Teaching Turkish‐Dutch kindergartners Dutch vocabulary with a social robot: Does the robot's use of Turkish translations benefit children's Dutch vocabulary learning?. (1st December 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Leeuwestein, Hanneke; Barking, Marie; Sodacı, Hande; Oudgenoeg‐Paz, Ora; Verhagen, Josje; Vogt, Paul; Aarts, Rian; Spit, Sybren; de Haas, Mirjam; de Wit, Jan; Leseman, Paul
• Is Part Of: Journal of computer assisted learning. Volume 37:Number 3(2021)
• Page Start: 603
• Page End: 620
• Publication Date: 2020-12-01
• Subjects: first language translations -- kindergartners -- robot‐assisted language learning -- second language -- vocabulary; Computer-assisted instruction -- Periodicals; 371.334
• DOI: 10.1111/jcal.12510
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0266-4909

Abstract

Abstract: Providing first language (L1) translations in L2 vocabulary interventions may be beneficial for L2 vocabulary learning. However, in linguistically diverse L2 classrooms, teachers cannot provide L1 translations to all children. Social robots do offer such opportunities, as they can be programmed to speak any combination of languages. This study investigates whether providing L1 translations in a robot‐assisted L2 vocabulary training facilitates children's learning. Participants were Turkish‐Dutch kindergartners ( n = 67) who were taught six Dutch (L2) words for which they knew the L1 (Turkish), but not the L2 Dutch form. Half of these words were taught by a Turkish‐Dutch bilingual robot, alongside their Turkish translations; the other half by a monolingual Dutch robot. Children also completed Dutch and Turkish receptive vocabulary tests. Results of generalized linear regression models indicated better performance in the Dutch‐only condition than in the Turkish‐Dutch condition. Children with well‐developed Turkish and Dutch vocabulary knowledge outperformed children with less well‐developed vocabulary knowledge. The majority of children preferred working with the bilingual robot, but children's preference did not affect word learning. Thus, contrary to our prediction, we found no evidence for a facilitating effect of providing L1 translations through a robot on bilingual children's L2 word learning. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Turkish‐Dutch children often lag behind their monolingual Dutch peers in terms of Dutch (L2) language skills, which means that supporting these children's L2 development is highly relevant. Children may boost their L2 vocabulary learning using their Turkish (L1) vocabulary knowledge. Social robots that can speak a vast variety of languages can be used to provide L1 input in linguistically diverse classrooms. What this paper adds: Using an experimental design with a social robot, we investigated whether children learned more L2 words when L1 translations were provided by a bilingual Turkish‐Dutch robot. Children learned more L2 target words when the robot spoke only L2, compared to when the robot also provided L1 translations. >70% of the children preferred to play again with the bilingual robot, as compared to the monolingual robot. Implications for practi c e and/or policy: More research is needed to investigate how children's L1 can help L2 vocabulary learning, perhaps a more L1‐inclusive school context. Technological developments (e.g., in automatic speech recognition) are needed to further improve the interaction between robot and child.