TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE USE OF CODE-SWITCHING IN UTAH CLASSROOMS by George Alexander Bazaes A project submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION IN CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, UT April 12, 2021 Approved Natalie A. Williams, Ph.D. Yimin Wang, Ph.D. Thomas J. Mathews, Ph.D. John C. Trimble, Ph.D. CODE-SWITCHING i Acknowledgements This thesis marks the second culmination of a long path that I began to walk several years ago, which was full of joys, personal and professional growth, successes and also failures. For this reason, I would like to thank the people who were with me from the very beginning and who were very important in supporting me in those difficult moments. Firstly, I would like to thank my family for always being by my side, enjoying my successes and supporting me in my failures. To my parents, Sergio and Cynthia Bazaes, fundamental pillars in my life; I would also like to thank you for the patience that you have had, for always and unconditionally believing that I was capable of achieving the goals that I had established. Furthermore, for that tremendous love that you have always given to me. To my siblings, Sergio and Jessica Bazaes. I would like to express my gratitude for the love you give me, for always being concerned about my well-being and for always reaching out to me during difficult times of my life. I merely wish to say that I love you both. Likewise, I would like to express my gratitude to my mentors, Dr Thomas Mathews and Dr John Trimble for being a great source of inspiration throughout my academic career. I would also like to express my deep gratitude to the members of the committee as well as Dr Sarah Herrmann for all the mathematical and statistical support that she gave me, furthermore, to all the professors I have had at Weber State University throughout both my under and graduate programs for guiding me and giving me the tools to meet this academic challenge. How can I not thank that special person who, perhaps without even realizing it, has been a great support, giving me joy in moments of sadness and bringing out a part of me that I did not know; Thank you, Melinda! CODE-SWITCHING ii Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... 1 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM ...................................................................................................... 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................ 3 An Introduction to Code-Switching ............................................................................................ 3 Code-Switching from a Linguistics Perspective ..................................................................... 4 Code-Switching from a Sociolinguistic Perspective ............................................................... 5 Code-Switching from a Psychosocial Perspective .................................................................. 6 Bilingualism and the Brain .......................................................................................................... 7 Types of Bilingual Learning .................................................................................................... 8 Sections of the Brain During Second Language Acquisition .................................................. 9 Code-Switching in the Classroom ............................................................................................. 11 Advantages of Utilizing Code-Switching in the Classroom .................................................. 11 Challenges and Opportunities of Encouraging Code-Switching in Classrooms ................... 12 The Practices of Language Teaching ..................................................................................... 13 Utah Demographic Information and Statistics .......................................................................... 14 Utah School System ................................................................................................................... 15 Utah School Districts ............................................................................................................. 15 Utah Core Curriculum Classes .............................................................................................. 16 Utah Official Language Code and ACLU ............................................................................. 17 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 18 PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................................... 19 METHOD ..................................................................................................................................... 21 CODE-SWITCHING iii Participants ............................................................................................................................... 21 Design ....................................................................................................................................... 22 Instruments ............................................................................................................................ 22 Relevant codes ....................................................................................................................... 23 Relevant Survey Questions to be Considered ........................................................................ 24 Research Questions ................................................................................................................ 28 Hypothesis ............................................................................................................................. 29 Procedure .................................................................................................................................. 