1. Sponsoring Committee: Professor Frank Tang, Chairperson
Professor Miriam Eisenstein Ebsworth
Professor Margot Ely
EXPERIENCES OF LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE IN
THE UNITED STATES: FIVE PEOPLE'S LANGUAGE STORIES
Sonna L. Opstad
Program in Multilingual Multicultural Studies
Department of Teaching and Learning
Submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in the
Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development
New York University
2009

2. UMI Number: 3346266
Copyright 2009 by
Opstad, Sonna L.
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI
UMI Microform 3346266
Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 E. Eisenhower Parkway
PO Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346

3. Copyright © 2009 Sonna L. Opstad

4. I hereby guarantee that no part of the dissertation which I have submitted for
publication has been heretofore published and/or copyrighted in the United Stated
of America, except in the case of passages quoted from other published sources;
that I am the sole author and proprietor of said dissertation; that the dissertation
contains no matter which, if published, will be libelous or otherwise injurious, or
infringe in any way the copyright of any other party; and that I will defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless New York University against all suits and ,
proceedings which may be brought against New York University by reason of the
publication of said dissertation.
J6/SL I0%

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am fortunate to have benefited from the support, wisdom, guidance,
friendship, encouragement, patience and understanding of a number of people
throughout this experience. I offer my very sincere gratitude to them here.
To Dr. Frank Tang, my chair, I am grateful for his guidance in all aspects
of this process, for reminding me that the dissertation is my first research study
and not my whole life's work, and especially for the sense of balance he provided.
He seemed to have an intuitive sense of when I needed patience and when I
needed to be pushed. I hope I can develop that sort of sense with my students.
I am indebted to Dr. Margot Ely for all of her extra time and care, for
allowing me to intrude on her retirement, and for her confidence in me. I am
especially grateful to her for teaching me about qualitative research. She has
shown me a way of learning that has helped me to make sense of life both
personally and professionally. And I try to create that welcoming feeling I found
in her classes in my own teaching.
Dr. Miriam Eisenstein Ebsworth has been a mentor to me since I first
started the master's program in Bilingual Education at NYU. I have been inspired
by her knowledge and commitment to the field, and appreciated her enthusiasm
iii

6. and humor. I thank her for all her ongoing encouragement and for helping me get
the job that kept my head above water.
Laurie Knis-Matthews, my friend and colleague, has been there for me
every step of the way. She's shared the excitement, the frustration, the meltdowns
and the celebrations. I could call her anytime and count on finding an empathetic
ear. My thanks also, Laurie, for the opportunity to work with your students.
Thank you to Alice Ganz for the e-mails, meetings at the diner and the
working conferences at the swimming pool. They helped to provide much needed
relaxation in addition to research support.
My thanks to Ming-Chi Own for her insight, perspective and
encouragement. I wish you lived closer!
I am grateful to my sister, Karen Opstad, and my brother, Steven Opstad,
for their patience and tolerance while I indulged in this work. They endured the
financial repercussions of my choice, my hermit-like behavior, and my whining,
all without a complaint of their own.
I am indebted to my parents, Woody and Reba Opstad, for much more
than I can begin to list here. They embodied the spirit of "Don't give up" and
were proud of me, as long as I tried my best. I wish they were still here.
To my dog Elsa, for her unconditional love and for understanding more
than is humanely possible.
Most of all, I offer my thanks to the participants in this study, Joseph,
Nari, Ella, William, and Dino, for so generously sharing their stories with me.
iv

7. TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
iii
CHAPTER
I
INTRODUCTION
1
II
RELATED LITERATURE
6
Attitudes, Policies, and Bilingualism
Language Attrition, Language Loss, and Language Shift
Benefits of Bilingualism
Connections between LI, Identity, Culture,
and Family
Complicity and Native Language Loss
III
RESEARCH METHODS
6
10
15
17
21
23
Participants
Participant Selection - Joseph, Nari, Ella, and William
The Chinese Heritage Language School
Participant Selection - Dino
Data Collection
Field Log
Data Analysis
Category Files and Theme Statements
Trustworthiness
Support Groups
Prolonged Engagement
Participant Checks
Socio-cultural Issues
Researcher's Stance
Presentation of the Data
I-Stories
Themes and Discussion
23
24
25
30
33
37
37
38
39
39
40
41
41
42
48
48
49
Continued
V

8. THE PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR STORIES
50
Interviewing Joseph
Joseph's Story
Interviewing Nari
Nari's Story
Interviewing Ella
Ella's Story
Interviewing William
William's Story
Interviewing Dino
Dino's Story
51
53
74
75
93
95
118
120
138
143
VARIATIONS ON A THEME - COMMON THREADS
Feelings about Language Proficiency, What it Means to
Know a Language, and the Struggle to Develop
and Maintain Languages in the United States
How proficient I feel in my heritage language is
complex. It varies over time, from situation to
situation, in comparison to others and with my
level of confidence
Reading and writing are part of knowing my language
I used my heritage language only with my family and
now the way I speak doesn't work outside the
family
Use it or lose it
I need both formal study in my language and a setting
that requires me to use it in order to develop and
maintain it
I had no special help with English in the United States,
so I struggled
Discussion
The Relationship between Language and Self and Issues
about English as a Replacement Language
Language is part of who I am
My feelings about my language and who I am reflect
the language attitudes I experienced
With my Asian features, I feel that I am not accepted
in the United States because of the way I look;
when I replaced my language with English I lost a
part of my self
168
169
169
177
180
182
186
189
195
203
203
208
216
Continued
vi

9. With my European features, speaking English with an
American accent is key to being accepted as an
American
Not knowing my heritage language is like rejecting my
culture; it's an embarrassment
Discussion
Obstacles and Hopes - The Role of Responsibilities, Time,
Exposure, and Effort in Heritage Language
Development for Themselves and Their Children
Pressing Responsibilities interfere with opportunities
to study and use my heritage language
English is the common language for my spouse and
me, so it's difficult to pass my native language on
to my children
My hope for my children is that early exposure to the
language will plant a seed that will help them
develop it more easily when they choose to pursue
it
Making the effort to develop and maintain the heritage
language is as important as the result
Discussion
VI
SUMMARY, METATHEME, IMPLICATIONS, AND
FINAL REFLECTIONS
Metatheme - The Centrality of Emotion in Language Use
Discussion
Speaking to My Profession
Suggestions for Future Research
Reflections on the Research Process
219
222
226
239
239
247
250
255
262
277
283
286
288
294
296
REFERENCES
305
APPENDICES
312
A
RECRUITMENT NOTICE
312
B
CONSENT TO Participate IN THE STUDY
313
C
PARTICIPANT CATEGORIES
315
D
SAMPLES OF TRANSCRIPTS
317
vii

10. CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
I sat in classrooms for two to three years without understanding what was
being said, and cried while the girl next to me filled in my spelling book
for. In music class...I wouldn't sing. In art class, I was so traumatized that
I couldn't be creative....I went into a "survivor mode" and couldn't
participate in activities. (Quan, 1990 p. 213)
Arriving in the United States at the age of seven, with no English beyond
the alphabet and a few basic words, Kit Yuen Quan (1990) describes what school
was like for her. Eventually English replaced Chinese, and when she left home at
age sixteen, Quan recalls her subsequent devastation at her native language loss:
I felt like I had no family, no home, no identity or culture I could claim...I
didn't even have the words to communicate what I felt. (p. 214)
In contrast, she relates a completely different feeling she observed among
the Cambodian children whom she tutored:
They spoke only Cambodian with their family...English was used for
school work and to talk to me... When they spoke to each other they were
not alone or isolated...they were connected to each other through their
language and their culture...in speaking their language they were able to
love and comfort each other, (p. 217)
As an adult, Quan began to study Chinese again and to reconnect with her
family. She writes:
I have had to create my own literacy program. I had to recognize that the
school system failed to meet my needs as an immigrant...! have to let
1

11. myself grieve over the loss of my native language and all the years wasted
in classrooms staring into space or dozing off when I was feeling
depressed and hopeless, (p. 220)
Similarly, in her discussion of the No-Cost Study investigating the
language patterns of language minority children in preschools, Lily WongFillmore (1991) argues that native language loss contributes to academic
difficulties for children and has a negative impact on other areas of their lives as
well. She writes, "the consequences of losing a primary language are far reaching,
and it does affect the social, emotional, cognitive, and educational development of
language minority children" (p. 342). She further suggests that the negative
effects of native language loss extend beyond the individual, "the loss of a
primary language, particularly when it is the only language spoken by the parents,
can be very costly to the children, their families, and to society as a whole" (p.
323).
Some of the consequences of this loss are poignantly revealed in the
stories documented by Sandra Kouritzin (1999) through interviews she conducted
with adults identifying themselves as having experienced the loss of a childhood
language. One participant described it this way, "I feel that I lost a part of my
identity....I really feel that it's been a personal assault" (p. 47) and another,
"Losing the language is like losing half the man you are" (p. 71). In describing
communication with parents, "When I spoke to my parents, we spoke in English
and that was it. They communicated what they could, but I'm sure they never
really understood what we were trying to say" (p. 93). The participants frequently
2

