themselves as having a natural ability to learn languages. They also rated their general performance in school the previous year as good. Another dimension considered was their 'Political Ideologies. An examination of the means reveals that there are slight differences in their preferences for the three possible future statuses of the island, namely Commonwealth, Statehood, and Independence. They rated Commonwealth as the preferred status (2.47); Statehood had a neutral rating (3.03); and Independence had a neutral tending toward low rating (3.75). However, their preference for any of the three political statuses for Puerto Rico was independent of the positive value they saw in learning English. 4.3 Results As in the Matched Guise Study, a factor analysis was the statistical method used to extract common factor variances shared by two or more of the variables used in this Language Attitude Study. The five resulting factors were: English language ability and usage; methods and materials; ethnic identity and student perceptions of the value of learning English by teachers other than English teachers. Even though the factor analysis was a multidimensional one, a unidimensional analysis for some of the questions was used (See Table 1 page 104)

PAGE 117

103 The justification for this is that although some of the variables did not group together in the different factors resulting from the factor analysis, they are significant enough to be used in examining other dimensions of this study. Minimum strength criterion for acceptance was a factor loading of .60; the purity criterion required that a scale's factor loading be at least twice the same scale's loading on any other factor. A coefficient of correlation analysis (r) was computed to test nine of the fourteen hypotheses. In hypotheses 1, 2, and 3, Statehood, Independence, and Commonwealth respectively were correlated with Value of Learning English. Hypotheses 4, 5, andS correlated Statehood, Independence, and Commonwealth respectively with Language Ability. Hypothesis 7 correlated Ethnic Identity with Statehood. Hypothesis 8 correlated Language Ability and Language Usage, and Hypothesis 9 correlated Methods and Materials and Attitude Towards Learning English. These correlation coefficients were used to test the dependence of one variable on another variable. On the remaining five hypotheses. Hypotheses 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, a t test was used to obtain the difference between the means of the experimental and control groups, or of the variables under study. (The means for each of the 75 variables is included for the purpose of discussion of the results and for general information of the reader (See Appendix J, Table 25)

PAGE 118

104 TABLE 1 QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS USED TO TEST HYPOTHESES Value of Learning a Second Language 59. To what extent do you think that learning a second language is important? Value of Learning English 72. If you could choose a second language to study, would you choose English? Time and Effort Involved in Learning English 12. The advantages of learning English do not justify the time and effort involved. Methods and Materials 56. I think that the books used for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico are interesting. 57. I think that, in general, the books used for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico are adequate. 58. To what extent have the English teachers you have had enriched their classes with a variety of materials? 60. How much do you enjoy the way in which your teachers in general present the comprehension activities? 62, How much do you enjoy the way in which your teachers in general present the reading activities?

PAGE 119

105 Table J. continued 63. How much do you enjoy the way in which your teachers in general present the writing activities? Ethnic Identity 9. To what extent do you feel that learning English keeps you from being a good Puerto Rican? 10. To what extent do you feel that speaking English keeps you from being a good Puerto Rican? English Language Ability and Language Usage 2. How often do you speak with Anglo-Americans in your neighborhood? 5. How often do you watch television programs in English? 6. How often do you read magazines, newspapers, comic strips, etc., outside of school? 19. How often do you feel that you speak English? 20. How often do you feel that you write English? 21. How often do you feel that you read English? 22. How well do you understand spoken English? 23. How well do you understand written English? 27. How well do you think you are understood? 28. How pleased do you feel with your English ability in general? 35. How often do you use English in your neighborhood? 36. How often do you use English outside of the English class? 37. How often do you use English in other places?

PAGE 120

106 Table 1 continued Negative Aspects of Learning English 29. To what extent do you feel ashamed when you speak English with Americans? 30. To what extent are you afraid to speak English in public? 31. To what extent do you feel 'stupid' when you speak English? Political Ideologies 44. To what extent are you in favor of Commonwealth for the island? 45. To what extent are you in favor of Statehood for the island? 46. To what extent are you in favor of Independence for the island? Student Perceptions of the Value of Learning English 52. To what extent do you feel that English teachers believe that learning English is advantageous? 53. To what extent do you feel that Spanish teachers believe that learning English is advantageous?

PAGE 121

107 The following hypotheses were examined in the present study H3_: Students' preferences for statehood status for the island correlate positively with their attitude toward learning English. Students' preferences for the independence status for the island correlate positively with their attitude toward learning English. H^: Students' preferences for commonwealth status for the island will have a positive but low correlation with their attitude toward learning English. H^: Students' preferences for statehood status for the island correlate positively with their ability toward learning English. H5: Students' preferences for independence status for the island correlate negatively with their ability toward learning English. Hgi Students' preferences for commonwealth status for the island correlate positively with their ability toward learning English. E-ji Students who see the learning of English as a threat to their Puerto Rican identity will have a negative attitude toward statehood. Hg : The better ability a student has for using English as a second language, the more willing he will be to use it. Hg: Students' judgment of methods and materials will correlate positively with their attitude toward learning English. H-]_q: Students in urban areas will have more positive attitudes toward learning any second language than students in rural areas. ^11* Students in urban areas will have more positive attitudes toward learning English than students in rural areas. ^12' Students in urban areas will find that the advantages of learning English justify the time and effort involved moreso than rural area students

PAGE 122

108 : Students from both urban and rural areas will find that English teachers significantly moreso than Spanish teachers will find the learning of English to be more advantageous. H-j^^: Students in urban areas will have a better English language ability than students in rural areas. 4.3.1 The Statistical Tests of the Hypotheses Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 1 predicted that students preferences for statehood for the island correlated positively with attitude toward learning English. This hypothesis was not supported. There is a positive correlation (r = 0.15) but the level of correlation is not predictively useful. Hypothesis 2 The second hypothesis, which predicted that student preference for independence status for the island correlated negatively with their attitude toward learning English was not supported. There is a negative correlation between their preference for independence and their attitude toward learning English, but at a very low level of correlation (r = -0. 01) Hypothesis 3 The third hypothesis which predicted that student preferences for Commonwealth status for the island would have a positive but low correlation with their attitude toward learning English was not supported. The correlation was too low to be predictively useful (r = 0.07).

PAGE 123

109 Hypothesis 4 Hypothesis 4, which posited that student preferences for statehood status for the island would correlate positively with their ability to learn English, was not supported. The level of correlation is positive, (£ = 0.18) but it is not high enough to be predictively useful. Hypothesis 5 Hypothesis 5, which predicted that student preferences for independence for the island would correlate negatively with their ability to learn English, was not supported. There is very low order of correlation (r = -0.08), but it is not statistically significant. Hypothesis 6 The sixth hypothesis posited that student preferences for commonwealth status for the island would have a positive but low correlation with their ability to learn English. This hypothesis also was not supported. There is a positive low correlation (r = 0.04) but it is too low to be predictively useful. Hypothesis 7 Hypothesis 7 predicted that students who see the learning of English as a threat to Puerto Rican identity would have a negative attitude toward Statehood. This hypothesis was not supported. Again, there is a

PAGE 124

110 correlation (r = 0.14), but it is too low to be predictively useful. Hypothesis 8 The eighth hypothesis predicted that the better the student's ability in using English as a second language, the more willing he will be to use it. This hypothesis was significantly correlated (r = .74). Hypothesis 9 Hypothesis 9, which posited that students would have a more positive attitude toward learning English the better the methods and materials used to teach it, was not supported. There is a positive correlation (r = 0.14) but it is not predictively useful. Hypothesis 10 Hypothesis 10, which posited that students in urban areas would have more positive attitudes toward learning any second language than students in rural areas was not supported. Results indicate that there is a significant difference (t (197,75) = £<.05) between these attitudes, but in the opposite direction of that predicted. Hypothesis 11 The eleventh hypothesis predicted that students in urban areas would have more positive attitudes towards learning English than students in rural areas. This hypothesis was not supported.

PAGE 125

Ill Hypothesis 12. Hypothesis 12, which predicted that students in urban areas would find that the advantages of learning English justify the time and effort involved more so than rural students, was not supported. Hypothesis 13. Hypothesis 13, which predicted that students believed that English teachers more so than Spanish teachers would find that learning English was: significantly more advantageous, was not supported. Hypothesis 14. The fourteenth hypothesis, which posited that students in urban areas would have a better English language ability than students in rural areas, was not supported. 4.3.2 The Content Analysis of the Open Question Students were asked the following question and were requested to explain briefly: 'In general, what do you think about the learning of English?' Although a number of responses were given, the more relevant ones for the present study were grouped under three categories : methods and materials, reasons for learning English, and political concerns. Some sample statements will be quoted for each of the three categories, based on a content analysis of the responses obtained. 4.3.2.1 Methods and Materials Despite the efforts of the staff of the English Program at the Department of Education to incorporate

PAGE 126

112 suggestions offered in the preparation and selection of books and other materials for the teaching of English on the island, many students seem to be dissatisfied with the books and materials used, and claim their inability to use the language is a result of the methods and materials used in the classrooms. The responses are selfexplanatory. Discussion of these responses will be included in the general discussion section of the Language Attitude Study. Negative Aspects 1. I like English, but the techniques used by many teachers are inadequate because they teach us many things that we're not going to use in our daily lives. We also need more and better materials to learn English properly. 2. It would be better if English teachers spoke more English and less Spanish in class. This would force us to practice our English. I like English, but if I never practice it, how am I going to be able to speak it? 3. I would like to learn conversational English and then learn grammar rules. We often learn the rules and then don't know how to apply them. I am very interested in learning English. 4. I think that we should learn English, but that we should be taught practical English — things that we can use every day.

PAGE 127

113 English is a very interesting language to learn, but the methods used are not very appealing. English needs to be taught starting in the elementary grades, but if the materials were constantly varied, classes would not be so monotonous Grammar is given more importance than conversational English. This is the reason why Puerto Ricans are afraid to speak with Americans. The Puerto Ricans know the rules, but they don't know how to apply them. Teachers should be screened. Good teachers make good students. I believe that all Puerto Ricans should learn English. Since English has been accepted as our second language, more emphasis should be put on preparing adequate materials for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico. If I had learned English in elementary school, I would not be having such a hard time in my English classes now. In elementary school, we were not motivated to learn English, nor were we told how important it is to know English. The problem in the secondary school is that English classes are monotonous. My comprehension of the language is equal to the level of difficulty of the materials used.

PAGE 128

114 Positive Aspects On the other hand, many students enjoy English and the materials used for teaching it. 1. I would say that between the good things and the bad, my English classes have been balanced. The books used for teaching English in secondary school are far superior to the ones used in the elementary grades 2. The teaching of English in Puerto Rico is good in general, but more emphasis should be put on developing conversational skills. 3. I feel that my English classes have been excellent. However, teachers need better materials if they are going to do a good job. 4. I feel that the teaching of English in Puerto Rico is good, but oral communication skills are not stressed enough. We should be taught more vocabulary, and more dictations should be given. 4.3.2.2 Reasons for Learning English Puerto Rican students see learning English as a way of helping them in going to college, getting better jobs, and meeting other people. Although they often find English difficult to learn, they see the value of learning English as justifying the time and effort involved. Below are some of the responses given as reasons for learning English. Job Opportunities 1. English is a very important language, as it is

PAGE 129

115 spoken in many countries. There are many jobs where English is a must if you want to be hired. 2. I feel that learning English is very important in Puerto Rico if there is to be industrial progress. Puerto Ricans must understand that the majority of the island's industries are American, and if we learn English there will be more job opportunities. It is obvious that English is an indispensible language in Puerto Rico. 3. I want to be a bilingual secretary, and I realize the value of learning English if I want to get a good job. 4. Learning English is very valuable and it is something that we all should do, as it will enable us to get a better education and, subsequently, a better job. 5. Learning English is necessary for every Puerto Rican who wants to move up the scale financially. You can't get a good job if you don't know English. 6. If we learn English, we can get a better job. The first thing they always ask at a job interview is if you know English. Meeting Other People 1. English is important because it is spoken in the majority of countries around the world. 2. For me, it would be great to be able to speak

PAGE 130

116 English so that I could establish better relations with English speaking people from around the world. 3. English is an international language, so it should be learned before any other foreign language 4. The learning of English is very important because it enables us to speak with the many Americans living in Puerto Rico now. 5. English is important because tourists travel to the island very often, and we need to learn it for commercial purposes. Going to College 1. If I learn English, I will have a better chance of going to college. 2. The learning of English is vital for our studies and for communication with others. 3. All Puerto Ricans should learn English, as it is the language used in universities and for commercial purposes. 4. Learning English is very important, because it increases our chances of going to college. 5. You need English to go to college, so you might as well learn it in school. 4.3.2.3 Political Concerns There is a growing awareness of political concerns among Puerto Rican students. Some Puerto Ricans see

PAGE 131

117 learning English as being important because of socioeconomic and political ties with the United States, while others see English learning as a hindrance to Spanish learning or as a threat to their Puerto Rican identity. Some statements given by students concerning political considerations were: 1. The learning of English is very necessary here on the island as well as in other countries. Knowing English will unite us more to the United States and improve our relations 2. Learning English is very necessary since our island is a possession of an English-speaking nation. 3. Puerto Rico will become a state some day, and what we will be speaking the most is English. It should be taught in schools at all levels. 4. It is wise to learn English in case we have to leave Puerto Rico some day as the Cubans did from Cuba. 5. Spanish should be taught first, and then English. Most Puerto Ricans don't understand English anyway, so why neglect Spanish for a second language that is almost useless in most instances? 6. English should not be taught to students who do not know their own vernacular well enough. Too much emphasis is given to the teaching of English, and not enough to Spanish. What are we, Puerto Ricans or Americans?