30 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 31 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 33 Addressing the Hypothesis .................................................................................................... 40 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 44 Connection to the Literature Review ......................................................................................... 48 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 49 Suggestions for Future Research Conduction ........................................................................... 49 Conclutions ............................................................................................................................... 50 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 52 APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................. 58 Appendix A: IRB Approval ....................................................................................................... 59 Appendix B: Weber State University Informed Consent: ......................................................... 61 Appendix C: The Survey: .......................................................................................................... 64 Appendix D: Relevant Descriptive Statistic………………………………..…………………72 CODE-SWITCHING iv List of Tables Table 1: Utah Metropolitan and Metropolitan Statistical Area, 2017 Estimates..........................15 Table 2: Number of ELs and EL Share of Students in Utah School Districts with More Than 1,000 Els, SY 2017-18...........................................................................16 Table 3: Abbreviations and codes used in present research work.................................................24 Table 4: Descriptive statistics Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Grade.......................................................................................................33 Table 5. ANOVA: Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Grade......................................................................................................34 Table 6. Group Statistic: Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Subject Area............................................................................................35 Table 7. Teachers Independent Samples Test: Use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Subject Area.............................................................................................35 Table 8. Descriptive Statistics: Use of Code-Switching and Q14.................................................37 Table 9. Correlations: Use of Code-Switching and Q14..............................................................37 Table 10. Descriptive Statistics: Use of Code-Switching and Q6.................................................38 Table 11. Correlations: Use of Code-Switching and Q6...............................................................39 Table 12. Descriptive Statistics: Code-Switching Learning and Q24 and Q28............................40 Table 13. Correlations Code-Switching Learning and Q24 and Q28...........................................41 Table 14. Group Statistics: Code-Switching Improves by Q30.....................................................43 Table 15. Independent Samples Test: Code-Switching Learning by Q24 and Q28................................................................................................................43 CODE-SWITCHING v Table 16. Correlations: Improves & Acceptance by Q30..............................................................44 Table 17: Tests of Homogeneity of Variances Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Grade Level.............................................................................................70 Table 18. Independent Samples Effect Sizes: Use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Subject Area.............................................................................................70 Table 19. Independent Samples Effect Sizes: Code-Switching Improves by Q24.........................70 Table 20. Frequency Table vs What is your range of age?...........................................................71 Table 21. Frequency Table vs Teachers' Grade Level..................................................................72 Table 22. Frequency Table vs Foreign Language Teachers.........................................................73 Table 23. Frequency Table vs About what percentage of your students are bilinguals?..............74 Table 24. Frequency Table vs A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance....................................75 CODE-SWITCHING vi List of Figures Figure 1. Means Plots - Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching by Teachers’ Grade Level..................................................................................................34 Figure 2. Simple Bar – Mean Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching by Foreign Language Teachers............................................................................................36 Figure 3. Simple Bar Mean of Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching by About what of your students are bilingual?....................................................................38 Figure 4. Simple Bar - Mean Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching by What is your range of age?.............................................................................................39 Figure 5. Scatter Plot of Q24 by Code-Switching Improves ........................................................42 Figure 6. Scatter Plot of Q28 by Code-Switching Improves.........................................................42 Figure 7. Scatter Plot of Q30 by Improves_Acceptace.................................................................45 Figure 8. Frequency vs What is your range of age?......................................................................71 