12. reported having difficulty in English and feeling anxiety because of it, but
acknowledged that English was their strongest language. Some expressed regret at
having lost a marketable skill. As one participant put it, "I just see it as a freebie. I
missed out on a freebie and now I have to pay for it" (p. 177).
Efforts to address the educational needs of language minority children in
the United States tend to focus on English. These children's native languages are
often considered problems to be overcome rather than resources to be developed
(Freeman, 1999). Stories such as Kit Yuen Quan's and those documented by Lily
Wong-Fillmore (1991 and 2000) and Sandra Kouritzin (1999) suggest damaging
outcomes from this practice and provoke further questions.
As an elementary ESL teacher, my experience with the children at school
was: the stronger the first language, the stronger the second. While it may seem
contrary to common sense (shouldn't more English produce more English?), Jim
Cummins (1987, 1992, 1996, 2000) explains this seemingly contradictory
situation by suggesting that a common underlying proficiency develops as
children learn, which is available across languages. The concepts one develops in
the native language are potentially available in the second, given adequate
exposure and motivation to learn the second language. Simply put, if you learn
about a concept in your first language, you don't need to relearn the concept in the
second. You merely need some new vocabulary. Stephen Krashen (1996)
illustrates this idea with his "Paris Argument." He says to imagine you have taken
a job in Paris, and that you speak no French, or maybe you studied it for a little
3

13. while several years ago. How much easier it would be to learn French if you have
information in English about how to find a place to live, where to shop,
information about the place where you work and the routines observed there. The
background information in English makes the input you will receive in French
more comprehensible. Numerous studies, among them Chaswick (1991); Gardner,
Polyzoi & Rampaul (1996); Ramos & Krashen (1997) found this positive
relationship between first and second language development (cited in Krashen,
1999).
Given the research supporting the positive role of the first language in
facilitating English development and in promoting academic achievement, the
focus on English, and English only, that appears to be increasing in our schools
seems counter-productive. Further, as Quan (1990), Wong-Fillmore (1991, 2000),
and Kouritzin (1999) have indicated, first language loss, "which may refer to lack
of first language development, delayed first language development, or a
progressive loss of previously-acquired language ability (Verhoeen &
Boeschoten, 1986)" (Kouritzin, p.l 1), appears to have potentially damaging
consequences. Studies of heritage language development efforts (Cho 2000,2004;
Tse 2000, 2001a, 2001b) offer support for the potential benefits of developing
both the immigrant language and English and reveal some of the challenges
involved.
While there has been considerable research on the linguistic aspects of
first language loss, Kouritzin's is one of the first studies to investigate the issue as
4

14. it concerns the whole person - his/her educational, emotional, and family
experiences. An in-depth understanding of this experience is vital in order for
policy-makers, parents, and teachers to make informed decisions regarding
effective educational services for children who are learning English as an
additional language. Each story contributes to this understanding - adding
perspectives, strengthening the images, refining focus, to provide a clearer more
complete picture.
This study is an attempt to continue the work Kouritzin, Tse, WongFillmore and others have begun by documenting the language stories of a group
of five Americans who identified themselves as having experienced limited
development or loss of skills in their native languages when they learned English
as a second language. Their stories add insight into the question: How do people
who learn English as a second language in childhood, with English becoming
their dominant language, describe their language learning experiences?
Sub-questions include:
How do people describe their experiences learning English?
How do they describe their proficiency in the native language?
What is the role of the native language in their lives?
What do they report influences their language use and language proficiency?
What are their plans and hopes for their children regarding language?
5

15. !
CHAPTER II
RELATED LITERATURE
A review of the literature on first language loss inevitably involves a
variety of issues related to bi/multilingualism. The way that societal attitudes
toward language diversity and immigration interact with education policies and
legislation, directly impacts the likelihood of maintaining or losing the first
language for individuals and communities. The connections between language,
culture, and identity, along with research into the cognitive and linguistic aspects
of bilingualism and first language attrition all enter into the discussion, as do the
insights from the study of heritage language development. An abbreviated
overview is presented here as a backdrop for the current investigation of the
individual experience of first language loss.
Attitudes, Policies, and Bilingualism
Despite the English-only rhetoric in the United States which portrays
monolingualism as desirable and necessary, in the rest of the world, bilingualism
and even multilingualism are the norm (Baker, 2000; Lessow-Hurley, 2000;
Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000). One particularly impressive example is provided by
6

16. Candelaria-Greene (1996) in her description of the situation in Kenya, in which
multilingualism is expected and routinely achieved. After approximately four
years in school, the special education students in her study demonstrated
proficiency in at least three languages (family/tribal language, Kiswahili, and
English) comparable to the English proficiency of native speakers in the U.S. who
were identified as having similar special needs.
A look at U.S. history reveals that bilingualism and bilingual education are
not recent developments there either, and in fact, both have been in existence
since the nation began (Freeman, 1999; Lessow-Hurley, 2000). The writers of the
Constitution did not declare an official language, and throughout the 1800s, state
laws guaranteed bilingual education and bilingual publications (Freeman 1999).
At various times throughout the 19* century, Norwegian, Swedish, Danish,
German, French, Dutch, Polish, Czech, Italian, and Spanish communities all
operated schools in languages other than English, or bilingually (Kloss, 1977 as
cited in Crawford, 2000). During this same period, the Cherokee achieved levels
of biliteracy (in English and Cherokee) that were higher than the English literacy
rates of whites in Texas and Arkansas (Freeman, 1999; Lessow-Hurley, 2000). As
efforts to dominate Native Americans intensified, the Cherokee printing press was
confiscated, children were removed from their homes, and forced to attend
schools where the Cherokee language was prohibited.
The climate for European and Asian immigrants also changed toward the
end of the 19th century. Laws restricted Chinese and Japanese immigration. A
7

17. wave of xenophobia ensued, focusing largely on the Germans, whose large
numbers made them highly noticeable (Freeman, 1999). The start of World War I
intensified anti-German sentiment and anti-immigrant sentiment in general
(Crawford, 2000; Lessow-Hurley, 2000). The English language became
associated with patriotism and other languages were viewed as anti-American.
Pressure to assimilate was intense, with some states passing legislation banning
the use of languages other than English for instruction (Crawford, 2000; Freeman,
1999; Lessow-Hurley, 2000). This climate, along with severe restrictions on
immigration dramatically promoted the dominance of English. Freeman (1999)
writes, "...a linguistically diverse United States became a largely monolingual
country over the course of one generation" (p.33).
This period of disregard for languages other than English continued until
the 1960s, when the Civil Rights movement sparked consideration of Englishonly practices as a potential violation of equal rights (Crawford 2000, Freeman,
1999). With the conservative backlash and renewed anti-immigration sentiment in
the 1980s, the tide turned again. While Congress continually renewed the
Bilingual Education Act, the number of checks by the Office of Civil Rights for
compliance decreased drastically (Crawford, 2000). And programs that stressed a
quick transition to English or English-only instruction received the majority of
funds.
The 1990s produced competing attitudes towards bilingualism and
bilingual education. Congress again renewed the Bilingual Education Act in 1994,
8

18. even adding the preservation of the child's native language as a desired goal,
however enforcement and funding for native language maintenance were almost
non-existent (Crawford, 2000). Legislation banning bilingual education passed in
several states. At the same time, there was a dramatic increase in two-way
bilingual programs, also called dual language immersion, which instruct native
English-speakers and language minority students in both English and the minority
language. Public opinion regarding bilingualism and bilingual education has
seemed to ebb and flow, and at times storm depending on the political and
economic situation, and how useful or threatening new immigrants and Native
Americans were perceived to be (Freeman, 1999; Lessow-Hurley, 2000).
A contributing factor to the contradictory currents of public opinion is the
popular press. In their examination of the relationship between findings of
published research and the opinions regarding bilingualism and bilingual
education that were presented in newspaper and magazine articles from 19841994), McQuillan & Tse (1996) found a discrepancy between the results of
academic research and the viewpoints presented in newspaper and magazine
articles. While 86% of studies in their ERIC search reported results favorable to
bilingual education, only 45% of the persuasive media pieces could be classified
as favorable. Furthermore, less than half of the newspaper and magazine articles
supported their opinions with social science research. Crawford's discussion of
the media coverage involving bilingual education, Ron Unz and Proposition 227
(1998 presentation, published in Crawford 2008) revealed a similar situation.
9

19. Journalists viewed it as a political story, rather than an education or science story.
They tended to focus on sound bites that provided a more dramatic article; the
results of educational research were more complex and not nearly as readerfriendly. Research that brings a human face to issues of language is necessary to
bridge this gap between research and public opinion.
Currently, and throughout its history, policies and practices regarding
language in the United States often reflect emotional responses to the political
situation at the time. Rarely does the problem of native language loss enter into
the discussion (Tse, 2001). An understanding of this experience in human terms is
essential so that we can move beyond assumptions and make informed decisions
about issues affecting English language learners.
Language Attrition. Language Loss, and Language Shift
Language attrition, language loss, and language shift are terms that are
sometimes used interchangeably in the literature. Language loss can refer to the
loss of the language ability at the group level, across generations (Kouritzin,
1999; Tse, 2001; Wong-Fillmore, 1991), or for an individual (Anderson, 1999,
2006; Kouritzin, 1999; Wong-Fillmore, 2000). Language attrition is the linguistic
term for the loss of language skills by an individual (Seliger & Vago, 1988;
Yagmur, De Bot & Korzilius 1999). Van Els (1986, cited in Jamshidiha &
Marefat, 2006) designated several categories to specify the type of loss:
LI loss in an LI environment (e.g., aphasia, aging, dialect loss)
10