PAGE 132

118 Other interesting comments made by students related to the general advantages of learning English were: 1. The learning of English is very important for any citizen, and it would be good if all Puerto Ricans spoke a second language. 2. English is a very important language, regardless of what other language you speak. 3. Every person must learn English, because in these times, everyone should know at least the basics of our second language. 4. Lately a lot of English is being spoken on the island, so we should try to learn as much English as possible. 5. Everyone should know how to speak more than one language, whether it's English or some other. 6. I feel that learning English is a good thing, because it's always good to know more than one language 7. Even though I don't know how to speak English, I feel that it is important, and I would definitely like to learn it. 8. I would like to know how to speak the English language so that I could do better in English classes 4.4 Discussion The larger cities of Puerto Rico, such as San Juan, Ponce, and Mayaguez, are centers of business and cultural

PAGE 133

119 activity, where there are a number of jobs which are sought by Puerto Ricans from both urban and rural areas. Puerto Ricans from the different towns on the island often commute to their jobs in these larger cities. The working population which seeks these jobs exceeds the number of jobs available in these areas. There is a competition which makes only those skilled in the different fields eligible for the jobs available. Puerto Ricans are often required to have a certain degree of English competency to work in places such as hotels, restaurants, airports, and the like, because of the influx of tourists who continually visit the island. Because learning English is a means of entering college, earning more money, and of getting better jobs, it would seem reasonable to believe that Puerto Ricans already living in these larger cities, and thus having more access to these jobs, would have more positive attitudes toward learning English which would also be a determiner for increased language ability. This would enable them to compete more successfully in the job market. However, no significant differences were found between the attitudes of urban and rural students for learning English or any other second language. Both urban and rural students have positive attitudes toward learning English. However, an interesting fact is that rural students had a slightly more positive attitude toward learning English than had urban students. This may be because students from rural areas are becoming

PAGE 134

120 increasingly aware of the importance of learning English, as these students have had to commute to universities in urban areas, and have even often had to change their permanent residence to these larger cities because of the unavailability of jobs in the smaller towns of the island. A college education makes most students aware of the importance of learning any second language, and especially of learning English. Because of this job competition resulting from the bilingual situation in Puerto Rico, many rural students have had to make significant changes in their lifestyles, and this may account for their increased motivation to learn English. An important issue in Puerto Rico is the growing concern that too much time and effort are being spent in teaching English. Many educators feel that if more time were alloted to the effective teaching of Spanish instead of so much time to teaching English, Puerto Rican students would at least know their native language adequately, whereas now they are showing significant deficiencies in the use of both languages. One might tend to believe that students in urban areas who have more contact with Americans and who have more access to seeing American films and to attending discotheques where American music is played or who were able to witness the difficulties in finding jobs, would feel that the advantages of learning English justify the time and effort involved moreso than rural students. However, this was not found to be true as evidenced from the results obtained

PAGE 135

121 But what is now often happening instead is that high school students, especially those at the senior high school level, are gradually losing their motivation to learn English as a result of the attitude of many prominent Puerto Ricans from different fields. These people are using the mass media to speak of how the learning of English is a threat to the Puerto Rican identity, how English is a hindrance to the learning of Spanish, how learning English is part of the 'Americanization' process used by advocates of statehood, and so on. Because students from urban areas are the ones most frequently exposed to this kind of publicity, this may account for the fact that urban students slightly less so than rural students feel that the advantages of learning English do not justify the time and effort involved. However, generally speaking, both urban and rural students highly value the learning of English, and understand the importance of the time and effort invested in teaching it. Another hypothesis attempted to support the notion that there are significant differences between the value given by English teachers to the learning of English as compared with the value given to it by Spanish teachers. There is a common belief among teachers or both languages as well as others interested in the language situation in Puerto Rico that there is not enough communication and planning between these language teachers, and because of the bilingual situation on the island, these

PAGE 136

122 teachers should join efforts to improve this situation in our schools. It has even been said that elementary school Spanish teachers often resent the fact that too much emphasis is given to English in the primary grades, evidence of which are the bilingual teachers and teacher-: aides assigned to some classes, the intense supervision given to those classes, and so on. Even though I am basing my comments on hearsay, this has been a topic frequently discussed in the universities, at supervisory circles, among teachers, student-teachers, teachers' aides, and so forth. Whether the above is true or not, there were no significant differences in these seventeen-year -old students perception of how much English and Spanish teachers value the learning of English. Students feel that Spanish and English teachers both view learning English as advantageous, with no significant differences between them. It seems evident that they are basing this perception on the high school level, where English is just another class subject and no special attention is given to students in either class. A positive attitude is often seen as an indicator of increased ability. The prediction that students in urban areas would have a better language ability than students in rural areas was unfounded. It would seem that students who live in urban areas, especially in big cities like San Juan, Ponce, Mayaguez, would have more opportunities to be exposed to English than their rural counterparts.

PAGE 137

123 which should increase the urban students' ability to use the language. However, contrary to what was predicted, the rural students assessed their language ability slightly better than urban students. This seems to indicate that language ability is an individual phenomenon which may be aided by exposure to the language but may not necessarily be a determiner of increased language ability. it must also be remembered that English is not the everyday language of Puerto Ricans in either urban or rural zones and a student may be motivated to learn a second language because of other factors, such as the socio-economic status of his parents, the educational level of his parents, parental encouragement, methods and materials used to teach the second language, and other related factors. Student perceptions of methods and materials used to teach English on the island, as related to student attitude toward learning English, were also examined to see if a positive attitude resulted from methods and materials used. Great efforts have been made in Puerto Rico by the English program staff at the Department of Education to prepare and adapt materials to the Puerto Rican reality. Teacher trainers have tried to orient future and in-service teachers on how to use methods that will make the teaching of English more enjoyable. Yet in spite of all that has been done, students are often dissatisfied with the methods and materials used. This is

PAGE 138

124 very important in determining the loss of motivation. However, the students who responded to the Language Attitude questionnaire highly value the learning of English, although they claim that the materials and methods used by 'some' teachers need to be improved. It seems that the methods and materials used for the teaching of English do not directly affect their positive attitude toward the language. There may be a negative attitude toward English as a class subject or toward a particular teacher, but not to the language as such. The political status of the island has been a longdebated issue in Puerto Rico. The changes in political parties also bring about changes in the educational policies for the island. I sincerely believe this to be one of the major problems affecting the entire educational system on the island, and a problem which should be of great concern to all Puerto Ricans interested in the welfare of Puerto Rican students and Puerto Rican society in general. Projects planned under one political administration which gave or were beginning to give results were often changed, discontinued, or reinterpreted when another political party came into power. The people who had understood the premises of many of these projects were often replaced by others who were unfamiliar with the existing projects, or who just wished to carry out projects of their own. The problem with all this is that there is often not enough time alloted to carry out the

PAGE 139

125 evaluation of projects which could have brought about positive long-range effects for the island. Only when politics can be separated from education sufficiently enough for people to understand the importance of short and long term goals of the different projects undertaken and to understand that education should be based not on the ideas or whims of people in one political party as opposed to another but only on the efforts of those who are capable and qualified to be leaders, regardless of political affiliation, will the educational system of Puerto Rico reach its desired goals. High school students are more than ever involved in politics, as it is pervasive in their everyday life. It is believed by many that if one is in favor of statehood, one will have a better attitude toward English, whereas if one is in favor of independence for the island, one will have a preference for Spanish, or even believe that learning English is a symbol of Americanization and therefore should not be given too much importance. Three hypotheses dealt with the correlation between the status for the island and the students attitudes toward learning English. It was found that students who prefer statehood status have a positive attitude toward learning English, but the level of correlation was low and therefore not predictively useful. It was also indicated that students who have a preference for independence status for the island would have a less positive attitude toward learning

PAGE 140

126 English. There was a negative correlation but at a very low order. It was found that student preference for independence status for the island is independent of their perceived value of English, Another hypothesis, which predicted that student preferences for commonwealth status for the island would have a positive but low correlation with their attitude toward learning English was not supported. Again, student preference for commonwealth status is independent of the value given to the learning of English. The general conclusion derived from the above results is that student preference for any particular political status for the island is independent of the positive value they give to the learning of English. Preference for a particular political status for the island is no more an indicator of the students evaluation of the worth of English than it is of their ability to use it. It was predicted that students who preferred statehood would have more positive attitudes toward learning English, would be more highly motivated, and thus would have an increased ability to use the language. Although there is a positive correlation between preference for statehood and increased language ability, it was not high enough to be predictively useful. It was also predicted that students who favor independence would have a lesser ability to use English, partly because of their lack of motivation. Again, although there was a low order of correlation, it was not predictively useful.

PAGE 141

127 Finally, the prediction that student preferences for commonwealth status for the island would have a positive but low correlation with student ability to learn English was not supported. Even though there was a positive but low correlation, it was not predictively useful It is evident that preference for a political status is not in any way an indicator of language ability as had been predicted. The only positive correlation evidenced from the results was that the better the student's ability in English, the more willing he would be to use the language

PAGE 142

CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY 5.1 Introduction The importance of learning English on the island, despite the acknowledged primary importance of Spanish, cannot be overestimated. Carlos E. Chardon, present Secretary of Education, says the following about the role of Bilingual Education in Puerto Rico in a report which appeared in the San Juan Star the local English newspaper (June 22, 1978) The goals and the role of bilingual education in the public schools of Puerto Rico must be based on the learning and the teaching of the vernacular. Within language teaching, Spanish is and will remain our principal and primary concern. However, learning English is essential for every Puerto Rican for two reasons. One is that, as United States citizens, Puerto Ricans must be provided with the opportunity to master English, the language through which many political and socio-economic decisions affecting the island's well being are expressed. Lacking competence in English, no Puerto Rican can effectively understand, much less participate in, these discussions so vital to our future. The second reason that the learning of English is important for Puerto Ricans is the very same one that makes it essential to practically all educated adults on the face of the earth: the English language is the primary and predominant international medium of communication in practically every field of human endeavor. Thus, the learning and teaching of English in Puerto Rico is, and must remain, obligatory. Dr. Ramc5n Mellado Parsons, former Secretary of Education, describes in an article on the Linguistic Policy of 128

PAGE 143

129 Puerto Rico (1976) what generally is agreed to be the preferred linguistic policy for the educational system. 1. Spanish is and will be, for a long historical period to come, the native language of all Puerto Ricans. 2. Because of the political and economic ties that exist between Puerto Rico and the United States, and because of the same international importance of the language, we Puerto Ricans must try to learn English as well and as quickly as possible. English should be the second language of all Puerto Ricans and the goal should be bilingualism for the majority of our population. 3. Spanish should be the vehicle of instruction of all class subjects at all levels of the Educational System, including the University level, except in cases in which we have visiting professors who are unable to offer the course in Spanish. 4. The Government of Puerto Rico should continue to give emphasis to programs that help the many Puerto Ricans born and raised in the United States, or born on the island and educated in the United States. These are students who have returned to the country and attend our schools, but who do not know enough Spanish to make the best of the subjects taught in this language. In these schools, Spanish should be taught as a preferred subject and the

PAGE 144

130 other subjects should be taught in English until these students become adapted. 5. English should be taught in Puerto Rico using the methodology and materials that, according to linguistic science, correspond to the learning of a foreign language. 6. The teacher should know the English language perfectly, have a total command of Spanish, and know both the Puerto Rican and the American culture. 7. Bilingualism is the desired goal as a means of enriching the Puerto Rican culture without losing the basic traits of the Puerto Rican identity. 5.2 Discussion and Recommendations The Puerto Rico Matched Guise Study where students rated the recording of 4 speech groups: Spanish, Spanishaccented English, near-native English and native English, suggested the following conclusions: 1. Spanish speakers are rated more positively than the other 3 speech groups. This is a reflection of the marked preference for Spanish over English. The ratings for English vary according to school level 2. Language preference seems to be highly personal and not clearly an indicator of self-identification as a Puerto Rican. A preference for 'correct' Spanish or 'correct' English may be more important in evaluating a speaker than are various other factors

PAGE 145

131 3. Male voices are always rated more positively than female voices by elementary and secondary school students. This can be an indication of the dominant position of males in our society. 4. Students from urban areas are not found to be significantly different from students in rural areas in terms of their perceptions of the variables being tested in the present study. The Language Attitude Questionnaire was designed to uncover the attitudes of students concerning teachers, teaching methods, materials, ability to use English, frequency of usage of the language, and other related factors. The questions were based on frequently mentioned problems concerning the teaching of English in Puerto Rico which seem to be affecting student motivation to learn the language. The results obtained indicated that: 1. There are no significant differences between the attitudes of urban, and rural school students for learning English or any other second language. Both urban and rural school students have positive attitudes toward learning English. 2. Both urban and rural school students understand the importance of learning English enough to justify the time and effort involved in learning it. 3. Seventeen-year-olds perceive that both Spanish teachers and English teachers viewthe learning of English as advantageous with no significant differences between them.