Figure 9. Frequency vs Teachers' Grade Level.............................................................................72 Figure 10. Frequency vs Foreign Language Teachers...................................................................73 Figure 11. Frequency vs About what percentage of your students are bilinguals?.......................74 Figure 12. Frequency vs A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance......................................................75 CODE-SWITCHING 1 Abstract The linguistic use of code-switching is defined as the process of shifting from one language or dialect (linguistic code) to another, depending on the social context or conversational setting (such as with Spanglish). Code-switching has brought considerable controversy over time, while students and teachers are among those affected by the outcome. The purpose of this study is to ascertain the opinions of educators on the use of code-switching in the classroom, based on the hypothesis that, teachers believe that student learning will improve in a classroom where code-switching is allowed. Furthermore, the study is designed to outline the psychosocial, and academic benefits of code-switching. A 26-question survey was administered where 121 Utah teacher responses were gathered and analyzed. Specifically, the survey inquired about the use of code-switching in a classroom among students or between students and their teachers. Results found a positive correlation between teachers’ belief that code-switching improves learning and their willingness to allow the use of code-switching in their classrooms. Key words: Code-Switching, Classroom, Linguistic, Sociolinguistic, Psychosocial, Utah, Teachers. CODE-SWITCHING 2 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM The United States of America is a land where over 300 languages are spoken among its population of over 300 million documented people (Public Information Office, 2015). In comparison, according to Okada (2016), the state of Utah is home to over 120 languages, and about one in every seven people speak more languages than simply English. The top 20 languages spoken in homes across Utah include: English, Spanish, Chinese, German, Navajo, Portuguese, French, Vietnamese, Tongan, Samoan, Korean, Japanese, Tagalog, Russian, Italian, Serbo-Croatian, Arabic, Nepali, Cambodian, and Dutch (Okada, 2016). Given that there are so many bilingual speakers in Utah, an ideal situation would be for schools to hire primarily bilingual teachers in order to accommodate for the bilingual and English learning students who enroll in Utah’s public schools. In an ideal situation, the bilingual teachers would be able to utilize their multilingual skills in order to assist the increasing number of English language learning students in Utah classrooms. Unfortunately, over 80% of teachers in the United States are white, monolingual English-speaking teachers. Additionally, teachers who are not foreign language teachers or English language learning and English as a second language teachers have little to no training on how to teach English language learning students (Nieto, 2017). Utah has a great advantage as there is a large bilingual population that could be utilized in the educational field. However, there is a law that states that the official language of the state is English, thus the common core class teachers who are capable of speaking the language of their non-English speaking students are encouraged to teach only in English during their regular class periods. (Utah Code, 2020). The problem that arises is that due to English being the official state language, combined with the lack of teacher training mentioned above. Across the country, English learning students CODE-SWITCHING 3 are faced with the issue that they could fall behind in core curriculum classes because of English is the only language that materials are taught in the classroom (Mitchell, 2017). Teachers, who may speak the same language as the English language learning students in their classrooms, may not be permitted to speak any other languages. The lack of code-switching in classrooms poses an enormous toll on non-English speaking students, not only on an academic level, but also on a psychological and sociological level as well (Mitchell, 2017). Literature Review An Introduction to Code-Switching In bilingual studies, there is a phenomenon known as “Code-Switching”. Code-switching is often referred to as code-mixing, code-meshing, language transfer, or language alteration (Lin, 2013; Treffers-Daller, 2009). The term code refers to the language being spoken or written, for example, the “code” of the current paper is English. Switching, mixing, meshing, transferring, and altering refers to changing back and forth from one code to another throughout the course of a conversation, sentence, phrase, or document in the case of written code-switching (Lin, 2013; Lin, 2016). In the past 40-50 years, there has been a growth in the study of code-switching, and because of this, there exists various definitions of what it truly means (Treffers-Daller, 2009). According to Dumitrescu (2014), code-switching is the act of switching back and forth between languages because of convenience, or lack of knowledge of the second language, however code-switching stretches far beyond convenience or a lack of knowledge. For the purpose of this study, the researcher will focus on definitions of code-switching according to linguistic, sociolinguistic, and sociopsychological perspectives. Specific definitions for each will be stated and dissected in subsequent sections of this study. CODE-SWITCHING 4 The current literature review will operationally define code-switching, as well as identify the Utah school system, districts, and core classes, and the state’s English only language mandate, specifically section five where education is discussed. It will look into the