20. LI loss in an L2 environment (e.g., loss of native languages by immigrants)
L2 loss in an LI environment (e.g. loss of a foreign language)
L2 loss in an L2 environment (e.g., loss of L2 by elderly immigrants)
First language attrition in an L2 environment, including limited
development of the first language, is the situation addressed in this study.
Research on first language attrition has typically focused on the specific changes
that occur in the language. The interest of this study relates more to the overall
personal experience. As Kouritzin (1999) did, I have chosen to use the more
general term language loss. To more accurately reflect the situations described, I
frequently refer to the experience as loss in the native or heritage language. I use
the terms first language, native language, immigrant language and heritage
language interchangeably to refer to the non-English languages used by
immigrant families.
Language shift refers to a change in language use (Fishman 1991;
Grosjean, 1982; Tse, 2001c; Zhang 2004) in which a group or individual begins to
use another language with more frequency and reduces the uses of the previous
language, typically shifting from minority language use to majority language use.
Migration, immigration, and political changes are situations that can promote this
shift. The shift can be accompanied by language loss, usually across generations.
Language shift in immigration situations in the United States is welldocumented (Fishman, 1991; Grosjean 1982; Portes & Hao, 1998; Tse, 2001c;
Wong Filmore 1991, 2000). Initially, the immigrants are monolingual in the LI.
11

21. Depending on the community situation, among other factors, they achieve varying
degrees of bilingualism. Their children may be bilingual, but the next generation
is likely to be monolingual in English. There is evidence that this shift is
happening even more rapidly today (Portes & Hao, 1998) even within an
individual lifetime (Wong-Fillmore, 2000).
How likely is language shift in young children? Wong-Fillmore's (1991)
often cited large-scale study revealed this trend in preschool children to be
widespread in California, much to the surprise and dismay of the parents.
Cummins' (1991, in Cummins 1996) longitudinal study of 20 children in Toronto
documented the rapid shift from Portuguese to English as children went from
junior kindergarten at age four, to first grade. Although parents continued to speak
Portuguese to their children, interviews and tapes of home language use revealed
that children were increasingly English dominant. By the end of grade one, only
two children were still more proficient in Portuguese and three demonstrated
equal proficiency in English and Portuguese. The rest were English dominant.
Consistent with theories of the positive influence of the LI on L2 development,
those children who were maintaining their Portuguese also had developed
stronger reading skills in English.
Subsequent studies have supported these findings among older children as
well (Hinton, 1999, Portes & Hao 1998, Tse 2001c). Portes & Hao's 1998 study
involving over 5,000 children of immigrants found few that considered
themselves fluent in their native language by the time they reached middle school.
12

22. In the article, Separated by a Wall of Words, published April 10,2001 in
the Washington Post, Rumbaut also indicates that language shift is happening at a
more rapid rate in the United States than previously, "We are seeing this country
become a language graveyard for the second generation, with children and parents
living under the same roof but unable to talk to one another." In a 1991 survey he
conducted, he found that although 94% of the parents spoke another language at
home, 73% of children identified English as their primary language by the time
they were in seventh grade. In 1995, the percentage of English dominant children
had risen to 88%, while the number of parents speaking another language
remained essentially the same.
Eilers, Zurer Pearson, & Cobo-Lewis (2006) reported that in Miami where
Spanish is assumed to occupy a very strong presence, even children in two-way
bilingual programs were showing evidence of weakness in Spanish by the time
they reached the fifth grade. They concluded that both school and home support
for Spanish was necessary in order to continued Spanish development and avoid
loss in Spanish Their findings also revealed that less Spanish did not produce
more English.
Reese & Goldenberg (2006) found a similar vulnerability for Spanish in
the two communities they studied, despite the presence of developmental and
two-way bilingual programs. The schools offered positive support for Spanish,
but the messages of the relative prestige accorded Spanish and English out in the
13

23. world were reflected in the students' preference for English and the erosion of
Spanish skills noticed by their parents.
Kaufman & Aronhoff (1991) followed the process of language attrition in
one child, a native speaker of Hebrew, as she became exposed to English in
preschool at age two and a half. The parents continued to speak Hebrew at home,
but signs of attrition began within three months. Less than a year later, attrition
was accompanied by a change in attitude as well, as the child began exhibiting
reluctance to speak Hebrew.
As Olshtain & Barclay (1991) found, language attrition can also take place
among adults in a situation where the native language occupies a position of
value, even prestige. Their study involving 15 adult native speakers of English
living in Israel, revealed evidence of lexical retrieval difficulties, despite the fact
that they all identified English as their dominant language. Most had acquired
only enough Hebrew "to fulfill utilitarian needs" (p. 139). They varied in age from
25-55, had lived in Israel between eight and twenty-five years, and had developed
full competency in English before coming to Israel. Their performance on a storytelling task and interview was compared to that of a group of English speakers in
the United States. The U.S. group exhibited none of the difficulties demonstrated
by the English-speakers in Israel. The participants were quite aware of their
difficulties and expressed frustration that they were unable to remember certain
words. Olshtain & Barzilay found the results to be particularly noteworthy since
this situation would be considered one of the least conducive to attrition.
14

24. Yagmar, De Bot, & Korzilius (1999) documented language shift and
attrition among speakers of Turkish, who had immigrated as adults to Australia.
Their results indicated a role for the status of the language in language attrition
and shift, but specifically how the attitudes influenced language maintenance and
loss could not be determined.
Clearly, native languages are vulnerable, and in a variety of situations.
Studies on the psycholinguistic aspects of LI loss have focused on what happens
to the language itself. Studies on the sociolinguistic aspects have looked at
describing the phenomenon at the group level. What happens to the individuals
who experience it is the focus of this study.
Benefits of Bilingualism
Since Peal & Lambert's classic 1962 study documenting cognitive
advantages for bilinguals, numerous studies have found similar results (Baker,
1993; Bialystok, 1991, Cummins & Swain, 1996; Diaz, 1993; Hakuta, 1986,
1990; Hamers & Blanc, 1989; Homel, Palij, & Aronson, 1987; all cited in Ovando
& Collier 1998). These studies considered "measures of cognitive flexibility,
linguistic and metalinguistic abilities, concept formation, divergent thinking, and
creativity" (Ovando & Collier, 1998, p.256). In discussing many of these findings,
along with those of others (Diaz, 1986; Goncz & Kodzopeljic, 1991; Hakuta &
Diaz, 1985; Mohanty, 1994; Ricciardelli, 1989,1992), Cummins (1996, 2000)
emphasizes that the children who demonstrated these advantages had developed
15

25. high levels of proficiency in both the LI and L2. He suggests that a minimum
threshold of LI proficiency is required to both avoid the negative effects of
subtractive bilingualism and to enjoy the benefits of additive bilingualism. In
order for this additive bilingualism to occur, support for the minority LI must be
substantial enough to counteract the dominance of the societal language (Landry
& Allard, 1991, in Cummins 1996).
The knowledge of more than one language offers practical advantages as
well, both to the individual and to society as a whole (Carreira & Armengol,
2001; Krashen, 1998). There is a need for skills in languages other than English in
business, government, media and communications, law enforcement, health care,
education, and the performing arts.
In terms of academic achievement, results from studies of bilingual
education indicate the benefits of the continued development of both the heritage
language and English (Greene, 1998 in Krashen, 1999; Ramirez, 1992). In
investigating the reasons for school drop out, Isidro Lucas' study (1991, in
Cummins 1996) revealed that English proficiency was not the issue for Puerto
Rican high school students in his study. None of the dropouts identified English
as a reason for dropping out. Nor was abandoning Spanish a characteristic of
those who remained in school. In fact, they maintained greater confidence in their
LI than the dropouts did. As Lucas describes it:
All my dropout respondents spoke good understandable English. They
hadn't learned math, or social sciences, or natural sciences, unfortunately.
But they had learned English....No dropout mentioned lack of English as
the reason for quitting. As it evolved through questionnaires and
16

26. interviews, theirs was a subtle story of alienation, of not belonging, of
being 'push-outs'...dropouts expressed more confidence in their ability to
speak English than stay-ins...stay-ins showed more confidence in their
Spanish than did drop-outs....I had to conclude that identity, expressed in
one's confidence and acceptance of the native culture, was more a
determinant of school stay-in power than the mere acquisition of the
coding-decoding skills involved in a different language, English" (p. 19)
Connections Between LI, Identity, Culture and Family
The connection between language and identity, mentioned by Isidro
Lucas, appears repeatedly throughout the literature. Skutnabb-Kangas (2000)
describes the continuum of opinions regarding the role of language with some
scholars viewing it as a tool or commodity, nothing more, and others seeing a
much more personal connection. Skutnabb-Kangas acknowledges the
instrumental aspect of language, but adds, "Language is a tie and our mother
tongues both form and are symbols of our identity.... conceptualizing the world in
childhood mainly happens through the mother tongue" (p. 104-105). Bonny
Norton (1997, 2000) describes a similar role for language in one's evolving sense
of self, "every time language learners speak, they are not only exchanging
information...they are engaged in identity construction and negotiation (p.410).
Joshua Fishman (1991) writes, "The destruction of a language is the destruction
of a rooted identity" (p.4).
Lucy Tse's (1998) proposes a model of ethnic identity development that
consists of four stage experienced by ethnic minorities: 1) Unawareness, 2) Ethnic
Ambivalence/Evasion, 3) Ethnic Emergence, and 4) Ethnic Identity Incorporation.
17