PAGE 146

132 4. The ability to use a language is an individual characteristic. Factors such as parental encouragement, personal motivation, teaching methods and materials, environment and other related variables may be determining variables for students from both urban and rural areas. 5. The results seem to indicate that the methods and materials used for the teaching of English do not directly affect a student's positive attitude toward the language. Students may have a negative attitude toward English as a class subject or toward a particular teacher, but not to the language as such. 6. Contrary to the popular belief that political affiliation is a determiner of attitude toward the language, it was found that students' preference for a particular status for the island is independent of their perceived importance of English. 7. Finally, it was found that the better a student's ability in English, the more willing he/she is to use it. This study of English as a second language in Puerto Rico was different from the Maine and the Louisiana studies in that in the latter two, the students selected attended high schools in communities that provided many opportunities to encounter French-American families and to develop positive attitudes towards French-Americans. In Puerto Rico, the lack

PAGE 147

133 of an adequate environment to practice the language does not help foster the same attitudes in Puerto Rican students. On the other hand, like in the Maine, Louisiana and Connecticut studies, where students with a strong motivation and desire to learn French obtained good grades in their French courses at school, so Puerto Ricans who rated their overall language and academic ability as good also seemed to appreciate the importance of learning English as a second language. In the Connecticut study, the students' strong motivation to learn French seemed to stem from the students integrative orientation toward the study of the language as well as a realization of the potential usefulness of the language. However, in Puerto Rico students only have an instrumental orientation. They feel that the potential costs and efforts involved in learning the language are justified in terms of the rewards obtained such as a better education, better paying jobs, and the ability to communicate with Americans and other English-speaking people. In the Philippine studies, there is evidence that English has a very special status in the Philippines. Learning a second language with national and worldwide recognition is for the Philippine students of vital importance. The challenge for these groups, however, is to keep their own cultural and linguistic identity while mastering a second language. In the Puerto Rico study, although students feel that learning English is important, they do

PAGE 148

134 not have the same need to master this second language. There is also no fear of losing their linguistic identity, for Spanish is clearly the first and preferred language of all Puerto Ricans, and although many cultural aspects have been adopted from the American culture, Puerto Ricans do not generally seem to see this as a threat to their identity. The recommendations made by Harrison, Prator and Tucker can apply to the Puerto Rican study as well, namely, that the objectives for English instruction be realistically chosen to reflect the perceived needs of the students as well as the resources available to meet these needs, and that the aims for English instruction at the secondary level reflect the different needs of secondary school graduates. The questions which the authors ask themselves about the Jordan study are the same which Puerto Rican educators are constantly asking, 'Has the investment in English paid off in terms of tangible results?' 'Since the major aim of the academic secondary school is to prepare students for higher education.. how well have they done so in respect to English?' In Puerto Rico, as in Jordan, most secondary school graduates have not acquired a sufficient command of English. Many Puerto Rican students may know English grammar and can do drills and may be able to translate with the aid of a dictionary, as the Jordanians can from English to Arabic, but both groups lack the practical ability to speak English according to their needs.

PAGE 149

135 Similar to the results obtained in Arus de Figueroa's study of the relationship between achievement in English among students of the Ana Roque High School in Humacao and their attitudes towards the English language in the United States Continental Community, the results of this study indicated that students did not seem to relate their political affiliation with their learning of English. Regardless of political preference, they showed a positive attitude toward learning the language. Common to both studies was the finding that students with a greater ability in English were more willing to use the language. The Puerto Rico results seem to indicate that students in general have a positive attitude towards English. They may react negatively to certain books, teachers or teaching personalities, but not to the language itself. But although their attitudes are positive, several recommendations might be made to improve the quality of English on the island. 1. To understand the attitudes of students towards learning English, we must look at a number of factors, all of the following could influence attitudes: parental encouragement, a student's aptitude or intelligence, interests and abilities; teaching materials and methodology used in the classrooms; the personality and attitudes of teachers who motivate the students to learn English, and the general attitudes of school members and the importance they give to English.

PAGE 150

136 Since it was found that the greater the student's ability, the more willing he/she is to use it, mor emphasis should be given in the English class to spoken English that can be used in real life situations and in the everyday lives of students. The teaching of Spanish should be intensified. Students must be aware of the importance of learning the vernacular, but stressing the importance of English in a bilingual situation such as that which exists in Puerto Rico. Politics cannot be so tied to education that the students suffer because of it. A change of Secretary of Education should not bring about drastic changes in the implementation of educational programs in the schools. There should be a consensus among all political and educational leaders in that education is for all Puerto Ricans and therefore, educators, regardless of political affiliation, who are qualified to plan curriculum, work on short and long term goals, and implement the philosophy of the English Programs should be selected The universities and the Department of Education should continue joining efforts to screen students who want to become language teachers, as well as to offer in-service training to teachers who are already in the field.

PAGE 151

137 6. Puerto Ricans should be made aware of the many stereotyped statements regarding the teaching of English on the island such as the belief that high school students are increasingly losing their interest to learn English. Students should be taught the English necessary to communicate in the target language, but acquiring a native or nearnative ability in the language should be taken as an individual occurence depending on the aptitude and language ability of each student, 5.3 Suggestions for Future Research More attitude studies should be carried out on the island for comparative purposes. Teachers should be consulted in the planning of these follow-up studies. The results should be incorporated in a plan of action to make English teaching more effective. These follow-up language attitude studies should look into questions such as : 1. What are the attitudes of the parents of the students who are selected to answer the questionnaires? How much have these attitudes influenced students' motivation to learn the language? 2. How do politicians, regardless of political affiliation, feel that the learning of English can be improved on the island? What do they perceive the role of politics to be in education and in deciding the linguistic policy for the island?

PAGE 152

138 3. What are the attitudes of elementary school teachers who are assigned to teach English in their schools regardless of their willingness or ability to teach the language? 4. What recoitunendations can the students offer to improve the teaching of English on the island? 5. What has been the effect of bilingual education in terms of the attitudes of students toward English? 6. V7hat are the most frequent stereotypes regarding the attitudes of students towards learning English and how if possible can these be corrected? Possible areas of inquiry include: a. Whether the methods and materials used to teach English are mainly responsible for the students' lack of motivation to learn it. b. Whether the perceived importance of English is relative to the political preference of students c. Whether the common apathy among high school students prevents them from learning English. 7. Do the attitudes of parochial school students differ significantly from those of public school students? Further research using the Matched Guise technique may also provide answers to a number of questions concerning language preference as related to Puerto Rican identity and other related issues.

PAGE 153

139 A student s motivation to learn a language is an important determiner in the acquisition of a second language. The responses in the Matched Guise and The Language Studies will hopefully give insight to others interested in exploring further these linguistic attitudes. I do hope that the pedagogical implications of this study will help educators and language planners implement a plan of action to continue improving the teaching of English on the island.

PAGE 154

APPENDIX A MEAN SCORES OBTAINED ON COLLEGE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION BOARD PROFICIENCY TEST

PAGE 155

141

PAGE 156

APPENDIX B STIMULUS PASSAGE FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY: ENGLISH VERSION AND SPANSIH TRANSLATION

PAGE 157

AN EXCITING PLANE RIDE I had an exciting flight not long ago! Let me tell you about it. When we took off, the sky was a clear blue. Many beautiful white clouds were in the sky. Bright sunlight was all around us. We all thought we would have a good trip. At our first stop, those white clouds were turning gray. We had to haye lights on in the plane. After a time, the captain came back to where we were. I asked, *What about the weather, Captain?* 'We might get a little wind and rain,' he said. ^Is that bad?" the lady beside me asked. *0h DO I' the captain was quick to say. 'We'll land easily at our next stop. Even when it rains hard we pilots can see Don t worry 1 • 'I thought rain was dangerous,' the lady said. 'We're more worried about a quiet, sleepy fog than about rain. Fog makes a low ceiling. The rain beat against the windows We could not even see out of them. We wondered about the weather ahead I As we flew north the sky grew dark. Great black clouds were all around us. Soon we heard the captain's voice. 'Fasten your seat belts. We are flying around a thunderstorm. Don't be afraid. It might rain even harder. But we'll fly slowly. It's more comfortable that way.^ 143

PAGE 158

144 We fastened our seat belts. Mine was hard to fasten. I was sitting on the edge of my seat! Suddenly I noticed lights dancing outside my window. I heard a snapping sound. Then I saw a flash of fire. My ears were ringing. If I had not been fastened to my seat, I would have hit the ceiling. What was that?' everyone cried. The Captain's voice came through to us. 'Don't get excited! We had to get rid of electricity we had picked up. Electricity is in the air. We picked up a lot of it. When a plane gets all it can hold it sends a bolt of electricity to a cloud. You have just had an unusual experience in an airplane!

PAGE 159

145 UN VUELO EMOCIONANTE EN AVION ITuve un vuelo emocionante hace poco! D^jame contarte. Al despegar, el cielo estaba de un azul claro. Habia muchas bellas nubes blancas en el cielo. Un sol resplandeciente brillaba a nuestro alrededor. Todos pens^bamos que tendrlamos un buen viaje. En nuestra primera parada, esas nubes blancas se estaban tornando grises. Tuvimos que encender las luces en el avi6n. Despu^s de un tiempo, el capit^n vino a donde est^bainos. Yo preguntS, iC6mo estl el tiempo, Capitln? 'Puede que tengamos un poco de viento y lluvia, dijo 61 'iEs eso peligroso?' pregunt6 la senora sentada a mi lado. lOh, no!' se apresur6 el capit^n a decir. 'Aterrizare mos sin dificultad en nuestra pr6xima parada. Atin cuando llueva fuerte, nosotros los pilotos podemos ver. INo se preocupe! 'Pensaba que la lluvia era peligrosa, dijo la seflora. 'Nos preocupa mds una neblina silenciosa y adormecida que las misma lluvia. La neblina hace un techo bajo.' La lluvia golpeaba en las ventanas. No podiamos ver hacia afuera. Nos preguntSbamos como estaria el tiempo m^s adelante 1 Segtin vollbamos hacia el norte el cielo se tornaba oscuro. Grandes nubes negras nos rodeaban. Pronto escuchamos la voz del capitln. 'Amdrrense los cinturones. Estamos

PAGE 160

146 volando alrededor de una tormenta el^ctrica. No se asusten. Puede Hover atln raSs fuerte. Pero varnos a volar lentamente. Es mas c6modo de ese modo. Nos amarramos los cinturones. El mlo era diflcil de amarrar. iEstaba sentado en el horde de mi asientol De repente notg luces bailando fuera de mi ventana. Escuch^ un estallido afuera. Entonces vi un destello de fuego. Mis oldos estaban sonando. Si no hubiese estado amarrado a mi asiento, hubiese llegado al techo. i.Qu6 fue eso?' grit6 todo el mundo La voz del capitln lleg6 a nosotros. iNo se asusten! Tuvimos que deshacernos de la electricidad que habiamos recogido del aire. Recogimos mucha de ella. Cuando un avi6n tiene el mSximo de electricidad, envia una carga de esta a una nube. lAcaban de tener una experiencia rara en un avi6nl

PAGE 161

APPENDIX C EVALUATION FORM FOR MATCHED GUISE STIMULUS TAP

PAGE 162

1. Is the speaker: A Puerto Rican American Other Could you specify his/her region of origin more closely: 2. If the passage was in English, to what extent (if any) is the speaker's English influenced by Spanish (e.g., accent, intonation, grainmar) ? Not at all : : : : Very Please describe the nature of the Spanish influence if you think any exists. 3. How clear is the recording of this speaker? Not at all : : : ; Very 4. How fluently is the passage read considering it may be in the speakers second language? Not at all : : : ; Very 5. How expressively is the passage read? Not at all : : : ; Very 6. How relaxed does the speaker sound? Not at all : : : ; Very 7. Any other features of the speaker's voice, reading style, etc. 143

PAGE 163

149 8. Comments on the task, and voices as a set.