world-class instructional design and assessment, as well as break down English language learning statistics for the top English language learning school districts in the state. Furthermore, the researcher will look into the psychological and sociological effects of the English only mandate, as well as the academic effects that it has on English language learning students. Additionally, the history, geography, and demographics of Utah will be analyzed as well. Code-Switching from a Linguistics Perspective According to linguistic researchers, code-switching indicates that the multi-language speaker has a proficient level of knowledge in both languages, and is therefore able to switch codes with ease, depending on which vocabulary they see most beneficial at the time (Hopewell & Abril-Gonzalez, 2019). Code-switching in this sense, then, is defined as having a perfect knowledge of both languages being utilized, thus the speaker has the ability to switch back and forth between languages with ease, and no meaning is lost. It is the use of more than one language or dialect (linguistic code) in a conversational or writing setting (Prince & Pintzuk, 2000). One example of this is: bilinguals, who can speak at least two languages fluently, and can use elements of both languages when conversing with another bilingual. The linguistic study of code-switching helps to identify how bilingual speakers come to obtain, understand and organize the grammar used in their second language (Prince & Pintzuk, 2000). Researchers also study code-switching in order to show how it can be relevant in and make an impact on various fields of study (Treffers-Daller, 2009). According to linguists, the use of code-switching in a conversational setting helps to shape the speaker and demonstrates a CODE-SWITCHING 5 culturally constructive ideology, and the bilingual speaker is able to adopt various different cultural identities (Morrison, 2017). Code-switching can take multiple forms as well. According to Purdue (2020), another form of code-switching is through writing. Code-switching in written form may happen when a student is making a direct quote, or when the topic requires a specific language and tone. For example, in writing about an experience, a student may write something along the lines of “This summer I was with my grandmother, who said ‘All men are violentos’.” Code-switching in writing is also done in order to address lexical need. There are times when technical terms are used, and exact meaning would be lost or distorted if the translation was used, thus the foreign word is used, with a translation following in parenthesis (Purdue, 2020). Code-Switching from a Sociolinguistic Perspective In sociolinguistic studies, code-switching is seen as the use of different dialects, accents, language combinations, and mannerisms within social groups in order to project a particular identity. With this definition, code-switching is used by everyone as they change their language style based on who they are talking to, what they are talking about, and where they are (Morrison, 2017; Shofner, 2020). There are times when these changes are only slightly different, such as a college student speaking with their university professor versus speaking with their boss. The tone and professionalism of the conversation may be the same, but the terminology and jargon may be slightly different. Other times changes are more greatly notices, such as a teenager speaking with their grandparents versus speaking with their friends. Generally, even though the speaker is a teenager, the tone and vocabulary they use is more gentile and respectful than the tone they use with their friends (Shofner, 2020). CODE-SWITCHING 6 Utilizing code-switching in only one language is often times seen as “slang,” but can also refer to switching from a formal to informal tone of voice. For example, when a mother speaks to her toddler in a high pitch with simple words and phrases, and then turns around and addresses her husband using full sentences, as well as a more serious tone. This is seen as single-language code-switching that does not utilize slang (Young, 2004). Young (2004) argued that utilizing code-switching within one language is often a racial idea. He said that “Code-switching is nothing if it ain’t about race” (pp. 50-51). In the United States, one of the biggest sociolinguistic examples used is that of African Americans. Often times called African American Vernacular English, also referred to as “Ghetto”, African Americans often times have certain slang that is used among themselves that is switched with Standard American English when they are talking to their non-African American friends, or when they are in a more formal setting such as work or school (Nordquist, 2020). Code-Switching from a Psychosocial Perspective Stanley Hall argued that adolescents, in their attempt to adapt to the various natural changes, try to bond with their peer group, where they feel security and understanding when sharing with people who go through similar circumstances. Doing so could generate the use of code-switching (Hall, 1915; Grinder, 1969). Code-switching is often attributed to illiteracy, lack of formal education, or lack of proficiency in one or both languages (Montes-Alcala, 2000). Furthermore, the researcher will focus on the following example of students using code-switching: A language learning student who does not have sufficient vocabulary needed to ask a question in class, so the student said what they can in English, and the unknown words were said in the student’s native language. In some languages, there are terms for certain combinations of code-switching, such as “Spanglish.” Spanglish is known as a “Hybrid Language” (Young, CODE-SWITCHING 7 2004). This form of code-switching is perhaps the most commonly used form of code-switching. Code-switching is also seen as a “spontaneous” switch in languages within either one sentence, or