27. In the first stage, there is an unawareness of belonging to a minority culture. This
stage typically occurs early in childhood, particularly with those living in ethnic
enclaves and isolated from exposure to the dominant group, or with those who
have the opposite situation, in which there is relatively little acknowledgement of
the ethnic minority culture and language. The second stage is characterized by the
desire to identify with the dominant culture, along with the presence of less
positive feelings, ranging from disinterest to rejection, for the heritage culture. In
Stage 3, there is a renewed interest in the heritage culture, as minority group
members find that acceptance into the dominant group is not really possible or is
problematic in some way. They question who they are and where they fit in; some
respond by rejecting the dominant group entirely. During the last stage, Ethnic
Identity Incorporation, there is a resolution to the conflict as they begin to identify
with the "ethnic American group", who share many of the same experiences and
have gone through a similar process. Some in this stage may arrive at a new
interpretation of what it means to be "an American".
Agnes Weiyun He (2006) proposes an identity theory of Chinese heritage
language development consisting often hypotheses that predict success in
development of the language based on identity-related attitudes. Although the
theory is designed to reflect the characteristics of Chinese heritage language
development, it appears to apply in similar ways to other languages and cultures
too. The hypotheses describe motivation to develop the language as influenced by
identity related issues such as the feeling of rootedness, the ease with which the
18

28. learner moves among different roles in different communities, perceptions of the
status of the language, and the way the language appears in family interactions.
Support for this connection between language and identity appears
throughout the emerging literature on heritage language development (Cho, 2000;
Cho & Krashen, 1998; Guardado, 2002; Lee, 2002; Li, 2006; Tse, 2000, 2001). In
Hae-Young Kim's (2003) study with Korean heritage learners, a recurring theme
in their reasons for studying Korean was the connection between the heritage
language and self-discovery, "language learning as a journey to find out who they
are" (p.8). Part of that discovery also involved the desire to know more about their
parents.
Wong-Fillmore (1991, 2000) contends that language loss comes with
damaging consequences for the children and their families. Generational conflicts,
loss of family connections, self-esteem, and academic difficulties were among the
problems she found related to this form of subtractive bilingualism.
Cho (2004) also found disadvantages in family relationships associated
with weak heritage language skills. They expressed frustration and indicate that
conversations are cut short or kept to a surface level because communication is so
difficult. The desire to establish stronger relationships with family members in
turn contributed to the motivation to try to improve their heritage language skills.
Personal accounts of those who have experienced native language loss
consistently confirm the connection between language and identity, culture, and
family relationships, whether or not they view the maintenance of the mother
19

29. tongue as beneficial. Richard Rodriguez (1982) provides some of the most
powerful descriptions of the cost to his family when Spanish was replaced with
English in his home:
...as we children learned more and more English, we shared fewer and
fewer words with our parents. Sentences needed to be spoken slowly when
a child addressed his mother or father. (Often the parent wouldn't
understand.) The child would need to repeat himself. (Still the parent
misunderstood.) The young voice, frustrated, would end up saying, 'Never
mind' - the subject was closed. Dinners would be noisy with the clinking
of knives and forks against dishes, (p.23)
He viewed this change as sad, but necessary, given the situation in the United
States. If one wanted to succeed, one had to pay the price.
Others describe a similar experience, with a very different reaction to the
loss. Marainen's (1988) provides an account of a conversation he had with his
father on their way home from a lecture he had given on the Sami. He had given
the lecture in Swedish, his L2, a language his father did not understand well. As
he went to translate what he had said for his father, he was shocked to find he was
no longer able to do so:
I realized in horror that / could no longer relate the most common and
everyday matters in my own language! ... I could no longer talk to Father!
... I became desperate, despondent and then I became angry....I had been
robbed of my own language, my own history and my own culture. What
was foreign to me was I, myself....I realized that the first thing I had to do
was to study my own language....I had to find my way to my Sami
identity... (pp. 183-184).
The intensity of the connection between language, identity, and culture is
vividly expressed throughout the interviews in Kouritzin's study (1999). In
discussing her loss of Finnish, one woman said:
20

30. I think, having lost my language, I, in essence, lost a lot of my culture....If
I'd kept it, I think I would have kept a sense of myself, my own identity,
much more....I suppose there's a certain death of self when you lose your
mother tongue, as well, that perhaps you don't ever get back, don't ever
find....don't ever resurrect (p.96).
Similar strong connections are expressed among the other participants. The
instrumental value of the language, the knowledge of the native language as a
marketable skill, was more common among younger participants. Those who
were older and/or had experienced the loss of a parent tended to emphasize the
personal connection to their language. All of her participants commented on the
lessened communication with family members after experiencing native language
loss.
Complicity and Native Language Loss
Feelings of responsibility and guilt frequently surface in the stories of
those who have experienced native language loss (Kouritzin, 1999), as if they feel
they should have resisted somehow, at the same time recognizing that it wasn't
their choice. As one participant put it, "I'm glad now that I can make amends,
compensate in some way, and make sure that my students maintain their
languages....I feel guilty that I turned my back on my own culture, not by choice,
but by circumstances" (pp. 48-49). Kouritzin also found that participants
frequently attributed the loss to their own inadequacy, assuming that the reason
for the loss was in part because of below average intelligence on their part.
21

31. Even Richard Rodriguez (1982) admits a certain need to rationalize the
loss. While criticizing movements such as bilingual education and other efforts to
maintain the native language and culture, he advises the reader to beware. He
acknowledges needing "to justify my own change" (p. 160). He explains:
My relationship to many of the self-proclaimed Chicano students was not
an easy one. I felt threatened by them....I envied them their fluent Spanish.
(I had taken Spanish in high school with gringos.)....I had been
submissive, willing to mimic my teachers, willing to re-form myself in
order to become 'educated'. They were proud, claiming that they didn't
need to change by becoming students. I had long before accepted the fact
that education exacted a great price for its equally great benefits. They
denied that price - any loss. (p. 160)
So this study attempts to find out more about this loss, this price that has
been paid. How do others who have experienced it describe it, reflect on it? What
advice would they offer? What do they wish had been different and what would
they want to be the same? What commonalities are there in the experiences, both
among participants in this study and in comparison to those described in
Kouritzin's and Wong-Fillmore's work? What new information might the
experiences of these participants provide? Each story contributes to a clearer
picture of native language development, maintenance, and loss for English
language learners. The better and more confident our understanding of the issue,
the more effective we can be in making decisions to benefit language minority
children.
22

32. CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODS
Since the intent of this study was to learn about individual experiences
with language learning and loss, and the meaning of those experiences for the
person, a qualitative interview approach was most appropriate. Qualitative
research methods are designed to provide an in-depth exploration of a
phenomenon, experience, or situation (Bogdan & Biklin, 1998; Creswell, 1998;
Ely et. al, 1991). They are suited to holistic investigations concerned with
describing a process and context in its complexity. Qualitative interviews are
often used when the intent is to document the feelings and experiences of the
participants in order to better understand a topic from the participants' points of
view. Qualitative techniques are most appropriate to communicate to others the
meaning of an experience for the participants involved (Creswell, 1998; Ely et. al,
1991; Mariano, 1998; Munhall & Boyd, 1993).
Participants
I was interested in finding participants who were adults living in the
United States, who had learned English as an additional language as children,
described themselves as having experienced loss in a first language (including
23

33. those with limited development of a first language), and now considered
themselves to be dominant in English. The criterion for language loss was selfidentification, not a test or other external criteria to measure proficiency. Since the
purpose of this study was to understand the experience from the participants'
points of view, their perception of their language facility was the most appropriate
means of identification (Kouritzin, 1999). Socioeconomic status, age, gender,
number of years in the United States were all left open, as Kouritzin (1999) did in
her study, in order to collect a variety of perspectives. Similarly, the number of
participants was not predetermined, since the focus of the study was an in-depth
exploration of each person's experience, not a survey of a specific number of
people.
All of the participants were informed, both verbally and in writing, of the
purpose of the study. They were assured that their confidentiality would be
protected and that they were free to withdraw from the study at any time. The first
interview session for each participant began by clarifying any questions about the
study, and then the consent forms (Appendix B) were signed.
Participant Selection: Joseph, Nari, Ella, and William
As I thought about where to recruit participants to interview, I kept
remembering a comment made by one of the participants in Sandra Kouritzin's
study (1999). He told her he would not have been able to participate in her
research study if he had not regained his language, because it was only after
24

34. regaining it, that he realized what he had lost. I decided a heritage language
school might be a promising place to start. I had previously read an article in a
local newspaper about a Chinese heritage language school, which was not far
from where I live, and planned to contact them. By chance, I happened to meet
the assistant director, Lena Hsu (a pseudonym; all names for people and places
included in this study are pseudonyms), in an office of a local college. She was
interviewing for a part-time position teaching Chinese, and I was looking over
materials for an adult ESL class I was teaching. When we were introduced, I told
her I had read about her school in the newspaper, and I explained my interest in
first language loss and maintenance. She seemed pleased with my interest, gave
me her card, and invited me to visit the school. I contacted her about a month later
and arranged to come the following Sunday to distribute my recruitment notices
(Appendix A).
The following description of entree into the field where I met my first four
participants is taken from my field log and presented as a story in the present
tense.
The Chinese Heritage Language School
The school is easy to find; it's convenient to several major roadways, and
there is a sign on the front lawn that prominently displays its name. On Sunday
mornings, the ample parking lot is usually about two thirds full. There is a larger
building in front that looks like a well-maintained office building, and on the hill
25