PAGE 164

APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DESIGNING THE MATCHED GUISE RATING SCALES: SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS

PAGE 165

Sexo Grado Favor de escribir en letra de molde. Un 'Buen' Puertorriqueno tendria las siguientes cualidades (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Un 'Mai' Puertorriqueno tendria las siguientes cualidades ; (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Alquien que me agrade tendria las siguientes cualidades : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Alguien que me desagrade tendria las siguientes cualidades : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Un maestro que yo admirara tendria las siguientes cualidades : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Un maestro que yo NO admirara tendria las siguientes cualidades : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 151

PAGE 166

152 Sex Grade Please Print: A 'Good' Puerto Rican would have the following qualities ; (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) A 'Bad' Puerto Rican would have the following qualities : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Someone I liked would have the following qualities : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Someone I disliked would have the following qualities : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) A teacher whom I would admire would have the following qualities : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) A teacher whom I would NOT admire would have the following qualities : (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

PAGE 167

APPENDIX E SUMMARY TABLE OF PILOT STUDY FOR DESIGNING THE MATCHED GUISE RATING SCALES

PAGE 168

TABLE 2 Characteristics of a 'Good' Puerto Rican, as Indicated by the Sixth, Ninth and Twelfth Graders in the Sample Characteristics Frequency Percent* Sixth Grade good citizen 82 48 friendly 67 39 good-natured 65 38 hard-working 64 37 honest 60 35 respectful 60 35 good-mannered 52 30 patriotic 49 28 humble 45 26 Ninth Grade responsible 40 30 honest 40 30 good citizen 38 29 courteous 36 27 hard-working 34 26 friendly 33 25 obeys laws 29 22 hospitable 29 22 respectful 29 22 Twelfth Grade honest 51 51 friendly 43 43 patriotic 33 33 respectful 29 29 responsible 27 27 hospitable 24 24 courteous 24 24 hard-working 18 18 humble 15 15 sincere 13 13 *Percentages are based on sample size: sixth grade (N = 172), ninth grade (N = 132) and twelfth grade (N = 99) 154

PAGE 169

TABLE 3 Characteristics of a 'Bad' Puerto Rican, as Indicated by the Sixth, Ninth and Twelfth Graders in the Sample Characteristics Frequency Percent* Sixth Grade Ninth Grade Twelfth Grade Percentages are (N = 172) ninth (N = 99) unpatriotic 76 44 bad person 66 38 disrespectful 57 33 vicious 57 33 bad ma nner ed 57 33 •J -J lazy 46 27 proud 45 irresponsible ^ 28 malicious 26 15 disrespectful 56 42 criminal 37 28 irresponsible 33 25 discourteous 31 23 thief 27 20 lazy 26 20 dishonest 24 18 ill natured 24 18 egotistical 23 17 disrespectful 32 32 unpatriotic 30 30 irresponsible 30 30 dishonest 24 24 bad-mannered 20 20 hypocrite 19 19 lazy 14 14 egotistical 14 14 discourteous 13 13 ; based on sample size : sixth gi grade (N = 132) and twelfth grade

PAGE 170

TABLE 4 Characteristics of a Person Whom I Would Like, as Indicated by the Sixth, Ninth and Twelfth Graders in the Sample Characteristics Frequency Percent* Sixth Grade good natured 94 55 friendly 70 41 well-mannered 59 34 respectful 57 33 kind 46 27 affectionate 45 26 humble 44 25 honest 4 2 24 obedient 27 16 Ninth Grade good natured 58 44 friendly 56 42 kind 54 41 respectful 41 31 sincere 36 27 honest 34 26 courteous 31 23 responsible 31 23 agreeable 26 20 Twelfth Grade sincere 46 46 friendly 43 43 honest 31 31 understanding 3 0 30 kind 29 29 respectful 25 25 simple 19 19 courteous 18 18 affectionate 15 15 ^Percentages are based on sample size: sixth grade (N 99^^' ^^^^^ grade (N = 13 2) and twelfth grade

PAGE 171

TABLE 5 Characteristics of a Person Whom I Would Not Like, as Indicated by the Sixth, Ninth and Twelfth Graders in the Sample Characteristics Frequency Percent* Sixth Grade bad person 89 52 disrespectful 58 34 bad-mannered 46 27 unpleasant 46 27 immoral 44 26 unkind 38 22 unfriendly 36 21 proud 33 19 lazy 26 15 irresponsible 24 14 Ninth Grade hypocrite 43 32 ill natured 34 26 egotistical 27 20 disrespectful 26 20 discourteous 25 19 proud 25 19 liar 24 18 irresponsible 24 18 unfriendly 19 14 dishonest 18 14 Twelfth Grade hypocrite 36 36 proud 23 23 irresponsible 22 22 dishonest 19 19 bad-mannered 17 17 incomprehensible 15 15 disrespectful 12 12 liar 12 12 disagreeable 12 12 unfriendly 11 11 Percentages are based on sample size: sixth grade (N = 172), ninth grade (N = 132) and twelfth grade (N = 99)

PAGE 172

TABLE 6 Characteristics of a Teacher Whom I Would Admire, as Indicated by the Sixth, Ninth and Twelfth Graders in the Sample Characteristics Frequency Percent* Sixth Grade good person 97 55 affectionate 55 32 friendly 53 31 respectful 43 28 hard-working 45 26 kind 3 5 20 humble 27 16 well-mannered 27 16 honest 26 15 good teacher 21 12 Ninth Grade good-natured 60 4 5 friendly 55 42 kind 39 3 0 understanding 2 9 22 courteous 27 20 affectionate 26 20 respectful 26 20 honest 22 17 agreeable 21 16 considerate 20 15 Twelfth Grade friendly 50 50 understanding 44 44 cooperative with students 33 33 good teacher 24 24 responsible 17 17 agreeable 17 17 sincere 15 15 respectful 15 15 righteous 15 15 affectionate 13 13 *Percentages are based on sample size: sixth grade M olV ""^""^^ ^''^'^^ ^^2^ twelfth grade

PAGE 173

TABLE 7 Characteristics of a Teacher Whom I Would Not Admire, as Indicated by the Sixth, Ninth and Twelfth Graders in the Sample Characteristics Frequency Percent* Sixth Grade Ninth Grade Twelfth Grade (N = (N = 172) 99) bad person 92 53 irresponsible 72 42 disagreeable 47 27 unpleasant 47 27 bad-mannered 43 25 scolder 39 disorganized 35 20 disrespectful 27 16 uncooperative with students 27 16 proud 26 15 ill-natured 40 30 irresponsible 34 26 disagreeable 24 18 discourteous 24 18 uncooperative with stud(=>iTh 23 X / hypocrite 22 17 aggressive 20 15 unfriendly 19 14 disrespectful 19 14 proud 18 14 not understanding 27 27 indifferent about students 22 22 irresponsible 21 21 bad teacher 20 20 unfriendly 19 19 unjust 13 13 proud 13 13 disrespectful 8 8 impatient 8 8 disagreeable 5 5 e based on sample s ize : sixth gi ninth grade (N = 13 2) and twelfth grade

PAGE 174

APPENDIX F MATCHED GUISE QUESTIONNAIRE SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS

PAGE 175

V02 Nilmero Sexo Edad Hasta que punto consideras esta persona ser : 1. Inteligente : : : : : : No Inteligente 2. Responsable : : : : : : Irresponsable 3. Patriotico (a) : : : r : : No Patriotico (a) 4. Seguro (a) de si Mismo(a) : : : : : Inseguro(a) de : S i Mi smo ( a ) 5. Arrogante : : : : : Humilde 6. Sincero(a) : : : : : : Insincero(a) 7. Fuerte : : : : : : Debil 8. Cortes : : : : : Descortes 9. Egolsta : : : : : : Bondadoso(a) 10. Competente : : : : : : Incompetente 11. Comprensivo (a) : : : : : : Incomprensivo (a) 12. Honesto (a) : : : : : : Deshonesto (a) 13. Respetuoso (a) : : : : : : Irrespetuoso (a) 14. Buen Ciudadano (a ) : : : : : Mai : Ciudadano (a) 15. Confiable : : : : : : Desconfiable 16. Afectuoso(a) : : : : : : No Afectuoso(a) 17. Instruido(a) : : : : : : No Instruidofa) 1 o Aventurero (a ) :::::• : No Aventurero (a ) 19. Amigable : : : : : : No Amiaable 20. Ambicioso (a) -•:::: : No Ambicioso (a) 21. Persona a la Que Me Gustaria Parecerme : : : : : Persona a la Que No Me Gustaria : Parecerme 161

PAGE 176

162 22. Hasta Que Funto Te Gustaria Tener a esta Persona Como Maestro (a) ? Mucho : : : : : : En lo Absoluto Si esta Persona Fuera Tu Maestro (a) Hasta Que Punto Consideras Que Este(a) Seria un(a): 23. Maestro (a) Maestro (a) Servicial _: : : ; : : nq Servicial 24. Maestro (a) Maestro (a) Organizado (a) : : : : : : Desorganizado 25. Maestro (a) Que Maestro (a) que Ama a Sus No Ama a Sus Estudiantes : : : : : : Estudiantes 26. Maestro (a) Maestro (a) No Trabajador (a) : : : : : : Traba jador (a)

PAGE 177

Voice Nximber Sex Age To what extent do you feel that this Der son is* 1. Intelligent : : : Not Intelliaent 2. Responsible : X J. X. C^O PtJIlO J.JJX c 3. Patriotic : : : UriDatiriotic 4. Sure of Himself : • TTn QTi 0 Arrogant : 6. Sincere : 7. Strong : • rV d Js. 8. Courteous : 9. Selfish : K i nd 10. Competent : 11. Understanding : 12. Honest : • r\ T O ^ A 13. Respectful : 14. Good Citizen : 15. Reliable : 16. Affectionate : • LNvj u AX X cc uxona.ue 17. Educated : 18. Adventurous : 19. Friendly : : Unf riendlv 20. Ambitious : : Not Ambitious 21. Person Whom I Would Like to Look Like 11'' Person Whom I Would Not Like to : Look Like

PAGE 178

164 22. To What Extent Would You Like to Have this Person as Your Teacher? ^ lot : : : : ; ; Not at all If this Person Were Your Teacher, to What Extent do You Think He/She Would be: 23. Helpful Not Helpful Teacher : : : : : ; Teacher 24. Organized Disorganized Teacher : : : : : ; Teacher 25. Teacher Who Teacher Who Loves His/Her Does Not Love Students His/Her • : : : : Students 26. HardNot Hardworking Working Teacher :::::: Teacher

PAGE 179

APPENDIX G INSTRUCTIONS FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY

PAGE 180

A Matched Guise Study Set of Subject Instructions We would like you to help us in a task we hope you will find interesting. Imagine for a moment that you are listening to the radio, or to the TV from another room. In both instances, very often you can form, an impression of the person speaking just by listening to their voices. Sometimes the impression created by a voice will be close to what the person actually is like, sometimes it will of course be quite wrong, and still other times an image or impression will not come to mind at all. So, we would like to involve you in this type of 'impression formation' task. We might add that the entire exercise is totally confidential and your name will not be asked for. We have been tape recording different people found in Puerto Rico. We would like you to listen to each of these people on tape, and give us your impressions of them. To eliminate give away cues in what these people might say, we have tape recorded all of them reading the same prose passage. This passage is being distributed now. Distribute Stimulus Passage There are in fact two versions of this passage — one in Spanish and one in English, both of which will be read on tape by different people. Perhaps you could now read both passages through to accustom yourselves with the content 166