throughout several sentences during a single conversation (Balukas & Koops, 2015). From a psychosocial perspective, and the definition that will be utilized for the purpose of this thesis will be the idea of utilizing code-switching when there is a lack of vocabulary skills in one or both languages being utilized. Through the utilization of code-switching, students have the opportunity to express themselves without feeling as though their attempts are being thwarted by a lack of language skills. Social relationships between teachers and students, as well as students and students affect their sense of well-being (Dewaele, 2011). In that same respect, students who are unable to communicate, or understand are less likely to engage, thus their speaking and language learning is punished. This causes English learning skills to become interrupted and could possibly end the student’s membership in certain academic classes where teachers do not utilize or permit code-switching (Dewaele, 2011). Bilingualism and the Brain According to Possel (2020), there are three types of bilingual learners: Compound bilingual learners, coordinate bilingual learners, and subordinate bilingual learners. Each type of bilingual learner depends on where that specific individual is at in their first language learning stage, as well as the social interactions that person has in their second language learning stage (Possel, 2020; Yip, 2013). The following sections are designed to break down those three stages, identify which type of bilingual learning is most likely to utilize code-switching, as well as identify the parts of the brain used in language acquisition during first and second language use, and code-switching. CODE-SWITCHING 8 Types of Bilingual Learning The first bilingual learner type is the compound bilingual learner, sometimes referred to as the simultaneous language learner (Possel, 2020). Compound language learning is the process of the language learner learning multiple languages at the same time. This language learning stage is most often evident in young children whose families immigrate when they are first learning to speak (i.e., a toddler). The child has not yet grasped the concepts of any language; thus, they are learning both the new language and their native language simultaneously (Yip, 2013, Ted Ed, 2015). Another reason a child could be considered a compound bilingual learner is if one parent spoke only one language in the home, and the other parent spoke another (Yip, 2013). For example, if the mother is from France and only spoke French in the home, and the father is from the United States and only spoke English in the home, the child would grow up listening to and learning both French and English at the same time. The second bilingual type is a coordinate bilingual learner. A coordinate bilingual learner is one who starts learning their languages at different stages of life (Ted Ed, 2015; Possel, 2020). Going off of the previous example of the immigrant family, the coordinate learner is an older child (i.e., preteen or teenager) who already has a stable knowledge of the mother tongue, and has thus learned the new language separately, but uses the two equally. Coordinate bilingual learners are the learners who are most likely to utilize code-switching in order to communicate due to the fact that they are still learning their second language, yet they have circumstantial and social needs to communicate (Scheu, 2000). The third and final type of bilingual learner is the subordinate learner. The subordinate learner is a learner who already has a vast knowledge of their native language, and when given the chance to learn a second language, they do so through filtering their primary language (Ted CODE-SWITCHING 9 Ed, 2015). Subordinate bilingual learners are asymmetric learners, meaning that their language use is not balanced, and their native language usually dominates the language they are learning (Possel, 2020). In continuing with the earlier given example of the immigrant family, the parents are considered to be the subordinate bilingual learners, as their second language usage usually only happens in places such as work (Ted Ed, 2015). Sections of the Brain During Second Language Acquisition The brain has always been, and will continue to be a mystery, however there are certain facts about the brain that are known. The brain consists of two hemispheres, each divided into four lobes: the frontal, the parietal, the temporal, and the occipital lobes. In addition to the four lobes, there are various glands and other areas, including a “little brain” called the cerebellum. All of the lobes and glands and pieces of the brain put together are what make humans act the way they do (Anderson, 2000). During language acquisition, the brain reacts differently depending on the type of bilingual learner; compound bilingual learners are able to use their entire brain, while coordinate bilingual learners use a little bit less, and finally subordinate learners use primarily only one hemisphere (Ted Ed, 2015). According to Kuhl (2010), a compound bilingual learner’s brain is the most elasticized, and therefore is able to retain and comprehend information easier than coordinate and subordinate learners. It is because of this that compound bilingual learners are part of the critical learning stage. The critical learning hypothesis is the idea that the ability to learn and perfect a language is biologically linked to the learner’s age. The younger the language learner is, the easier time they will have learning the language (Du, 2010). The critical learning period begins during infancy and ends around age seven. After age seven, grammatical proficiency begins to decrease as the individual grows older (Kuhl, 2010). CODE-SWITCHING 10 During language acquisition, the main part of the brain used is the left hemisphere, specifically the Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas, which