35. behind it, there is a smaller two-story white house that reminds me of a country
school. The office, the lounge, and most of the classrooms are in the larger
building. Most of my time is spent there as well. Only one interview takes place
in the little house on the hill. A uniformed security guard greets and offers
assistance to visitors as they enter the larger building. He is Caucasian, of
imposing size, but friendly demeanor.
As I walk through the entry way on this first day, the cheerful sound of
children's voices fills the halls. Adults talking and laughing over coffee and
donuts can be heard in the lounge. The atmosphere seems warm and comfortable;
it has the feel of a community center on a busy Saturday. And it is that way every
Sunday morning that I visit.
The security guard shows me to the office where I wait for Lena to finish
talking with a Caucasian couple. The office is a sunny room with windows on two
sides. There are four desks, each filled with papers, books, organizers, and other
office equipment. A row of computers and printers lines one wall. Colorful
decorations hang from the ceiling, and posters in Chinese are displayed on the
walls. Lena calls a greeting to me and tells me to have a seat. I sit down at a chair
by the computer wall. As the couple is leaving, she introduces them to me and
mentions that the school also has some Caucasian students. Would I be interested
in talking with any of them for my study? I explain that I need people who have
experienced some loss of their first language. "Oh," she said. "No then." Clearly,
first language loss is something not associated with Caucasians.
26

36. The director, who has been bustling in and out of the office, on the phone,
talking with what appear to be parents, teachers, and other staff as I wait for Lena,
comes back in the office with an apparent free moment. Lena introduces me. Dr.
Lien has an efficient, business-like, but accommodating demeanor. She leads me
down the hall to the lounge, which is brimming with activity and noise. Parents
are sitting at cafeteria tables, chatting over coffee and Dunkin Donuts while
children play. Dr. Lien raises her voice to be heard and introduces me, saying that
I am from a local college and doing a project. She turns to me, "I'll let you
explain it." The people closest to me are the only ones with a chance of hearing. I
smile and explain that I'm also a student at NYU. I tell them that I am working on
a study and wonder if some of them would be interested in participating. I get out
my bright pink recruitment notices and start passing them around. Several people
pick up the notices and start reading. Others go back to their conversations. A
group of three people closest to me start asking me questions about it. A few
more, farther down the table appear to be answering the eligibility questions. A
glance tells me that one person has answered them all "yes". I start to feel
hopeful.
One woman to my right, Nari, says she's not sure if she fits or not because
she doesn't remember which language she learned first, English or Korean. She
really learned them at the same time. But she says she definitely feels more
confident in English than Korean. I tell her that yes, she would fit.
27

37. The man across from me, Joseph, says he would be interested, although he
does still speak and read Chinese. He appears to be in his 40's and talks about
how you really have to work at it to maintain the language. He says you'll realize
suddenly that you're searching for words. He tells me that he went to one of the
same colleges I did. He first got a degree in architecture and then got his master's
in public service. He would like to get a doctorate, but it's difficult to arrange
while he's working full-time. We discuss the commute to various colleges and the
work load. He talks about reading classics in Chinese to develop his Chinese
more, beyond just newspapers and magazines. I get the feeling that he could start
the interview right away.
Joseph mentions that there are other schools and asks how many people I
need. Do I have a questionnaire? As I get out the consent forms which provide
details of participation in the study (Appendix B), I explain that it's a series of
interviews. I tell them I can leave the information with them and they can take it
home and decide if they'd like to participate.
Another woman, Ella, joins us and says that she would definitely qualify.
She says that reading and writing are really difficult for her. Nari agrees and
comments she reads at about a first grade level. They seem very interested in
participating and don't really need to think about it. We discuss places to meet for
the interviews, and they suggest just doing them at the school.
"We're always here on Sundays. You can just come here. You could
probably do several of us at once."
28

38. "Besides," Ella continues, "I'm from Connecticut. It would just be easier
to meet here."
I explain that multiple interviews are necessary. The looks on their faces
tell me that they're amazed that I would need more than one interview, but they
seem willing to go along.
I notice a woman on my left has answered yes to the three questions on
my recruitment notice. She is busy running after a 2-3 year-old child and I don't
get a chance to talk with her.
Ella, Joseph, and Nari recommend that I also talk to a man sitting farther
down the bench. William has a child on his lap and another sitting next to him. On
the other side is a woman who I assume is his wife. I show him the notice and
explain that his friends thought he might be interested. He asks about data
collection and if there is a questionnaire. I explain that it's an interview study.
"Oh, so just our stories," he answers. "Sure, if my wife is here to take care of
them," he says, referring to the children. "Otherwise, it won't work." The children
are very active, and it's obvious that talking for any length of time with them
around would be too distracting.
I thank them and tell them I'll see them next Sunday. I go to the office and
thank Lena. She asks if I found any people to interview. I answer that I did, and
I'll come back the following week. She shows me the restroom and indicates the
cafeteria down the hall. If you want something to eat, go ahead. She asks how the
29

39. classes at the college are going and adds, "Maybe we can collaborate on
something later on."
I am impressed by the welcome and their willingness to share what they
can to accommodate my study. Lena's comment about collaboration indicates that
she may hope for some reciprocal professional assistance, but it's one that I would
be quite happy to provide if I can. I couldn't have hoped for a more positive
beginning to the recruitment process.
Participant Selection - Pino
I met Dino at a graduation party for the son of a friend and former
colleague of mine. Renee and I taught in the same schools almost nine years
before, but we live about 40 minutes apart, so we don't see each other often or
share mutual friends (other than former colleagues). However, we have kept in
touch, mostly by phone or e-mail. Renee frequently invites me to special family
events. Dino and his wife, Teresa, live in Renee's neighborhood, and they are
good friends. The following description details how we met and how Dino
became involved in this study.
After Rene's introduction, Dino and Teresa ask what the topic of my
dissertation is. I explain that I am interested in people who learned English as a
second language when they were children, then found that English became the
stronger language, and they had experienced loss in their first language. Dino
nods with kind of a surprised look and says, "That would be me."
30

40. "Really?" I feel my heart quicken. I was hoping for another participant,
particularly someone of apparent European heritage. My own aversion to
imposing on others and my worry about invading their privacy makes recruitment
intimidating for me. While the experience of language loss is not that uncommon,
determining where to recruit people and how to bring up the subject is not easy.
There is nothing about Dino that would indicate that he might be a potential
participant. He speaks with a Long Island-Bronx accent; there is no trace of
anything to signal that he emigrated from another country.
"Yeah, if I am understanding it correctly," Dino answers. "I came from
Italy when I was a young kid and now I rarely speak Italian. Well, what we speak
is a dialect."
"But you still speak it with your mother," comments Teresa. "Do you need
people who don't speak it at all anymore?" She asks, turning to me.
"No, not necessarily," I answer. "It doesn't have to be complete loss. It's
people who have experienced some loss in their first language, so that now they
feel more confident in English. It's also people who maybe were learning both at
the same time, but then English took over as the main language."
"Well there's definitely some loss," Dino says, with kind of a wry humor
in his voice.
"Then you would fit!" I exclaim, trying to remember that this is a party
and I should keep things conversational. It wouldn't be fair to monopolize his
31

41. time or take advantage of the social setting. We are interrupted at that point
anyway, the conversation turns to other things for the rest of the party.
A few weeks later, after getting Dino's phone number from Renee, I call
to see if he would be interested in participating in the study. Teresa answers the
phone and says that they are getting ready for company for the weekend, but she
will give Dino the message, and he will call me back in the early part of the week.
Wednesday night, the phone rings, and it's Dino. He asks me to remind him again
about the type of participants I'm looking for. I give him the same explanation I
did at the party. He recounts that he came from Italy when he was young and
continued to speak his language with his mother but then learned English at
school. School was all in English, except that he did have a chance to take Italian
when he was taking classes on sabbatical as an adult. He asks what participation
would entail. I explain that it is an interview study, so really it's just talking with
me about his life, his experiences with languages, and also about his family, work,
school, things like that. I go on to say that the idea is to get a view of the person's
experience as a whole, which is why we would talk about his life experiences etc,
in addition to language.
He responds that it sounds interesting and he'd be glad to do it. He laughs
a little self-consciously as he mentions not ever having the experience of telling
someone his life story before. I laugh with him and acknowledge that it sounds a
little daunting, but the idea is really just to get to know him, in order to get a
better understanding of his experience. I assure him that everything is confidential
32

42. and pseudonyms will be used to protect his identity. We agree to meet on
Thursday afternoon at 4:00 at his house.
Data Collection
The in-depth interview was the primary means of data collection.
Consistent with the description provided by Ely et al. (1991), the structure of the
interviews was shaped by the responses of the participants. Initially, questions
were broad and open-ended, a starting point for participants to reflect on their
experiences and communicate their thoughts in detail. More specific questions,
emerging from the dialogue and on-going analysis, both during and after each
interview were used to probe and clarify the information provided. In this way,
the research was guided by those who have knowledge of the experience, the
participants, and not limited by a set of predetermined questions. My intent in
using this format was to assist the participants in telling their stories so that others
may understand more fully the experience of heritage language loss for those who
learn English as a second (or third) language in childhood.
The open structure of the interviews was also useful in establishing and
maintaining rapport. In interviewing Ella, for example, we talked quite a bit about
her new job, which allowed her to become more comfortable with me, and
allowed me to get to know her better. This contributed to our continued rapport
and to my understanding of her responses. Joseph and I talked quite a bit about
philosophy and history, areas he was passionate about and felt comfortable
33