PAGE 181

167 Ss Read Stimulus Passage So, you will hear a series of speakers reading these passages and we would like your impressions of these people. Rather than letting you write down your spontaneous reactions to the tape recordings which is often hard to do because the 'right' word does not always come to mind — we are going to provide you with a list of rating scales to help you. The rating scales are in the questionnaire being distributed now, so please look down the list of adjectives and see if you have any problems with them. Questionnaire Distributed and Examined by Students Once you have heard a speaker,, you are to rate him or her on the list of scales in front of you. That is, how intelligent, friendly and so forth, you find the speaker to be. Let us make sure that you fully understand exactly how to use these scales as some of you may never have done this sort of thing before. Let me give you an example on the blackboard of how to rate someone. On the blackboard, the following will be found: Pleasant : : : : ; ; Unpleasant Let us imagine that you are asked to rate someone on the scale I have on the blackboard. Let us consider for a moment how you would rate me: By now, you will probably

PAGE 182

168 have some impression of me. If you consider me to be 'Very Pleasant' then you would place across here (showing them on the blackboard) : Pleasant X ; : : : : : Unpleasant If, on the other hand, you considered me to be 'Very Unpleasant,' then you would put a cross here (showing them again) : Pleasant : : : : : : X_Unpleasant If you were completely undecided about me, you thought me neither 'Pleasant' nor 'Unpleasant,' then you would put a cross in the middle of the scale as so: Pleasant : : : x_: : : Unpleasant If you think, yes, 'I am Pleasant, but Not Extremely or Exceptionally so,' then you would place an X here: Pleasant : X_: : : : : Unpleasant Similarly, if you think 'I am Unpleasant but not Extremely or Exceptionally so,' then you would put an X here: Pleasant : : : : x_: Unpleasant Now, if you think I am 'Slightly Pleasant' — in other words, just on the pleasant side, then you would place a cross here: Pleasant : : _K : : : : Unpleasant Similarly, if you think I am 'Slightly Unpleasant' — just about unpleasant, you would place an X here: Pleasant : : : : x_: : Unpleasant So, are there any questions about this? If you look at the first scale on your questionnaire you

PAGE 183

will see it is Intelligent — Untelligent. The same manner of rating would of course, occur here too. Just to be extra sure, let us look at the example on the blackboard On the blackboard now will be the following scale: Intelligent : : : : : : Unintelligent If we consider the speaker we hear to be 'VeryIntelligent,' we place a cross here (show them again) : 'Very Unintelligent' here, 'Undecided' or 'Not Intelligent or Unintelligent' here, 'Intelligent but Not Extremely' here, 'Unintelligent but Not Extremely' here, and finally 'Moderately Intelligent' here and 'Moderately Unintelligent' here. So, let me repeat the procedure for you. You will hear a voice on the tape recorder reading the standard prose passage. When the passage has been read and the tape recorder turned off, you can rate the speaker on the scales on the questionnaire. This done, we move on to the next voice, rate that, and so on and so forth. We would like you to listen to the speaker reading all of the passage for the first few voices, after that you may begin rating whenever you like, even if he or she has only been speaking for a few seconds. However, be sure that you have a firm image of the speaker before you start rating. Once you start, go straight down the list of scales and place your crosses as quickly as you can. If you stop at one scale and become undecided — give it

PAGE 184

170 a mark in the middle, which is the undecided one anyvay. Similarly, if you cannot get an impression of a particular speaker at all; place crosses in the middle of all the scales. The longer you think about individual items, the more confused you will get; so carry straight through. Be careful, also, to place a cross on each scale, and also, if possible, use all parts of the scale. Do not stick always to the moderate slots, or the the extremes. After each voice has finished, I will turn the. tape recorder off and give you about two minutes to rate the speaker. Is everything quite clear? Do you have any questions? The first voice, 'Speaker 1,' will be a practice voice for you to get used to the procedure. I will play Voice 1, then if there are no questions, after I have played it, rate the speaker on the scales provided and denote the speaker on the questionnaire as Speaker 1 Number each speaker as you hear him or her. If you have any questions after listening to the practice voice, please mention them at once. When we start with Speaker 2, I cannot answer anymore questions. One final word before you begin. Obviously, you will all react to these speakers in quite different ways. This is natural — we all do not feel positively or negatively about the same person. So, it is your views that we are interested in — not anybody else's. Therefore, whatever anybody else does in their rating is irrelevant. If

PAGE 185

171 you mark the same way as other people around you — you are not much of an individual are you? As I mentioned before, this is all entirely confidential — so please, be completely honest in your impressions. The teacher would then play practice Voice Number 1. When finished, the teacher would turn off the recorder and instruct the students to rate. After 2 or 3 minutes, the teacher would try to hurry up the people who had still not finished but would allow everybody to finish before the procedure was repeated for the next voice. Before playing Voice Nximber 2, the teacher would remind the students to: (1) rate every item, (2) use all parts of the scale, (3) go quickly through the series of scales, and (4) not to be concerned with other people's feelings. The teacher thereafter would have to keep reminding people about these things and also to label speakers as 'Speaker 2,3 or 4'. Before playing each new voice, the teacher would ask the students to check through to see that they had not missed a scale for rating the previous speaker. Finally, the teacher had to make sure that the student had been given a number corresponding to the teacher's roll book so that each questionnaire could be attached to the Language Attitude Questionnaire to be administered at a later date.

PAGE 186

APPENDIX H SUMMARY TABLES FOR MATCHED GUISE STUDY

PAGE 187

TABLE 8 Factor Analysis for Matched Guise Study Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Evaluative Dynamism Teacher Value Intelligent 0. 64 Arrogant 0. 69 Person I would like Responsible 0. 69 Selfish 0. 69 to look like 0. 77 Sure of Him/ Ambitious 0. 63 Person I would like Her Self 0. 61 to have as teacher 0. 65 Sincere 0. 68 Helpful teacher 0. 85 Courteous 0. 69 Organized teacher 0. 85 Understanding 0. 64 Teacher who loves Honest 0. 70 his/her students 0. 84 Respectful 0. 71 Hard-working teacher 0. 85 Reliable 0. 67 Educated 0. 60 Good Citizen 0. 71 173

PAGE 188

174 TABLE 9 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Speech Group Combination 1 Dependent Variable Citizenship Source df SS MS F £ Due to Model 1 373 .31 373.31 160.38 <.05 Due to Error 3709 8633 .16 2.32 Total 3710 9006 .47 TABLE 10 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups Dependent Variable Citizenship Source df SS MS F E Due to Model 3 36.09 12.03 5.03 0.0019 Due to Error 4347 10404.78 2.39 Total 4350 10440.87

PAGE 189

175 TABLE 11 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Sex of Speaker Dependent Variable Evaluative Source §3 MS F Due to Model 1 1150.24 1150.24 11.46 0.0007 Due to Error 3069 308072.21 100.38 Total 3070 309222.46 E TABLE 12 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Sex of Speaker Dependent Variable Evaluative Source §S MS F Due to Model 1 13273.06 13273.06 36.77 0.0001 Due to Error 4349 665274.15 152.97 Total 4350 678547.51 E

PAGE 190

176 TABLE 13 Analysis of Variance Sunonary Table for Four Speech Groups by Sex of Speaker Dependent Variable Citizenship Source ^ SS MS F Due to iModel 1 200. 64 200. 64 85.21 0 .0001 Due to Error 4349 10240.23 2.35 Total 4350 10440.87 £ TABLE 14 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups By Elementary School Students Dependent Variable Evaluative Source df SS MS F g Due to Model 3 1329.67 443.22 4.42 0.0044 Due to Error 3967 307892.78 100.38 Total 3070 309222.46

PAGE 191

177 TABLE 15 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups Dependent Variable Evaluative Source §S MS £ £ Due to Model 3 3060.82 1020.27 6.57 0.003 Due to Error 4347 675486.69 155.3^ Total 4350 678547.51 TABLE 16 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups Dependent Variable Evaluative Source df SS MS F p Due to Model 3 2085.41 695.13 4.72 0.0029 Due to Error 4010 590584.26 147.27 Total 4013 592669.68

PAGE 192

178 TABLE 17 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Zone Dependent Variable Dynamism E Source df SS MS F Due to iModel i 34.76 34.76 2.46 0.1174 Due to Error 1086 15369.45 14.15 Total 1087 15404.21 TABLE 18 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Zone Dependent Variable Citizenship E Source df SS MS F Due to Model 3 25.87 8.62 3.43 0.0164 Due to Error 4011 10098.30 2.51 Total 4014 10124.17

PAGE 193

179 TABLE 19 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Urban School Students Dependent Variable Evaluative Source II. §3 MS F Due to Model 3 1517.69 505.89 4.05 0.0071 Due to Error 3468 432790.11 124.79 Total 3471 434307.80 E TABLE 20 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Urban School Students Dependent Variable Citizenship Source df SS MS F Due to Model 3 29.68 9.89 4.31 0.0051 Due to Error 3468 7970.16 2.29 Total 3471 7999.85 P

PAGE 194

180 TABLE 21 Analysis of Variance Suiranary Table for Speech Group 1 by Urban School Students Dependent Variable Teacher Value Source df SS MS F Due to Model 3 884.18 294.72 4.59 0.0034 Due to Error 3468 222496.32 64.15 Total 3471 223380.50 E TABLE 22 Analysis of Variance Siainmary Table for Speech Group 1 by Rural School Students Dependent Variable Teacher Value Source df SS MS F Due to Model 3 1240.37 413.45 6.02 0.0005 Due to Error 4011 275592.69 68.70 Total 4014 276833.06 P

PAGE 195

181 TABLE 23 Analysis of Variance Summary Table for Four Speech Groups by Sex of Speaker Dependent Variable Teacher Value Source df SS MS ^ E Due to Model 1 5520.84 5520.84 79.04 0.0001 Due to Error 4349 303777.79 69.85 Total 4350 309298.63

PAGE 196

APPENDIX I LANGUAGE ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE SPANISH AND ENGLISH VERSIONS

PAGE 197

Edad Grado Sexo Region Pueblo 1. iCuan frecuentemente ves norteamericanos? -"^^cho : : : : gn lo ahsoluto iCuan frecuentemente conversas con norteamericanos en los siguientes sitios? 2. En tu vecindario: ^^<=^ho : : : ; En lo absolute 3. En tu escuela: -^^^ho : : : gn lo absolute 4. Otros lugares: M^'^ho : : : : En lo absolute 5. iCuan frecuentemente ves programas de television en ingles? M^cho : : : En lo absolute 6. iCuan frecuentemente lees revistas, periodicos, munequitos, etc. en ingles fuera de la escuela? ^^^^^ • : : : En lo absolute 7. iCuan frecuentemente escuchas musica americana? ^"^^cho : : : En lo absolute 8. iCuan frecuentemente ves peliculas americanas? M^'^^^ • : : : En lo absolute 9. iHasta que punto piensas que aprender ingles te resta de ser buen puertorriqueno? Mucho : : : absolute 183

PAGE 198

184 10. iHasta que punto piensas que hablar ingles to resta de ser buen puertorriqueno? Mucho : : : .. En lo absolute 11. iHasta que punto un mayor uso del ingle's por los Puertorriquenos contribuye a la asimilacion de la cultura americana? ^^cho : : : ; En lo absoluto 12. Las ventajas de aprender ingles no justifican el tiempo y el esfuerzo envuelto. De acuerdo : : : : En desacuerdo 13. iSi aprendieras mas ingles leerias mas cuentos en ingles y verias mas peliculas americanas? Definitivamente Si : : : : Def initivamente No Hasta que punto piensas que aprender ingles podria ser importante para ti a fin de; 4 Ganar mas dinero M^c:ho : : ; : En lo absoluto 15. Obtener mejor empleo : : : : En lo absoluto 16. Entrar a la universidad : : : En lo absoluto Hasta que punto piensas que aprender ingles podria ser importante para ti^ a fin de: 17. Entender a los americanos y su forma de vida : : : En lo absoluto

PAGE 199

185 18. Conocer y conversar con un numero mayor y mas variado de personas Mucho : : : ; En lo absolute 19. iCorao piensas que hablas el ingle's? Muy bien : : : ; ^^y mal 20. iComo piensas que escribes el ingle's? Muy bien : : : : ^uy mal 21. iComo piensas que lees el ingles? l^ien : : : ^uy mal 22. iComo entiendes el ingles hablado? bien : : : ; ^uy mal 23. iComo entiendes el ingles escrito? Muy bien : : ; ^uy mal 24. iComo esperas entender ingles en un future cercano? bien : : : j^^y mal 25. iComo esperas hablar el ingles en un futuro cercano? bien : : : j^uy mal 26. iComo salistes en tu clase de ingle''s el ano pasado? bien : .. 27. iComo piensas que eres entendido al hablar ingles con americanos? ^"^^^ho : : En lo absolute 28. iCua'n satisf echo (a) esta's con tu habilidad general en ingles? Mucho : : : En lo absolute

