Contexts that promote intensive second language (L2) experiences (typically, stay abroad, immersion, etc.) are reported to facilitate language development; yet, little is known about such programs when they are addressed to school-age learners in their home country. The present study examines the experiences of learners aged 11–13 years who participated in two domestic summer programs: a group of 58 learners on an overnight summer camp and a group of 47 learners at a language school. While the learners on both programs received English lessons on a daily basis, only those in the summer camp were exposed to English during non-language related activities. L2 development was assessed by administering three productive tasks and students’ experiences were recorded using questionnaires and via on-site observations. Our results indicate that the learners in both settings underwent significant L2 improvement in spite of the short duration of the two programs (three to four weeks). The results also highlight the challenge that domestic intensive programs face in seeking to maximize L2 use.
BarronB. (2004). Learning ecologies for technological fluency in a technology-rich community. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31, 1–37.
2.
BarronB. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49, 193–224.
3.
BensonP. (2011) Language learning and teaching beyond the classroom: An introduction to the field. In: BensonP.ReindersH. (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom: The theory and practice of informal language learning and teaching (pp. 7–16). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
4.
BultéB.HousenA. (2012). Defining and operationalising L2 complexity. In: HousenA.KuikenF.VedderI. (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Investigating complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21–46). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
5.
CollentineJ. (2009). Study abroad research: Findings, implications, and future directions. In: LongM.DoughtyC. (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 217–233). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
EvansM.FisherL. (2005). Measuring gains in pupils’ foreign language competence as a result of participation in a school exchange visit: The case of Y9 pupils at three comprehensive schools in the UK. Language Teaching Research, 9, 173–192.
8.
FeuerA. (2009). School’s out for the summer: a cross-cultural comparison of second language learning in informal settings. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12, 651–665.
HeatonJ. (1966). Composition through pictures. Essex: Longman.
11.
HingerB. (2003). Intensive versus extensive courses: Does time distribution in school context make a difference in foreign language acquisition? In: HeyworthF. (Ed.), The organisation of innovation in language education (pp. 109–125). Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
12.
HingerB. (2006). The distribution of instructional time and its effect on group cohesion in the foreign language classroom: A comparison of intensive and standard format courses. System, 34, 97–118.
13.
HousenA. (2002). Second language achievement in the European School system of multilingual education. In: SoD.JonesG. (Eds.), Education and society in plurilingual contexts (pp. 96–128). Brussels: Academic Press.
14.
HousenA. (2012). Time and amount of L2 contact inside and outside the school: Insights from the European schools. In: MuñozC. (Ed.), Intensive exposure experiences in second language learning (pp. 111–138). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
15.
HylandF. (2004). Learning autonomously: Contextualizing out-of-class English language learning. Language Awareness, 13, 180–202.
16.
Juan-GarauM.Pérez-VidalC. (2007). The effect of context and contact on oral performance in students who go on a stay abroad. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4, 117–134.
17.
KampfnerJ. (2014). What makes the super-rich tick: Status update. The Guardian G2, 15.10.14, pp. 6–9.
18.
LaiC.ZhuW.GongG. (2015). Understanding the quality of out-of-class English learning. TESOL Quarterly, 49, 278–307.
19.
LightbownP. (2012). Intensive L2 instruction in Canada: Why not immersion? In: MuñozC. (Ed.), Intensive exposure experiences in second language learning (pp. 25–44). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
20.
LindgrenE.MuñozC. (2012). The influence of exposure, parents, and linguistic distance on young European learners’ foreign language comprehension. International Journal of Multilingualism, 10, 105–129.
21.
LlanesA. (2011). The many faces of study abroad: an update on the research on L2 gains emerged during a study abroad experience. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3, 189–215.
22.
LlanesA. (2012). The short- and long-term effects of a short study abroad experience: The case of children. System, 40, 179–190.
23.
LlanesA.MuñozC. (2009). A short stay abroad: Does it make a difference?System, 37, 353–365.
24.
LlanesA.MuñozC. (2013). Age effects in a study abroad context: children and adults studying abroad and at home. Language Learning, 63, 63–90.
25.
MacWhinneyB. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk. 3rd edition.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
MartinsenR. (2010). Short-term study abroad: Predicting changes in oral skills. Foreign Language Annals, 43, 504–530.
27.
MuñozC. (Ed.) (2006). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
28.
MuñozC. (2010). Staying abroad with the family: A case study of two siblings’ second language development during a year’s immersion. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 160, 24–48.
29.
RichardsonL.D.WolfM. (Eds). (2001). Principles and practice of informal education. Learning through life. London: Routledge.
30.
SerranoR. (2011). The time factor in EFL classroom practice. Language Learning, 61, 117–143.
31.
SerranoR.LlanesÀ.TragantE. (2016) Examining L2 development in two short-term intensive programs for teenagers: Study abroad vs. ‘at home’. System, 57, 43–54.
32.
SerranoR.TragantE.LlanesÀ. (2012). A longitudinal analysis of the effects of one year abroad. Canadian Modern Language Review, 68, 138–163.
33.
SerranoR.TragantE.LlanesÀ. (2014). Summer English courses abroad versus ‘at home’. ELT Journal, 68, 397–409.
34.
SongJ. (2011). Globalization, children’s study abroad, and transnationalism as an emerging context for language learning: A new task for language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 749–758.
35.
SternH. (1985). The time factor and compact course development. TESL Canada Journal, 3, 13–27.
36.
StallingsJ. (1980). Allocated academic learning time revisited, or beyond time on task. Education Researcher, 9, 11–16.
37.
SundquistP. (2009). Extramural English matters: Out-of-school English and its impact on Swedish ninth graders’ oral proficiency and vocabulary. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden.
38.
van HoutR.VermeerA. (2007). Comparing measures of lexical richness. In: DallerH.MiltonJ.Treffers-DallerJ. (Eds.), Modelling and assessing vocabulary (pp. 93–115). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
VermeerA. (2000). Coming to grips with lexical richness in spontaneous speech data. Language Testing, 17, 65–83.
40.
ViladomsJ. (2009). Pesquis i Baliga. Cavall Fort, 1119, 53.