43. discussing. These conversations led me to a fuller understanding of his
experiences and perspectives. Often the participants would provide the
information that I was interested in, without my asking the question. The topic
would come up naturally, as part of our conversation.
Interviews were both responsive to the comfort level of the participants
and reflective of their need to discuss or avoid particular topics. Some stories
were told and retold; some topics brought quiet responses, and some provoked
animated discussion. The rate of speech, the tone and volume that accompanied
the information shared, were all important in understanding and interpreting their
stories. As indicated by Green, Franquiz, & Dixon (1997), both the participant
and the interviewer bring their ideas about language (what silence means,
intonation patterns, how emotions are expressed, eye contact, gestures) to the
interaction. How the speaker makes use of these conventions and how they are
understood by both interviewer and participant influence how they communicate
during the interviews and how the communication is interpreted and transcribed
(Roberts, 1997). Goldstein (1995) also found that if she wanted the participants to
talk about experiences from their lives, it was helpful to share a little from her
life. I tried to be sensitive to this possibility with my participants and to avoid
what Igoa describes as the "dehumanizing" that occurs when a person becomes
"the object of study" 1995, p.73). Notes relating to these issues were recorded in
the field log, and in specific files detailing research issues that were specific to
each participant.
34

44. We engaged in casual conversation as we got settled in a quiet spot to talk
and set up the audiotape equipment (Bogdan & Biklin, 1998). This also helped me
to get a feel for the conversational style of the participant (Goldstein, 1995). I
often began the interviews by asking about something they had mentioned in our
initial conversation about the study, such as "You mentioned you learned English
and Korean at the same time..." or with a general question about their language
experiences, "Would you tell me about your experiences with language when you
were growing up?" In subsequent interviews, questions became more focused or
asked for clarification and detail about a topic already mentioned. I incorporated
participant checks into all interviews, regularly checking the accuracy of the
information and getting feedback from the participants on my interpretations of
what they had shared.
There were from three-six interviews with each person, usually about an
hour in length:
Participant Name
Number of Interviews
Total Number of Minutes
Joseph
5
360
Nari
3'
240
Ella
6
270
William
3
200
Dino
3
375
35

45. The length of the interviews varied according to the participants' comfort levels
and time commitments. The total number of interviews and the amount of time
spent interviewing each participant reflected the time required for sufficiency and
redundancy of the information.
I had originally intended to complete a series of interviews with one
participant before starting to interview another, but some of my participants had
other ideas about this process. The first four participants, recruited from the
heritage language school, were clearly ready to be interviewed right away. I felt
that insisting on completing a full series of interviews with one person before
talking to anyone else would interfere with rapport, and I was afraid I might miss
out on opportunities to talk with them. These were very busy people for whom
time was already in limited supply. While Chinese School was in session, the
interviews fit into their schedules easily. Once the summer started, getting
together would be much more difficult for them. I compromised by interviewing
just two participants, one after the other, each visit. Visits were at least one week
apart, which gave me time to listen to the tapes of the interviews several times to
decide on questions for the following interviews, and to transcribe and continue to
analyze the tapes. I actually found this variation in the interviewing format much
less overwhelming than I anticipated, perhaps because my schedule at that time
allowed me to immerse myself in the interviewing process and devote all my <
attention to it. I found that each story remained distinct from the others, and the
36

46. discussions from interviews with one participant were helpful in interviews with
other participants.
All participants were agreeable to my contacting them for future
clarification and questions that might arise as I heard the stories of other
participants and continued to revisit the transcripts of all the interviews. I also
encouraged them to contact me with additional thoughts that that they might have.
Field Log
After each interview, I listened to the audiotape of the interview several
times, making notes so that I could decide what I needed to find out in future
interviews (Ely, 2001). Then I transcribed the interviews word for word. I read
the transcripts over carefully, making notes and indicating possible categories in
the margins. I also kept a log of each visit, where I recorded information about the
recruitment sites, notes about informal interactions that took place before and
after the interviews, basically anything that was not on tape. Pseudonyms were
used in all discussions and representations of the data, including logs and
transcripts.
Data Analysis
As suggested by Ely et al. (1998), analysis was ongoing; it began with the
initial impressions recorded in my field log as I made contacts with potential
participants, and continued as I transcribed and reviewed each interview. Possible
37

47. categories and subcategories, hunches, questions and thoughts were noted in the
margins as I read the transcripts. Initially, all notes and categories reflected as
accurately as possible my reaction and impressions as I read the content. No
attempt was made at uniformity at this point, and no existing set of categories was
applied. I shared the transcripts with my support group members, who in turn
recorded their comments and reactions. I reviewed the transcripts again with their
comments and made notes about the possible themes emerging there.
Category Files and Theme Statements
For each transcript, I made a category file, in which the category
descriptions were revised and indicated on the left in bold, followed by the
portion of the transcript that suggested the category. I also kept a Research Issues
file for each participant, where I collected all of the Observer Comments (my
notes as a researcher), notes about rapport, and anything pertaining to the research
process itself: interruptions, time constraints, equipment issues, my mistakes,
worries, improvements, and other reflections on the process.
The category files were reviewed and the categories grouped together to
form larger groups: LI Proficiency, Fitting In, LI and Identity, Learning English,
Family Connections, Time, Children's Language, for example. I started with
Nari's theme section, experimenting with different ways of physically organizing
the categories into themes. I went through the files many times, making notes and
lists of themes that they suggested. I tried actually cutting up the category files
38

48. and physically arranging and rearranging the pieces, which worked fine, except
that it was cumbersome to keep track of all of the pieces of paper. I learned that
creating new files of theme-related categories was easier to manage. Some
categories were common to all participants, and a few were specific to a single
participant's story. Lists of these categories appear in Appendix C.
Trustworthiness
Throughout the study, from initial contacts through the presentation of
data, efforts to ensure trustworthiness have been, and continue to be, a constant
priority (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998; Ely et al., 1991; Guba & Lincoln, 1989).
Besides the conscious effort to maintain a trustworthy attitude, techniques to
support me in this endeavor included the use of support groups, prolonged
engagement, participant checks, and the practice of ongoing reflection, initiated in
my written stance and continued in analytic memos.
Support Groups
I met with two support groups made up of fellow doctoral students in the
School of Education, who were also conducting qualitative research studies. The
members of the groups came from different programs within the School and
different professional interests (occupational therapy, elementary education and
math education). The diverse perspectives they brought with them assisted me in
looking at my research from multiple points of view. I shared interview
39

49. transcripts, log entries, I-Stories, written theme discussions with them, as well as
numerous verbal discussions to help me process my thoughts and reactions to the
data and the research process. I also enlisted the help of a former colleague who is
from Singapore and of Chinese heritage, and has been living and teaching in the
United States over ten years. She had conducted a qualitative research study in my
classroom when I was teaching ESL in the early 1990's. We have met regularly
over the years at TESOL conventions and have continued our discussions relating
to culture and language that began with her research. Her feedback added another
valuable perspective to my analysis and presentation of the data.
Prolonged Engagement
Prolonged engagement (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998; Ely et al., 1991;
Mariano, 1998) was necessary so that the data represented a more thorough
picture of the experience being studied. Multiple interviews were conducted with
each participant over a period of several weeks to be sure that the information
collected was representative of their thoughts. The rapport so essential to
qualitative research develops over time, particularly when the interviewer and the
participants are from different cultures (Glesne, 1999). As previously mentioned,
multiple interviews also allowed me to ask questions that occurred to me as I
reviewed the tapes and transcripts, and to check my impressions with my
participants (Anderson, Herr, Nihlen, 1994; Ely et al., 1991). Further, the
participants also had the opportunity of reflection between interviews, offering
40

50. them the opportunity to clarify their thinking and assist me in understanding their
experiences.
Participant Checks
In addition to prolonged engagement, I incorporated participant checks
into all interviews. In some cases, I was clarifying my understanding of events
and basic factual information. At other times, I would share my interpretations
that were emerging from the interviews to get their opinions and reactions.
Whether or not they agreed with my interpretations, their feedback was crucial to
my understanding of their experiences.
Socio-cuitural Issues
Another important issue in maintaining trustworthiness for me was
cultural/socioeconomic group membership. As a native-speaker of English and a
member of what is loosely termed "the mainstream" in the United States (middleclass, white, and of apparent European ancestry) I was, as Bodgan & Biklen call
it, "border crossing" (1998, p.83), to some extent. I was aware that my
participants might view me as a member of the dominant culture, which could
influence their responses or even their willingness to participate in the study. I
anticipated that they might feel uncomfortable discussing the more personal
aspects of these issues with an outsider, particularly if I were identified with a
more powerful group. Establishing rapport and earning their trust was an essential
41

51. part of ensuring the credibility of the study. I also needed to come to terms with
my own culture and history of privilege, as well as to acknowledge my
assumptions and personal perspectives regarding language. I began this effort
with my researcher's stance and continued with ongoing reflection and
discussions with my committee and support group members.
Researcher's Stance
Those of us who love languages, especially if we have devoted our lives to
learning or teaching them, find it hard to put ourselves in the right frame
of mind to understand the concept of language diversity as a curse. We see
in language a source of novel delights and subtle experience, a blessing.
(Haugen, 1987, p.l; in Skuttnab-Kangas, 2000, p. 211)
Haugen expresses the way I feel about languages. For me, studying
another language was like opening a door and finding a place where I felt
excitement and anticipation. It was magical. I started Spanish classes in seventh
grade and couldn't wait to get to class each day. I was in awe of my teacher and
others who could go back and forth from one language to the other with ease. I
hoped/wished that I would be like that one day. As I learned more about Spanish,
I also began to look at my native language, English, with new interest and
understanding. I was fascinated by it: grammar, diagramming sentences, the
subtle nuances of words and phrases, the variety of accents. I was hooked on
language in general. My interest continued through high school and college. I also
took German and a couple of Portuguese classes. Basically, whenever I had a
spare spot in my schedule, I added a language.
42