PAGE 200

186 29. iA que extremo te averguenzas cuando hablas en ingle''s con americanos? : : : En lo absoluto 30. iHasta que punto tienes miedo de hablar ingles en publico? ^^^^'^o : : En lo absoluto 31. iHasta que punto te sientes 'torpe' cuando hablas xngles? : : : En lo absoluto 32. iComo salistes en tu clase de espanol el ano pasado? ^ien : : : Muy mal 33. iComo piensas que es tu comprension de la lectura en espanol? Muy buena : : : ^uy mala 34. iComo piensas que escribes el espanol? ^i^n : : : : Muy mal iCon que frecuencia usas el ingles? 35. En tu vecindario: Mucho : • 36. Fuera de la clase de ingle''s; Mucho : En lo absoluto En lo absoluto 37. Otros lugares : Mucho : : : absoluto 38. iCon cuanta frecuencia piensas que usarias el ingles en el futuro si pudieras hablarlo con fluidez? Mucho : • T7„ 1 ^ u T ^ — • _• • En lo absoluto

PAGE 201

187 39. iCuanto disfrutas hablando ingles? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 40. iCuanto disfrutas estando con americanos? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 41. iCuan satisfecho te sientes con la forma de vida puertorriquena? M^cho : : : : En lo absolute 42. iCuan importante es para ti hablar ingles? Mucho : : : ; En lo absolute 43. iHasta que punto crees que el espanol puerterriqueno es buen espanol? ^^che : : : : En lo absolute iHasta que punto estas a favor de las siguientes formas de ideologia politica para la isla? 44. Estado Libre Asociado: ^^^ho = : : : En lo absolute 45. Estadidad: : : : : En lo absolute 46. Independencia : : : En lo absolute 47. Estoy satisfecho (a) con la frecuencia con que se habla ingles en la isla. De acuerdo : : : desacuerdo 48. Se debe hablar mas ingles en la isla. De acuerdo : : : desacuerdo

PAGE 202

188 49. Se debe hablar menos ingles en la isla. De acuerdo : : : : En desacuerdo iHasta que punto piensas que las siguientes personas creen que aprender ingles es provechoso? 50. Mis padres: M^cho : : : : En lo absolute 51. Mis amistades: '^ucho : : : ; En lo absoluto 52. Mis maestros de ingle's: M^cho : : : ; En lo absoluto 53. Mis maestros de espanol Mucho : : : : En lo absoluto 54. Otros maestros: Mucho En lo absoluto 55. Lideres de la comunidad (ej principales de escuelas, lideres civicos) M^cho : : : En lo absoluto 56. Los libros usados para la ensenanza del ingles en Puerto Rico son interesantes De acuerdo : : : : gn desacuerdo 57. En general, los libros usados para la ensenanza del ingles en Puerto Rico son adecuados. De acuerdo : : : En desacuerdo 53. iHasta que punto los maestros (as) que has tenido han enriquecido sus clases con materiales variados? : : En lo absoluto

PAGE 203

189 59. iCuan utiles crees que son los materiales preparados por maestros para el aprendizaje del ingles? ^"^"^^^ = : : : En lo absolute iCuanto disfrutas de la manera en que tus maestros en general presentan las siguientes actividades en clase? 60. Actividades de comprension: = : : : En lo absoluto 61. Actividades de conversacion : ^"^^^^o •• : : En lo absoluto 62. Actividades de lectura: ^^'^ho : : : lo absoluto 63. Actividades de escritura: = : : : En lo absoluto 64. iCoraparada con otras clases, cuanto disfrutas de la clase de ingles? ^"^^^^o = : : : En lo absoluto 65. iEn general, como opinas que los maestros (as) que has tenido saben hablar el ingles? ^i^^ = •• : : Muy mal 66. iComparado con maestros (as) de otras asignaturas, cuan corapetente opinas que han sido tus maestros (as) de ingles? Mucho : -cv, 1 ^ V, 1 ^ • • : En lo absoluto 67. iCuanto ingles usan tus maestros (as) en el salon de clases? Mucho En lo absoluto

PAGE 204

190 68. iCuanto ingles hablas en la clase de ingle^s? Mucho : : : : Nada 69. iHasta que punto piensas que aprender un segundo idioma es importante? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 70. iHasta que punto piensas que aprender un segundo idioma debe ser opcional? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 71. iHasta que punto piensas que si un segundo idioma fuera requisite de graduacion el estudiante debiera decidir que idioma estudiar? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 72. i Si pudieras seleccionar el segundo idioma a estudiar, escogerias el xngles? Def initivamente Si : : : : Def initivamente No 73. iHasta que punto piensas que tienes una aptitud natural para aprender idiomas? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 74. iHasta que punto te pones nervioso(a) cuando tienes que hablar en la clase de ingles comparado con otras clases? Mucho : : : : En lo absolute 75. iEn general, come salistes en todas tus clases el ane pasado? Muy bien : : : ; Muy mal

PAGE 205

191 76. iEn general, que piensas sobre el aprendizaje del ingles? Explica brevemente.

PAGE 206

192 Age Grade Sex Region District 1. How often do you see Anglo-Americans? A lot : : : : Not at all How often do you speak with Anglo-Americans in the following places? 2. In your neighborhood: A lot : : : : Not at all 3. In your school: A lot : : : : Not at all 4. Other places: A lot : : : : Not at all 5. How often do you watch television programs in English? A lot : : : : Not at all 6. How often do you read magazines, newspapers, comic strips, etc. in English outside of school? A lot • • • • • • Not at all 7. How often do you hear American music? A lot • • • Not at all 8. How often do you watch American films? A lot Not at all 9. To what extent do you feel that learning English keeps you from being a good Puerto Rican? A lot : : : : Not at all

PAGE 207

10. To what extent do you feel that speaking English keeps you from being a good Puerto Rican? A lot : : : : Not at all 11. To what extent a greater use of English by Puerto Ricans contributes to the assimilation of the American culture? A lot : : : : Not at all 12. The advantages of learning English do not justify the time and effort involved. I agree : : : : i disagree 13. If you learned more English would you read more stories in English and see more American films? Definitely yes : : : Definitely no To what extent do you feel that learning English could be important for you in order to: 14. Earn more money lot : : : ; Not at all 15. Get a better job lot : : : : Not at all 16. Enter college A lot : : : : ^ot at all To what extent do you feel that learning English could be important for you in order to : 17. Understand Americans and their way of life A lot : : : : Not at all

PAGE 208

194 18. Know and talk to a greater and more varied number of persons A lot • • Not at all 19. How do you feel that you speak English? Very well I z Very bad 20. How do you feel that you write English? Very well I • • • • < Very bad 21. How do you feel that you read English? Very well : : : : Very bad 22. How do you understand spoken English? Very well • t • Very bad 23. How do you understand written Encrlish? Very well • • Very bad 24. How do you expect to understand English in the near future? Very well '. • • • • • Very bad 25. How do you expect to speak English in the near future Very well : • • • • • • Very bad 26. How did you do in your English class last year? Very well • : : : Very bad 27. How do you think you are understood when speaking English with Americans? = '• : : Not at all How pleased do you feel with your English ability in general? • = : : Not at all

PAGE 209

195 29. To what extent do you feel ashamed when you speak English with Americans? A lot : : : : Not at all 30. To what extent are you afraid to speak English in public? A lot : : : : Not at all 31. To what extent do you feel 'stupid' when you speak English? A lot : : : : Not at all 32. How did you do in your Spanish class last year? Very well : : : : Very bad 33 Kow do you think is your understanding of reading in Spanish? Very good : : : : Very bad 34. How do you think you write Spanish? Very well : : : Very bad How often do you use English? 35. In your neighborhood: A lot : : : : Not at all 36. Outside the English class: A lot : : : : Not at all 37. Other: A lot : : : : Not at all 38. How often do you think you would use English in the future if you could speak it fluently? A lot : : : ; ^ot at all 39. How much do you enjoy speaking English?

PAGE 210

A lot : : : ; Not at all 40. How much do you enjoy being with Americans? lot : : : ; Not at all 41. How pleased do you feel with the Puerto Rican way of life? A l"t : : : : Not at all 42. How important is it for you to speak English? A lot : : : ; Not at all 43. To what extent do you think that Puerto Rican Spanish is good Spanish? A lot : : : ; Not at all To what extent are you in favor of the following political ideologies for the island? 44. Commonwealth: A lot : : : ; Not at all 45. Statehood: ^ lot : : : : Not at all 46. Independence: ^ lot : : : : Not at all 47. I am satisfied with the frequency with which English is spoken on the island. 1 agree : : : ; j disagree 48. More English should be spoken on the island. ^ ^^ree : : ; j disagree 49. Less English should be spoken on the island. ^ ^5^^^ = : : : I disagree

PAGE 211

197 To what extent do you feel that the following people believe that learning English is advantageous? 50. My parents: ^ lot : : : : ^ot at all 51. My friends: A lot : : : ; jjot at all 52. My English teachers: ^ : •• : : Not at all 53. My Spanish teachers: ^ : : : Mot at all 54 Other teachers : ^ 1"^ = : : : Not at all 55. Conmunity leaders: (i.e., school principals, civic leaders) ^ • : : Not at all 56. The books used for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico are interesting. ^ ^^ree : .. : j disagree 57. In general, the books used for the teaching of English in Puerto Rico are adequate. I agree : : j disagree 58. To what extent have the English teachers you have had enriched their classes with a variety of materials? A lot : • Not at all 59. How useful do you believe are the materials prepared by the teachers for the teaching of English? A lot : Not at all

PAGE 212

198 How much do you enjoy the way in which your teachers in general present the following class activities? 60. Comprehension activities: A lot : : : : Not at all 61. Conversation activities: A lot : : : : Not at all 62. Reading activities: A lot : : : : Not at all 63. Writing activities: A lot : : : : Not at all 64. Compared with other classes, how much do you enjoy the English class? A lot : : : : Not at all 65. In general, what is your opinion of how well the teachers you have had speak the English language? Very well : : : : Very bad 66. In your opinion, how competent have your English teachers been as compared to teachers of other subjects? A lot : : : : Not at all 67. How much English do your teachers use in the classrocra? A lot : : : : Not at all 68. How much English do you speak in the English class? A lot : : : _: Not at all 59. To what extent do you think that learning a second language is important? A lot : : : : Not at all

PAGE 213

199 70. To what extent do you think that learning a second language should be optional? A lot : : : : Not at all 71. If a second language were a requirement for graduation, to what extent do you think the student should decide what language to study? A lot : : : : Not at all 72. If you could choose a second language to study, would you choose English? Definitely yes : : : : Definitely no 73. To what extent do you think that you have a natural ability to learn languages? A lot : : : : Not at all 75. In general, how did you come out in all your classes last year? Very well : : : : very bad 76. In general, what do you think about the learning of English? Explain briefly:

PAGE 214

200 The questions were grouped into dimensions as follows. 1. Contact with Anglo-Americans. 1-8. 2. Ethnic identity. 9-11, 41,43, 3. Value of learning a second language. 69 -71, 4. Value of learning English. 72. 5. First language ability, 32-34, 6. English language ability. 19-28, 73. 7. Second language usage. 35-38, 47-49, 68, 3, Positive aspects of learning English. 13-13, 39, 40, 42. 9. Negative aspects of learning English. 12, 29-31, 74. 10. Time and effort involved. 1. 11. Students' perceptions of how adults value the learning of English. 50-55. 12. Methods and materials. 55-67. 13. General abilities. 73, 75. 14. Political ideology. 44-46.

