Extending the reach of research

Establishing and sustaining a culture of accessible summaries of applied linguistics research

​

What is OASIS?

One page, non-technical summaries of studies published in journals

wide range (areas, theories, methods etc.)

searchable interface

accessed via wide range of international networks, e.g., professional associations

​

Launched by a short term project; driven forward and sustained by academic journals

sustainable, systematic, international, peer-reviewed research

​

Not creating “great expectations” (Lightbown, 1985).

summaries stick to one study (but includes summaries of syntheses)

they are summaries, not ‘applications & implications’

it’s one step – engagement among users needed

will not be able to make all research accessible to all audiences

• https://oasis-database.org/

What problem does it solve?

​

Research shows…

​

• findings about language learning and teaching do no reach stakeholders easily

​

• academic publications are increasingly more difficult to read and understand by people outside the field

​

​

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

​

1) Epistemic responsibility:

• “Scientists must learn to communicate with the public, be willing to do so, and indeed consider it their duty to do so” (The Bodmer Report, 1985)
• ‘Impact’
• Open science movement & social equity

​

There is a need to “defog the ‘ivory tower’ complex” (Watermeyer, 2012)

​

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

​

2) Research is inaccessible

​

• “The readability of scientific texts is decreasing over time” (Plaven-Sigray et al. 2017)

​

• Average academic article read in its entirety by about 10 people (Goldacre 2014)

​

“Prof, no one is reading you”.

“Academese [makes] the materials quite dry and abstract, and simply a bore to read.”

(Bitescience)

​

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

​

3) We cannot leave this to intermediaries:

​

• Very little good research gets through to the press
• Exaggeration in science news and academic press releases (Sumner et al. 2014)
• There are many initiatives, but most are:

not sustained or

of little relevance to language learning

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

​

4) Who decides what is disseminated?

​

• Currently, what is disseminated to a wider audience is decided by intermediaries, such as journalists, etc.
• Collins & Ruivivar (2018)

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

​

5) Benefits of engaging with research for educators

• enriches professional identify and reflection

Bai, 2018; Borg, 2010; Furlong et al., 2014; Stenhouse, 1975; Winch, Oancea &

Orchard, 2015

​

6) Benefits for engaging with practitioners for researchers

“Most definitely - engagement with others outside the academy (in my case, students of language, educators, and bilingual individuals) makes me think about research differently, helps me draw connections between different theories and data sources, and helps me keep the bigger picture in focus, even when I'm engaged in basic research (which is the bulk of my work).”

(from Tokowicz & Warren 2018)

“it helps us to think about whether our own teaching intuitions are backed up by research”

​

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

Access and understanding

Lack of professional development (46)

Lack of authority (43)

Terminology (33)

Unaware of resources (32)

Unaware of what is research-based practice (30)

Lack of “respect” for research

Different view of teaching / learning (24)

Not relevant (19)

Teaching experience is sufficient (18)

Lack of interest (17)

Time / funds / regulations

(2 components)

​

Lack of time (85)

Regulation/guidance at a local level (44)

​

No funds to attend conferences (59)

No funds to do research (57)

7) Many factors are barriers to accessing research

Principal Components Analysis

Marsden & Kasprowicz, 2017, The MLJ

Why is OASIS important: 8 motivations

8) We are told Accessible Summaries would be useful, to address some of those barriers

​

“How can research be made more accessible?”

• Marsden & Kasprowicz (2017): 62% of suggestions = accessible summaries, online, via practitioner outlets
• Andringa & Van Beuningen (in preparation): Idem

The OASIS initiative aims to make findings from language related research available and accessible to anyone who might be interested through non-technical open summaries.

​

​

In this document, two prototype summaries are presented and annotated to help authors write summaries for OASIS.

Summary format

De Houwer, A., Bornstein, M. & Putnick, D. (2014). A bilingual–monolingual comparison of young children's vocabulary size: Evidence from comprehension and production. Applied Psycholinguistics 35 (6), 1189-1211. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000744

Who knows more words: bilingual or monolingual children?

​

Why this research is important

Many people are concerned about the language development of children growing up with two languages in the family. Such children have been thought to have a smaller vocabulary (fewer words) than monolingual children. This study investigated the development of vocabulary size – an important indicator of language development – by bilingual (Dutch and French) and monolingual children (Dutch only) at 13 and 20 months of age. Both comprehension (how many words children understand) and production (how many words they can say) was tested. While there were large differences in vocabulary size between individual children, the study found very few differences between the two groups of bilingual and monolingual children.

​

What the researchers did

• They recruited participants from 61 middle-class families with a single child. 30 used Dutch at home (monolingual) from birth and 31 used Dutch and French at home (bilingual) from birth. In 14 of these, mothers spoke French with their child, while fathers spoke Dutch. In 16 families, this was reversed. In one bilingual family, both parents used both languages when speaking to their child.
• They asked mothers, fathers and third persons (e.g., grandmothers) to individually indicate children's word knowledge on standardized lists of vocabulary items. They did this twice, when the focus child was 13 and 20 months old. People were asked to mark whether the child understood a word that (s)he did not yet say (comprehension) or whether (s)he both understood and said it (production). For the 30 monolingual children, Dutch lists were completed; for the 31 bilingual children, Dutch and French lists were completed.

​

What the researchers found

According to what the parents reported:

• Both at 13 and later at 20 months, bilingual children understood and produced as many Dutch words as the monolinguals.
• At 13 months, for both groups, children could understand many Dutch words beyond those they could say. At 20 months, this was still true, but the comprehension-production gap had decreased in both groups.
• The researchers also looked at total knowledge (taking comprehension and production together). At 13 months, total knowledge of Dutch words was similar across groups. For total knowledge of Dutch at 20 months, the monolingual children knew more Dutch words than the bilingual children.
• At 13 months, when total knowledge of Dutch and French was considered, bilinguals knew 60% more words than monolinguals. When comprehension without production was considered, the difference was even larger, with bilinguals understanding 71% more words.
• Differences between the two groups were generally small. Instead, differences between individuals within the groups were generally large. For example, at 20 months, children in the monolingual group said between 19 and 531 words; children in the bilingual group said between 14 and 1234 words.

​

Things to consider

• There were large differences between individuals in both groups, and few differences between the groups as a whole. From this it seems that growing up bilingually may not be the most decisive factor for vocabulary development. If in a bilingual situation a child’s vocabulary development is late, it is important to consider explanations other than being bilingual (for instance, a child may have a hearing problem).
• This study showed that growing up bilingually does not necessarily slow vocabulary development and may in fact speed it up. The participating children were selected for their similarities in terms of age, family composition, age of first exposure to each language, and socio-economic background. More research is needed to find out if the present findings hold in different types of bilingual settings and with different types of language pairs.

How to cite this summary: Andringa, S., Bailey, E., De Houwer, A., Marsden, E., Kasprowicz, R. (2018). Do bilingual or monolingual children have more vocabulary knowledge? OASIS Summary of De Houwer, Bornstein & Putnick (2014) in Applied Psycholinguistics. https://oasis-database.org

The current OASIS summary format, the writing guidelinesis, and the recommendations made in this document are based on:

• Survey research with potential stakeholders
• Interviews and think-aloud studies with teachers
• Feedback from journal editors
• Feedback from interested colleagues
• Our experience with writing summaries

Let’s have a look

​

​

​

https://oasis-database.org/

​