52. Exactly why I was so fascinated with language is hard to say. As a young
child, the only person in my family who spoke a language other than English was
my grandfather. His mother tongue was Norwegian and he learned English after
he went to school. He often told about his memory of his first day of school, when
he came home and cried because he couldn't understand what they said. He
always told it with a laugh, as he did with any number of stories about a problem
that worked out okay. He became extremely proficient in English, admired for his
speaking and writing ability. He also taught Latin and German - apparently he
had an interest in languages as well.
My grandfather did not, however, pass along his mother tongue to his
children. He said there was no point in learning Norwegian, unless one lived in
Norway. Occasionally he wrote a phrase in Norwegian on a Christmas card, sang
a song in Norwegian or included it in a story he retold from childhood, but that
was all. Despite its limited utilitarian value in the United States, he said his ability
to speak and read Norwegian had stayed with him; he assumed because it was his
mother tongue. So I had no model of first language loss.
I have not felt a sense of loss because I did not learn to speak Norwegian.
There was certainly no Norwegian community where I grew up. I was not in a
situation in which I heard others speaking it and wished I could join in. English
was and is my mother tongue. I would say it's more a feeling of disappointment
that I did not learn to speak Norwegian. I see it as a missed opportunity,
43

53. something I would have enjoyed, like a precious heirloom passed down to each
generation.
My identification with the experience of language loss is more likely when
I think about my L2, Spanish. It has slipped away more and more each year. After
a summer in Mexico on a study program in college, the senora in my friend's
house commented, "I can tell you're thinking in Spanish now. When you came
you were still translating, but now you can really speak." I was thrilled. And now,
27 years later, I'm embarrassed at how much I have forgotten and angry with
myself for letting it happen. I feel like I've been careless and lost a precious gift.
Though my native language, English, was never threatened, I came to
appreciate it when I was studying in Spain and Mexico. Most of the time, I was
thrilled with the opportunity to speak Spanish and was disappointed when
someone spoke to me in English. On the other hand, it was also exhausting to
function in Spanish from morning till night, day after day. Despite having studied
Spanish for years, the fact that it was my best subject, and that I was thoroughly
enchanted by it, there were times when I needed to hear, read, and speak in
English.
I always remember this experience when I hear people insisting that
second language learners in the United States need to be immersed in English and
discouraged from using their native language. Needing one's mother tongue
doesn't mean there is resistance to the second language. Among the ESL students
I taught, I consistently found that the ones who were most successful in English
44

54. were the ones who had continued to develop their first languages. Welcoming the
first language also helped for some students who seemed particularly homesick
for their country and their language. Their eyes would light up, "I can write in
Korean?" Somehow the idea that English was an addition and not a replacement
made the situation more comfortable for them. They didn't have to give up who
they were and what they knew; they could add English to it.
On the other hand, for many, the idea that another language besides
English was welcome at school was a hard sell. The pressure of English was all
around and no amount of persuasion on my part could convince them that their
language had a place here.
Besides my attitudes about language, it is important to acknowledge how
my social and cultural background could impact the study. Looking back as I
write this stance, I realize that my life has been full of privilege and opportunity.
Most of these advantages, I have learned about as an adult and am learning about
them still. In my world, as a child and teenager, it was cool to be Catholic, Italian,
Irish, or Jewish. I wasn't. I knew that being white kept me from all kinds of
discrimination, but I remember being shocked, in a college class, to learn that
WASPS were the dominant group. That certainly wasn't my experience! WASPS
were boring. I had always taken comfort in being able to say that I wasn't all
WASP. I was thrilled with the discovery, when one of my relatives investigated
the family roots, that my heritage includes Native American ancestors. And yet I
45

55. know it's not really fair to claim it. I want the benefits, the image, without having
paid the price.
Despite apparent membership in the "dominant" culture, I frequently
found mismatches between the school culture, the cultures in the community, and
my family culture. The advantage I had was that my parents were able to explain
this to me, and to help me figure out how to navigate among the differences. I
refer to family culture because my culture is a mix of ethnicities, geographic
influences and my parents' reactions to them. It can not be identified with a single
ethnic group. I know that the differences I experienced were much more subtle
than those of new immigrants, particularly those who are identified as more
visible minorities. I was not obviously different. On the surface I seemed to
belong. I have had enormous advantages because of this. On the other hand, I do
remember what I felt (and still feel) as I try to respect my family culture and
function in the world. There are commonalities in this experience that I found to
be of help to me in understanding my participants.
A large part of my privileged experiences came from socioeconomic
advantages. Again, I was often unaware of those when I was young. My family
didn't talk much about money. I just knew that we weren't poor. We didn't have a
lot of the flashy things that many of my peers had, but if there was something that
was really important to me, I could have it. I was also aware that my father turned
down raises in his position as the director of a not-for-profit hospital because he
said the hospital needed it more than we did. So I knew we were in a position to
46

56. turn money down. My parents also declined participation in socially prestigious
organizations, like country clubs, saying, "That's just not us." But it's different to
turn something down because you don't want it, than it is to be prevented from
the opportunity. Whether I knew it or not, I had, for most of my life, a very easy
road, well-paved, with lots of options and roadside assistance. As I began the
study, I was very aware of the potential problem these privileges could present in
my effort to conduct an effective study. I hoped that by acknowledging the
obstacles and continuing to reflect on the ways my experiences both interfered
and contributed to my rapport with my participants and how I heard their stories, I
could turn the problem into a resource.
In the course of conducting the research and dealing with new life events
and financial responsibilities, the economic advantages I had once experienced
became a distant memory. While difficult for me personally, this situation
ironically helped to balance my frame of reference for the study. I also had an
occasion to reconnect with Spanish for a job, and I was confronted with some of
my feelings of loss and anxiety, offering added perspective on some of the
feelings my participants expressed. In truth, listening to their stories helped me to
make sense of my own experiences, in addition to providing insight into the
research topic.
47

57. Presentation of the Data
I- Stories
After completing the interviews, I wrote an 1-Story for each
person, in which the information the participant had given me about his/her life is
presented in a unified story, told in the first person, as if the participant were the
storyteller. I tried to preserve each person's conversational style and to tell the
story in a way that allows each person's personality to come through. I decided to
write the I-stories at this point in the analysis to maintain the essence of the story
as a whole. I used the I-stories both as a tool for analysis and as a means of
presenting the data. The process of writing the participant's story as if he/she were
telling it, helped to clarify the essence of the thoughts and feelings expressed in
the interviews.
Following the work of Daphne Patai (1988), I have included excerpts of
the interview transcripts presented as free verse, so that the reader may more
closely "hear" the voices of the participants. The process of constructing these
free verse poems involves listening to the tape and typing the excerpt of the
transcript so that each pause starts a new line. Extraneous elements frequently
found in conversation, such as "um" and "you know", that are distracting in print
and do not contribute to the conversation as it was heard are deleted. On the other
hand, the repetitions and false starts part-way through a word or sentence, which
are part of the speaker's effort to communicate his/her ideas and feelings, allow
the reader to experience the message as it was expressed.
48

58. Each person's story, along with an introduction that includes my
reflections on the interview process we experienced, appears in Chapter IV, titled
"Telling Their Stories".
Themes and Discussion
Each person's story is unique, with its own set of themes that reflect the
specifics of that experience, and yet, there were themes that were common across
participants. In the chapter titled, "Variations on a Theme - Common Threads", I
discuss themes as they relate across participants, followed by a discussion of these
themes in light of the related literature. As I did in Chapter IV, I have presented
aspects of the transcripts in free verse (Patai 1988) to assist me in communicating
the themes that I found in the experiences of the participants.
49

59. CHAPTER IV
THE PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR STORIES
This chapter presents the stories of the five research participants: Joseph,
Nari, Ella, William, and Dino. Each story is preceded by a brief introduction,
which provides the context of the interview situation from my perspective as the
researcher. The stories are reconstructed from analysis of the interview data and
told in the first person, as if the participant were the storyteller (Ely, 1997;
Kouritzin, 1999). The resulting narratives are designed to provide the reader with
a clear understanding of each person's story as it was revealed to me. Care was
taken to preserve each participant's conversational style and allow his/her
personality to come through. To further support this intention, following the work
of Daphne Patai (1988), I have included excerpts of the interview transcript
presented as free verse, so that the reader may get a better sense of the voices of
the participants.
Throughout the interviews, Joseph, Ella, William and Nari usually used
the term Chinese rather than Cantonese, Taiwanese, or Mandarin, despite the fact
that the differences between these dialects are greater than the differences
between Spanish and French, for example. I have maintained this characteristic in
presenting their stories. The specific dialect spoken by the participant is indicated
50