PAGE 215

APPENDIX J SUMMARY TABLES FOR LANGUAGE ATTITUDE STUDY

PAGE 216

TABLE 24 Factor Analysis for Language Attitude Study Factor 1; English Language Ability 2, Frequency of Speech with Anglo-Americans in Neighborhood 0.60 5. Frequency of Viewing Television Programs in English 0.61 6. Frequency of Reading Magazines, Newspapers, Comic Strips etc., in English Outside of school 0.63 19. Ability to Speak English 0.8 0 20. Ability to Write English 0.75 21. Ability to Read English 0.73 22. Ability ro Understand Spoken English 0.78 23. Ability to Understand Written English 0.68 27. Ability to be Understood by Americans 0.75 28. Self -Evaluation of General English Ability 0.75 35. English Usage in Neighborhood 0.7 5 36. English Usage Outside of English Class O.Sl 37. English Usage in Other Places 0.69 Factor 2: Methods and Materials 56. Interest Evaluation of English Language Texts 0.65 57. Adequacy of English Language Texts 0.67 58. Use of Enrichment Materials by English Teachers 0.7 2 60. Presentation of Comprehension Activities by English Teachers 0.71 202

PAGE 217

203 Table 24 continued 62. Presentation of Reading Activities byEnglish Teachers 0.60 63. Presentation of Writing Activities by English Teachers 0.60 Factor 3 : Ethnic Identity 9. Conflict of Learning English with Puerto Rican Identity 0.68 10. Conflict of Speaking English with Puerto Rican Identity 0.69 Factor 4: Student Perceptions of Value of Learning English by Teachers Other Than English Teachers 53. Value of Learning English by Spanish Teachers 0.60 54. Value of Learning English by Other Teachers 0.63

PAGE 218

204 TABLE 25 Means of Variables of Language Attitude Study N = 184 Variables Mean Standard Deviation 1 2.81 1.20 •J 3.89 1.24 3 3 57 1.22 4 3.45 1.23 3.48 1 26 c b 3.37 1.20 7 / 1.97 1.10 Q O 2 58 1.31 Q 3.99 1.34 lU 4 17 1.19 11 2.79 1.20 IZ 3.10 1. 52 1 J 1.56 0.85 14 1.85 0 96 Id 1.50 0.73 lb 1.55 0 .31 17 1.68 0.86 13 1 51 0.71 T ft 19 3 .38 1.17 20 3 .15 1.12 21 2.76 1. 01 22 3 .11 1.17 23 2.70 1. 04 24 1.84 0.84 25 2. 01 0.89 26 2.17 1.00 27 3.27 1.11 28 3.14 1.24 29 3.33 1.26 30 2.78 1.37 31 3.09 1.30 32 1. 94 0.94 33 1.73 0.79 34 1.79 0.82 35 3.90 1.17 36 3.82 1.17 37 3.57 1.27 38 1.84 0.91 39 2.49 1.32 40 2.72 1.37

PAGE 219

Table 25 continued 41 1.59 0.88 42 1.69 0 83 43 2 00 0.94 44 2.47 1 32 45 3 03 1.28 46 3.75 1 37 47 3.04 1.28 48 2.36 1 27 49 3.86 1.24 50 1.57 0.87 51 2. 00 1 00 52 1.29 0 66 53 2 07 0 9 9 54 2 04 0 96 55 1.79 1 on 56 2 .73 1 34 57 2. 81 1 24 58 2.50 1 .14 59 2 .28 1 05 60 2. 32 0 99 61 2. 27 1 09 62 2.11 1.00 63 2.15 1 06 64 2.58 1.19 65 1.76 0.86 66 2.04 0.98 67 2.05 1. 04 68 2.95 1.17 69 1.29 0.56 70 2.86 1.39 71 1.89 0.99 72 1.74 1.04 73 2.51 0.97 74 2.51 1.21 75 2.00 0.83

PAGE 220

REFERENCES Agheyisi, Rebecca, and Joshua A. Fishman. 1970. Language Attitude Studies: A Brief Survey of Methodological Approaches. Anthropoligical Linguistics. 12. 137-157. Amato Villanueva, Morris. 1975. A Sociological Approach to the Teaching of English. Unpublished monograph. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. An Exciting Plane Ride. 196 0. Reading Skill Builders, Book 2, Part 3. Reader's Digest Services. Anderson, Theodore, and Mildred Boyer. 1970. Bilingual Schooling in the United States. Volume 1, Report; Volume 2, Appendices. Austin, Texas: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Anglejan, Alison d', and G. Richard Tucker. 1973. Sociolinguistic Correlates of Speech Style in Quebec. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 1-27. Anisfeld, Moshe, and Wallace E. Lambert. 1972. Social and Psychological Variables in Learning Hebrew. In Gardner and Lambert 1972a. 217-227. Anisfeld, M.,N. Bogo, and Wallace E. Lambert. Evaluational Reactions to Accented Speech. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. LXV. 223-231. Anisman, Paul. 1975. Some Aspects of Code Switching in New York Puerto Rican English. Bilingual Review. 2. 56-85. Arus de Figueroa, Aida C. 197 0. Study of the Relationship between Achievement in English of Students of the Ana Roque High School in Humacao and their Attitudes toward the English Language and the Continental Community. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Arzola, Matilde. 197 5. English Teaching in Puerto Rico and the Returning Migrants. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. 206

PAGE 221

207 Asher, James J., and Ramito Garcia, 1970, The Optimal Age to Learn a Foreign Language. Modern Language Journal. 53. 334-341. Battle, Ana. 1976. The Puerto Rican: A Resource Unit for Teachers. Philadelphia: School District of Philadelphia and the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith. Bernstein, Abraham. 1907. Teaching English in High School. New York: Random House. Bock, Douglas G. and Thomas J. Saine. 1975. The Impact of Source Credibility, Attitude Valence, and Task Sensitization of Trait Errors in Speech Evaluation. Speech Monographs. 42. 229-236. Bonilla de Munoz, Gladys. 1972. Attitudes toward English in Puerto Rico. Monograph presented to fulfill a partial requirement of the Reading Seminar for the M.A. degree in Secondary Education in English. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Bouchard, Ryan, Ellen. 1973. Subjective Reactions toward Accented Speech. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 60-73. Bouchard, Ryan, Ellen, and Miguel A. Carranza. 1975. Evaluative Reactions of Adolescents toward Speakers of Standard English and Mexican -American Accented English. Linguistics 166. 83-101. Bourhis, Richard Y. Howard Giles, and Wallace E. Lambert. 1975. Social Consequences of Accommoclating One s Style of Speech: A Cross-National Investigation. Linguistics. 166. 55-72. Bourhis, Richard Y., Howard Giles and Henri Tajfel. 1973. Language as a Determinant of Welsh Identity. European Journal of Social Psychology. 3. 447-460. Burt, Marina, Heidi Dulay and Mary Finocchiaro. 1977. Viewpoints on English as a Second Language. New York: Regents Burton, Dwight L., and John S. Simmons. 1970. Teaching English in Today's High Schools. New York: Holt. Cardona, Providencia. 1971 Estudio comparative de la enseRanza del ingles a ninos hispanoamericanos en California y Puerto Rico. Monografia sometida al Colegio de Pedagogia, como requisite del Seminario de Lectura. Universidad de Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras.

PAGE 222

208 Carranza, Michael A., and Ellen Bouchard Ryan. 1975. Evaluative Reactions to Bilingual Anglo and MexicanAmerican Adolescents Toward Speakers of English and Spanish. Linguistics. 166. 83-101. Carroll, John 3. 1971. Current Issues in Psycholinguistics and Second Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly. 52. 101-114. Chapman de Pacheco, Catherine. 1971. The Optimum Grade Level for Starting English in Puerto Rico Public Schools. University of Puerto Rico, College of Education, Rio Piedras Cohen, Andrew D. 1974. Mexican-American Evaluational Judgments about Language Varieties. Linguistics. 136. 33-51. Concepcion, Rafaela. 1969. La Ensenanza del Ingles como Segundo Idioma. Estudio Comparative. Monografia. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Cooper, Robert L. and Joshua A. Fishman. 1974. The Study of Language Attitudes. Linguistics. 13 6. 5-19. Departamento de Estudios Graduados, Colegio de Pedagogia, Universidad de Puerto Rico. 197 2. Propuesta de programa de estudios conducentes a la maestria en la ensenanza del ingles como segunda lengua o idioma extranjero. Desroches, Alain M. P.C. Smythe and R.C. Gardner. 1975. The Social Psychology of Second Language Acquisition and Bilinguality : An Annotated Bibliography. Research Bulletin no. 340. London, Ontario: Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario. Dxaz Padilla, Jose. 1971. Estudio sobre la actitud de un grupo de estudiantes de la escuela secundaria publica hacia el aprendizaje del ingles. Monografia. Colegio de Pedagogia, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. De Briimbaugh a Celeste Benitez. 1973. El Imparcial. Division de Investigaciones Pedagogicas. Consejo Superior de Ensenanza, Universidad de Puerto Rico. n.d. La Ensenanza del Ingles en Puerto Rico. Chapter 13, Estudio del Sistema Educative de Puerto Rico. Vol. II. Ellis, D.S. Speech and Social Status in America. 1967. Social Forces. XLV. 431-437.

PAGE 223

209 Engel, Patricia L. 1972. The Use of Vernacular Languages in Education. Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics. Epstein, Edward H. 1966. Value Orientation and the English Language in Puerto Rico: Attitudes toward Second Language Learning among Ninth Graders and their Parents. University of Chicago unpublished dissertation. 197 0. Politics and Education in Puerto Rico: A Documentary Survey of the Language Issue. New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press. Ervin, S., and Charles Osgood. 1954. Second Language Learning and Bilingualism. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 49. 139-146. Fasold, Ralph W. 1972. Tense Marking in Black English: a Linguistic and Social Analysis. Urban Language Series #8. Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics. Fathraan, Ann K. 1976. Variables Affecting the Successful Learning of English as a Second Language. TESOL Quarterly. 10. 433-441. Ferguson, Charles A. 1972. Soundings: Some Topics in the Study of Language Attitudes in Multilingual Areas. Paper presented to the Tri-University I-!eeting on Language Attitudes, Yeshiva University, January. Fertig, Sheldon, and Joshua A. Fishman. 1969. Some Measures of the Interaction between Language, Domain, and Semantic Dimension in Bilinguals. Modern Language Journal. 53. 244-249. Fife, Robert H. 1951. The Teaching of English in Puerto Rico. San Juan: Department of Education Press. Fishman, Joshua A., ed. 1968. Readings in the Sociology of Language. The Hague: Mouton. Fishman, Joshua A., and Heriberto Casiano. 1969. Puerto Ricans in Our Press. Modern Language Journal. 53.3. 157-162. Fishman, Joshua A., Robert Cooper, and Roxana Ma. 1971. Bilingualism in the Barrio. Language Science Monographs, No. 7. Bloomington, Indiana: Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics. Eraser, Bruce. 1973. Some 'Unexpected' Reactions to Various American-English Dialects. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 28-35.

PAGE 224

210 Gardner, Robert C. 1972. Motivational Variables in Second Language Acquisition. In Oiler and Richards. 1973. 198-216. Gardner, Robert C. 1973. Attitudes and Motivation: Their Role in Second Language Acquisition. In Oiler and Richards. 1973. 235-245. Gardner, Robert C., and Wallace E. Lambert. 1972a. Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Massachusetts: Newbury House. 1972b. Language Aptitude, Intelligence, and Second Language Achievement. In Gardner and Lambert. 197 2a. 282-292. 1972c. Motivational Variables in Second Language Acquisition. In Gardner and Lambert. 1972a. 191-197. Giles, Howard. 1970. Evaluational Reactions to Accents. England: Educational Review. XXII. 211-227. 1973. Communicative Effectiveness as a Function of Accented Speech. Speech Monographs. 40. 33 0-331. Giles, Howard, ed. 1977 (forthcoming) Language, Ethnicity, and Intergroup Relations. London: Academic Press Giles, Howard, Richard Y. Bourhis and Donald M. Taylor. 1977 (forthcoming) Towards a Theory of Language in Ethnic Group Relations. In Giles 1977 (forthcoming). Giles, Howard, and Peter F. Powesland. 1975. Speech Style and Social Evaluation. London: Academic Press. Giles, Howard, Donald M. Taylor and Richard Y. Bourhis. 1974. Dimensions of Welsh Identity. Mimeo, McGill University. Gonzalez Atiles, Emilio, Pedro Pedraza and Ana Celia Zentella. 197 5. Toward a Language Policy for Puerto Ricans in the United States. Unpublished Manuscript. New York: Centre de Estudios PuertorriqueHos Gumperz, John J. 1967. On the Linguistic Markers of Bilingual Communication. In Macnamara. 1967a. 4 8-57. Harms, L.S. 1961. Listener Judgments of Status Cues in Speech. Quarterly Journal of Speech. XLVII. 164-168. Harrison, William, Clifford Prator and G. Richard Tucker. 1975 English Language Policy Survey of Jordan, Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics.