60. either in the introduction to the story or in the beginning of the story itself. The
written form of the language is the same across all three dialects and refers to the
traditional form, not the simplified form introduced in China during the 1950s.
Interviewing Joseph
Joseph was the first participant I interviewed. He had shown immediate
interest when I introduced the study the previous week at the Chinese Heritage
Language School. He told me that he does speak and read Chinese (Cantonese
and some Mandarin) now, but that it takes a lot of work to maintain. He explained
that he had experienced language loss previously, "What happens is that you're
using English at school and at work, and then you go to speak Chinese and you'll
suddenly realize that you're searching for words." (Logl, p.4). He talked about
reading Chinese and working to improve on it. He told me about some of his
educational goals, how he would really like to pursue a doctorate, but with the
commuting time involved, it wouldn't fit into his schedule right now. I had the
distinct impression we could have started the interview right then.
When I walked into the lounge of the Chinese School for the first
interview, Joseph was sitting at a table with his recruitment notice and consent
form in a clear plastic folder in front of him and he seemed ready to talk on this
day as well. He anticipated the need for a quiet space for taping and suggested we
look for a room that was not in use. We usually talked in the gym, seated facing
one another, on folding chairs that Joseph brought in from the hall. He always
51

61. reminded me of a host arranging things for his guest's comfort, as we set up. It
made me feel welcome and lessened my concerns about imposing. Neatly dressed
in slacks and a button down shirt, Joseph would sit, leaning forward somewhat,
with a slightly rounded posture that didn't change much throughout the
interviews. His demeanor gave the impression of a secure humility - modesty out
of choice, not necessity. He seemed to have a genuine interest in the discussion,
with no apparent desire to impress, and no defensiveness or self-consciousness
either. There was a quiet assurance about him that put me at ease as well.
I talked with Joseph five times over approximately two months, with each
interview lasting between 30 minutes and 90 minutes. He talked readily, showing
no reluctance or discomfort in relating the details of his life. However, he seemed
to prefer to talk on an intellectual level, often bringing philosophy, history, and
literature into the discussions. I worried at times that I was letting the interviews
veer too far off topic. But I also knew I wanted to avoid being too directive, to
give him the space to tell his story. I felt that the discussions on religion,
philosophy, and history were also revealing who Joseph was. These topics are
quite important to him and are therefore part of his story. He often used the
second person "you" as he described an experience. I suspect it provided a
distance that made talking more comfortable. As a listener, I found it pulled me
into the experience, allowing me to feel as if I were living it too. The "you" also
adds a more universal tone to the story, implying that Joseph considers his
experience to be something with which others can identify as well.
52

62. Throughout the time I visited the Chinese School, Joseph would
frequently ask how it was going and if I was finding out anything interesting.
Joseph revealed his love of learning in every conversation, whether it was a taped
interview or a casual meeting in the lounge. On one of my visits, I walked into the
lounge and found Joseph reading a novel in Chinese. He seemed apologetic that it
was a popular novel and not a classic or historical work. "This is relaxing relieves stress," he explained. He compared the author of that novel to Taylor
Caldwell to help me understand the type of book it was. We talked about various
authors and types of literature. Joseph mentioned that he was fond of historical
fiction, especially things set in Roman times and went on to compare authors from
the East and West, their different perspectives and the similarities they share. The
conversation then turned to philosophy and psychology. He commented that he
found psychology limited, because it ignores culture and loses the important
questions by focusing on side issues. Philosophy, he explained, looks at the real
overarching questions. Conversations with Joseph were rarely superficial. In
addition to the information he provided for the study, I found it fascinating and
quite inspiring to talk with him. What follows is Joseph's story, as analyzed and
reconstructed from his interview data.
Joseph's Story
Actually, I emigrated from Hong Kong to New York City when I was 13.1 was
born in China, in the south, so we spoke Cantonese mainly, not Mandarin. It was
53

63. my main dialect for 13 years. At the age of five, we moved to Macao and there it
was the same dialect. Then a year after that, when I was six, we moved to Hong
Kong. So that's the background, basically, 13 years of exposure to the mother
tongue - Cantonese. During the school years in Hong Kong, I did pick up some
English because I attended a parochial school, a Catholic school. It was run by
Dominican priests, and actually, it was a good environment to learn a foreign
language because we had to deal with some non-Chinese teachers, like the priests
and some of the teachers from the Philippines. They didn't use Chinese, so we
were kind of forced to use the English language. Of course it's just general
exposure, not really in-depth.
I was fortunate to go to a missionary school because we learned a little
more English than the average student - although, English was still a second
language, no doubt about it. At recess and at other times, we were glad to get out
of English. It felt strange to us, so we kind of made fun of it. But we were forced
into it in a sense; you know you have to improve your test scores to move on to
the next grade. So we worked hard at it. But we were glad to get out of the
English and go back to the Chinese history or Chinese literature. They used
English to teach us math and science, so we had to understand that. It wasn't all
just composition or literature. We also had dictation where the teacher read a
paragraph and you had to know how to spell the words and understand the words
basically. I think it was more intense than they learn Chinese here in America.
Here it's kind of like enrichment. For us, it was necessary. We didn't look at it
54

64. like learning French or Spanish, like here. It wasn't just the language requirement
that you will never use. We had to use English so we had to pay more attention to
it. We started in first grade or kindergarten, and it continued all the way through;
you don't expect to get out in three years, you expect to use it your whole career
basically.
But actually, I did enjoy the English literature too. I remember the
mythology, you know, there were interesting stories. Sometimes we had role
plays or drama activities to motivate the students. You act the role, and I think
that definitely helped to learn the language. We also studied poetry. We
memorized it - most of the things were by memorization. You memorize it and
stand up in front of the class and recite. So obviously we're all nervous, but
everyone got a turn, and it was a little challenge. In a sense, it forced you to study
so you didn't get too much embarrassment when the teacher called on you. There
was a lot of memorization, which I didn't particularly enjoy, but it can be useful.
First you memorized the thing, whether you understood it or not, and then when
you get older, you remember it and go back to it. You ask yourself, "What was
that all about? How do I interpret it? How do I apply that theory?" Then you
understand the wisdom of that passage that you memorized. So as a young student
you say, "That's ridiculous to memorize all these things." As an adult, you find a
different perspective.
The political situation was the reason my family moved from China to
Hong Kong. When the Communists took over China, it was pretty rough. A lot of
55

65. things were being controlled: speech, movement; you can not easily move from
one province to another. So we were fortunate that we were able to move to
Macao and then Hong Kong. My grandfather was in the United States, so I think
my parents anticipated coming to the U.S. later on. I was too young to know at the
time, but that may have been why they chose to put me in a bilingual school in
Hong Kong, so I would learn both English and Chinese. I think they realized that
if you don't have the language skills, you can not find a job. Either it was their
foresight or divine providence, but they put me in a religious school, so I was not
just taking language, but religion as well. And of course the study of religion had
a profound effect on me. My parents are not Catholic, so that's kind of interesting
that I ended up there.
It was never a problem that my parents were not Catholic. Religion was
important to me, but I was not evangelical, in a sense. I really believe religion is a
calling. Not every person is suited for every religion. Besides, in Chinese families,
we don't openly discuss religion and things like Americans do. The sons or
daughters in the families always obey. We don't challenge the parents. We can
disagree, but we don't challenge them. Also my parents were not highly educated
in terms of formal schooling, so I don't know that they were interested in
discussing certain issues. Now that we are older, we talk more about current
events than before. But when we were younger, we just talked about the family,
what you should do, what you should not do. Of course they're concerned about
how well you do in school, but as far as intellectually, no. I am a little better
56

66. prepared for that with my son because of my experience in the schools, and I'm
ready for open discussion, debate, philosophy - this kind of thing. But the older
generation, my parents, they didn't have that level of education, so they probably
were not interested in philosophy and theology.
When I moved to New York in 1966, with my parents, we settled in the
city where my grandfather lived. It's not too far from Chinatown, but it's not a
Chinese community; it was more Italian at that time. My grandfather had moved
here, and married and had a family here after my mother was grown. My mother
was the oldest daughter, and my grandfather told us he wanted to bring us here
too. They realized that this is the place of opportunity for me; this is the place to
be to get a higher education. Of course the first year, it was a little bit strange,
obviously. You have complete culture shock and things like that. You can see that
the competition is all around you and you know that you have to be able to go to
the mainstream of American society. But I had a sense of what I wanted to
accomplish and my family expectations.
In order to do that, obviously you have to master the language, so you can
communicate with other people and get a job in the mainstream. The most clear,
sure way to go is through the education. So a college education is a basic
requirement. So I set that goal. You really concentrate, you know: How can I
catch up with my peers and eventually, after four years, compete in college? And
you try to learn, to catch up. So there is a tendency at that young age to imitate or
copy the American way of living, the language. And of course, I'm indebted to
57

67. my parents because they expected me to get a formal education and not just stick
with the old garment industry, laundry, or restaurant business. They encouraged
me to try my best and get on with my educational life and make a career, different
from theirs.
Once I set that goal, I aimed for it, and I associated with other people who
are planning to go to college. We talked to each other, we communicated, we
learned from each other and encouraged each other, basically. We competed with
each other in a way - you know, which college are you going to make? And this
kind of thing. I also could see some of my family members and I didn't want to be
a failure. I wanted to do something. Practically all my cousins were born in
America, so I wanted to prove the point that I could do equally well. It's a
competition built in that I wanted to show some honor to the family.
Obviously the first few years, the language was not able to catch up to par.
I took my studies seriously, but I it was difficult for me to get into the high school
I wanted, because of the reading level. So I went to a public high school for art
and design since I really enjoy drawing as well. My mother's aunt said, "Well,
maybe it's a good choice. Go ahead and study in a public high school. It's all
right." And I studied there four years, which I really enjoyed. But, I knew my
weakness. I knew I had to increase my vocabulary, so I went through some books
and whenever I found a word I didn't use, I underlined it and studied it. The
reading level, of course you read something and then you try to understand it.
Once you increase the vocabulary, I think you can understand the reading
58