PAGE 225

211 Helm, June, ed. 19 68. Spanish-Speaking People in the United States: Proceedings of the 1968 Annual Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Hopper, Robert, and Frederick Williams. 1973. Speech Characteristics and Employability Speech Monographs. 40. 296-302. Hymes, Dell, ed. 19 64. Language in Culture and Society. New York: Harper and Row. Hymes, Dell. 1967, Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Setting. In Macnamara, 1967a. 8-28. Kavet sky, ^Joseph. 1963. ^Una Interpretacion Critica de la Ensenanza del Ingles en Puerto Rico desde el Ano 1949. College of Education, University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Ker linger, Fred N. 1964. Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Holt. Kimple, James Jr., Robert L. Cooper and Joshua A. Fishman. 1969. Language Switching and the Interpretation of Conversations. Lingua. 23. 127-134. Kloss, Heinz. 1967. Bilingualism and Nationalism. In Macnamara. 1967a. 39-47. Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Virginia: Center for Apolied Linguistics. Lambert, Wallace E. 1967. The Social Psychology of Bilingualism. In Macnamara. 1967a. 91-109. Lambert, Wallace E., R.C. Gardner, H.C. Barik and K. Tunstall. 1972. Attitudinal and Cognitive Aspects of Intensive Study of a Second Language. In Gardner and Lambert. 1972a. 228-245. Lambert, Wallace E., Robert C. Gardner and Samuel Fillenbaum. 1972. Evaluational Reactions to Spoken Languages. In Gardner and Lambert. 1972a. 293-305. Lambert, Wallace E., Howard Giles and Omer Picard. 1975. Language Attitudes in a French-American Community. Linguistics. 158. 127-163. Lambert, Wallace E., J. Havelka and R.C. Gardner. 1959. Linguistic Manifestations of Bilingualism. American Journal of Psychology. 72. 77-82.

PAGE 226

212 Lambert, Wallace E., R.C. Hodgson, P.C. Gardner and S. Fillenbaiom. 1960. Evaluational Reactions to Spoken Languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psycholoav 60. 44-51. Lance, Donald M. 1970. The Codes of Spanish-English Bilinguals. TESOL Quarterly. 4. 343-352. Lewis, Oscar. 1966. La Vida. New York: Random House. Ma, Roxana, and Ellen Herasimchuk. 1971 Linguistic Domains of a Bilingual Neighborhood. In Fishman. 1971. 34 9-4 64. Maccoby, Eleanor E., T.M. Newcomb and E.L. Hartley, eds. 1958. Readings in Social Psychology. New York: Holt. Macnamara, John, ed. 1967a. Problems of Bilingualism. Special issue of the Journal of Social Issues. 23. 2. 1967b. The Bilingual Linguistic Performance: A Psychological Overview. In Macnamara. 1967a. 58-77. 1973. Attitude and Learning a Second Lanauage. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 36-40. Madsen, William. 1965. Mexican-Americans of South Texas. Case Studies in Cultural Anthropology. New York: Holt. Makkai, Adam, V.B. Makkai and L. Helm, eds. 1977. Linguistics at the Crossroads. Lake Bluff, Illinois: Jupiter Press Markel, Norman N., R.m. Eisler and H.W. Reese. 1967. Judging Personality from Dialect. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 6. 33-35. Mendez,_Ana Teresa. 1971. Estudio sobre la Realcion que Existe entre las Actitudes hacia el Ingles del Colegio Nuestra SefJora de Guadalupe y los de la Escuela Luis Pales Mates. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Miller, D.R. and Hewgill, M.A. 1964. The Effect of Variations in Nonfluency on Audience Ratings of Source Credibility. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 50. 36-44. Miller, L.M. 1972. Evaluational Reactions of MexicanAmerican and Anglo Teachers to Children's Speech. Western Speech. 36. 109-114. Morris, Isaac. 1945. The Teaching of English as a Second Language. Mew York: MacMillan.

PAGE 227

213 Munoz, Mayra. 1973. Actitudes de estudiantes de cuarto ano hacia voces grabadas en ingles y espanol. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Nader, Laura. 1968. A Note on Attitudes and the Use of Language. In Fishman. 1968. 276-281. Nash, Rose. 1977. Aspects of Spanish-English Bilingualism and Language Mixture in Puerto Rico. In Linguistics at the Crossroads. 205-225. Natalicio, Diana S. and Frederick Williams. 1972. What Characteristic Can Experts Reliably Evaluate in the Speech of Black and Mexican-American Children? TESOL Quarterly. 6. 121-128. Naremore, R.C. 1971. Teachers' Judgments of Children's Speech: A Factor Analytic Study of Attitudes. Speech Monographs. 38. 17-27. Negrdn de Montilla, Aida. 1971. Americanization in Puerto Rico and the Public School System 1900-1930. P.io Piedras, Puerto Rico: Editorial Edil, Inc. New York City Board of Education. 1957. Teaching English to Puerto Rican Pupils in Grades 1 and 2. Puerto Rican Study, Mimeographed. 1957. Teaching English to Puerto Rican Pupils in Grades 3 and 4. Puerto Rican Study, Mimeographed. 1957. Teaching English to Puerto Rican Pupils in Grades 5 and 6. Puerto Rican Study, Mimeographed. Oiler, John W. Jr. 1977. Attitude Variables in Second Language Learning. In Burt. 1977. 172-184. Oiler, John W. Jr., and Jack C. Richards, eds. 1973. Focus on the Learner: Pragmatic Perspectives for the Language Teacher. Massachusetts: Newbury House. Olmeda Burgos, Maria Esther. 1973. Attitudes Towards English and the English Class of the Students of the Gabriela Mistral High School. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Osgood, Charles E., George J. Suci, and Percy H. Tannenbaum. 1971. The Measurement of Meaning. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Osuna, Juan Jose. 194 9. A History of Education in Puerto Rico. Rio Piedras: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.

PAGE 228

214 Padin., Jose. 1912. The Problem of Teaching English to the People of Puerto Rico. Department of Education Bulletin. Vol. 1. Palmer, Leslie A. 1973. A Preliminary Report on a Study of the Linguistic Correlates of Raters' Subjective Judgments of Non-native English Speech. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 35-96. Personnel of the Bilingual Education Projects of the Department of Education of Puerto Rico. June 22, 1978. Bilingual Education in Puerto Rico. San Juan Star. Principe Galarza, Jorge. 1973. Attitudes Towards the English Language. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras. Ramirez, Arnulfo G. and Robert L. Politzer. 1975. The Acquisition of English and the Maintenance of Spanish in a Bilingual Education Program. TESOL Quarterly. 9. 113-124. Ramirez-Perea, Israel. 197 2. The School Adjustment of Return Migrant Students in Puerto Rico Junior High Schools. Rio Piedras: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico. Rand, Christopher. 1958. The Puerto Ricans New York: Oxford University Press. Recomendaciones Respecto a la Ensenanza del Ingles durante el Ano Escolar 1969-70. Carta Circular Num. 88-69-70. Departmento de Instruccion Publica, Hato Rey, Puerto Rico Rodriguez Bou, Ismael. 1960. Estudio del Sistema Educative de Puerto Rico. San Juan: Editorial Universidad de Puerto Rico. Rojas, Pauline M. 1954. Sobre la Ensenanza del Ingles en Puerto Rico. ^Hato Rey: Editorial del Departamento de Instruccion Publica de Puerto Rico. Ros, Maria and Howard Giles. 1977. The Valencian Language Situation: Towards a Theoretical Framework. Unpublished manuscript. Rubin, Joan. 1962. Bilingualism in Paraguay. Anthropological Linguistics. 4. 52-28. Shuy, Roger W. 1969. The Relevance of Sociolinguistics for Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly. 3. 13-22.

PAGE 229

215 Shuy, Roger W. and Ralph W. Fasold, eds. 1973. Language Attitudes: Current Trends and Prospects. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Smith, M. Estell. 1968. The Spanish'Speaking Population of Florida. In Helm. 1968. 12-133. Tax, Sol and Leslie G. Freeman, eds. 1977. Horizons of Anthropology. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Taylor, Donald M. J. Bassili and F. Aboud. 1973. Dimensions of Ethnic Identity: an Example from Quebec. Journal of Social Psychology. 89. 185-192. Taylor, Donald M. Roch Maynard and Elizabeth Rheault. 1977. Threat to Ethnic Identity and Second Language Learning. In Giles, ed. 1977 (forthcoming). Teshner, Richard V., Garland Bills and Jerry R. Craddock. 197 5. Spanish and English of United States Hispanos: A Critical, Annotated, Linguistic Bibliography. Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics. Thompson, Roger M. 1974. Mexican-American Language Loyalty and the Validity of the 197 0 CensusLinguistics. 128. 7-18. Tucker, G.R. 1968. Judging Personality from Language Usage: a Filipino example. Philippine Sociological Review. 16. 30-39. Tumin, Melvin M. and Arnold Feldman. 1961. Social Class and Social Change in Puerto Rico. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. United States Congress, Senate. 1966. Cuban Refugee Problem. Hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate Problems Connected with Refugees and Escapees of the Committee on the Judiciary, 8 9th Congress, Second Session, Part 1: Washington, D.C., March 23, 24, 29, and 30, 1966. Part 2: New York, New York, April 13, 1966. Part 3: Newark, New Jersey, April 15, 1966. Washington, D.C. : United States Government Printing Office. Vinas de Vasguez, Paquita. 1973. The Teaching of English in Puerto Rico. TESOL Newsletter. 6. 1. Williams, Don C. 1967. The Miami Experience in English for the Foreign Born: The Adult Cuban Refugee. TESOL Quarterly. 1. 50-52.

PAGE 230

216 Williams, Frederick. 1973. Some Research Notes on Dialect Attitudes and Stereotyoes. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 113-128. 1974. The Identification of Linguistic Attitudes. Linguistics. 13 6. 21-3 2. 1976. Explorations of the Linguistic Attitudes of Teachers. Massachusetts: Newbury House. Williams, Frederick and L.M. Miller. 1971. Effects of Dialect Switching on Language and Personality Evaluations. Unpublished Manuscript. Williams, Frederick and G.W. Shamo. 1972. Regional Variations in Teacher Attitudes toward Children's Language. Central States Speech Journal. 23. 73-77. Williams, Frederick, J.L. Whitehead and L.M. Miller. 1971. Ethnic Stereotyping and Judgments of Children's Speech. Speech Monographs. 38. 166-170. Wolck, Wolfgang. 1973. Attitudes toward Spanish and Quechua in Bilingual Peru. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 129-147. Wolfram, Walter A. 1971. Overlapping Influence and Linguistic Assimilation in Second Generation Puerto Rican English. Unpublished manuscript. Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics. 1973a. Sociolinguistic Aspects of Assimilation: Puerto Rican English in New York City. Urban Language Series #9. Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics. • 1973b. Objective and Subjective Reactions of Language Assimilation among Second Generation Puerto Ricans in East Harlem. In Shuy and Fasold. 1973. 148-173.

PAGE 231

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Nitza Llado Berrxos was born on August 14, 1947, in San Juan, Puerto Rico. She attended primary school in New York and Puerto Rico and secondary school at Saint Therese Academy in San Juan. She attended the University of Puerto Rico, where she received a Bachelor of Arts degree, magna cum laude, in Secondary Education with a major in English and a minor in Spanish in May 1969. In June of that same year, she was accepted at the graduate school of the College of Education, University of Puerto Rico, where she completed her Master of Arts degree in Supervision and School Administration in the summer of 1970. After completing her master's degree, she taught English as a Second Language and supervised undergraduate student-teachers of English at the University of Puerto Rico. She also was Coordinator of the Bilingual Auxiliary Teacher's Program in conjunction with the English Program of the Department of Education for three years. She has been President of Puerto Rico TESOL, Chairperson of the Teaching English Abroad Special Interest Group (TEASIG) of National TESOL, and member-at-large of the Latino Caucus of the Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) She belongs to the Teacher's Association of Puerto Rico and to the National 217

PAGE 232

218 Association of Bilingual Education (NABE) She is also a member of Alpha Delta Kappa, an International Honorary Society for Women Educators. In 1975, she came to the University of Florida to obtain a Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Program in Linguistics. Here at the University of Florida, she has taught English as a foreign language at the English Language Institute as part of her academic work. Her dissertation research was funded by the Department of Education of Puerto Rico. Upon completion of her Ph..D. work, she will be returning to the University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras Campus, to work in the English Program of the College of Education.

PAGE 233

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Norman N. Markel, Chairman Professor of Linguistics and Speech I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. "ayn^ C Harder Professor of Linguistics I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Roger M. Thompson Associate Professor of Linguistics I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosopjy. Robert L. Curran Professor of Foundations of Education

PAGE 234

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of Linguistics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. December 1978