are found in the left frontal and left temporal lobe, respectively (Magalhães, 2019). The Broca’s area is the part of the brain that processes language, while the Wernicke’s area is the part of the brain that develops and comprehends language. Although the areas of the brain that are most responsible for language acquisition are located in the left hemisphere, language acquisition includes communication between both sides of the brain (Magalhães, 2019). According to Van Hell et al (2015), during code-switching, several areas of the brain are used, and areas vary depending on the type of code-switching done. In regular code-switching, the switch takes place at the beginning of a noun and verb phrase. For example: the little girl corre muy rápido (the girl runs very fast). During irregular code-switching the switch takes place somewhere in the middle of the noun and verb phrase (Van Hell et al, 2015). For example: the little niña es… (the little girl is…). In a study done measuring regular code-switching, the areas of the brain that showed an increase in activity levels were the “prefrontal, parietal, and temporal cortex, as well as in the anterior cingulate cortex, basal ganglia, and thalamus” in the left hemisphere, and “the prefrontal and temporal cortex, as well as the putamen” in the right hemisphere. Irregular switches showed increased levels of activity in the “left inferior frontal gyrus, left parietal lobule, right inferior and middle frontal gyri, and right insula” (Van Hell et al, 2015, p. 32). In the early 19th century, bilingual children were seen as being handicapped because all of the time and energy they spend switching back and forth between their native language and second language (Ted Ed, 2015; Mitchell, 1937). Despite these reasonings, however, more recent research suggests that such increased activity in the brain has proven to have a positive impact on CODE-SWITCHING 11 the brain and has even shown to thwart the effects of dementia and Alzheimer’s later in life (Yu et al, 2017). Code-Switching in the Classroom Throughout schools across the country, there are two different types of language learning settings. The first is for foreign language speaking students learning English. These classes consist of English as a second language classes, and English language learning classes. The second type of language learning setting is for English speaking students learning a foreign language. These classes consist of a foreign language class, or dual immersion program (Lin, 2016). The language learning settings referred to in in this study are English as a second language and English language learning classes. Advantages of Utilizing Code-Switching in the Classroom For several decades there has been much debate on whether code-switching is a help or a hinderance in second language learning (Jingxia, 2010). However, in looking at code-switching and its psychological effects, it is important to understand that having a good rapport with students is essential in teaching a class. The student needs to feel as though he or she can trust the teacher, and this is less likely to happen if the student cannot understand everything the teacher says (Gardner, 2020). Gardner (2020) argued that the use of code-switching in the classroom is acceptable when building rapport with students but should not be over-used as the ultimate goal is for the student to become competent in communicating. According to Rodrigo (2016), code-switching has a positive impact when used in an academic setting. The duty of an educator is to ensure that his or her students obtain information and knowledge. Teachers also have the job of making sure that that knowledge is obtained in a “clear and concise manner,” and sometimes the best way to do so is through code-switching CODE-SWITCHING 12 (Rodrigo, 2016). Furthermore, another benefit of allowing teachers to utilize code-switching in the classroom is that it adds emphasis and ensures understanding for the English learning student (Rodrigo, 2016). For example, during a lesson in a home economics class, the teacher may realize that the English learning student has a confused look after an instruction, the teacher may repeat the instruction substituting the more difficult words in the sentence into the native language of the student. While code-switching is a useful tool in enhancing students’ language development, it should not be used as a crutch or an excuse to shirk in learning responsibilities (Simasiku et al, 2014). Challenges and Opportunities of Encouraging Code-Switching in Classrooms Cross-lingual pedagogical strategy advocates identify many benefits from utilizing the students’ first language as a language acquisitional tool. According to Sakaria and Priyana (2018) the use of code-switching in the classroom enhances language development significantly. Utilizing code-switching can often times help students to gain a better understanding of topics and concepts that may prove to be more difficult to understand. The idea of utilizing code-switching as a pedagogical tool helps increase participation and comprehension in a classroom setting while “strengthening student-teacher interpersonal relationship[s]” (Sakaria & Priyana, 2018, p. 177). In addition to emphasizing learning, utilizing code-switching is also an effective scaffolding strategy. Bilingual teachers have the opportunity to give emphasis to difficult concepts or introduce new ones. Furthermore, bilingual educators who utilize code-switching for English language learning students in core curriculum classes have the opportunity to express appropriate affection for students, thus motivating the students to continue in their language learning endeavor (Sakaria & Priyana, 2018). CODE-SWITCHING 13 As with every teaching pedagogy, code-switching has its challenges. According to Aljoundi (2013) some of the challenges involved in code-switching include, but are not limited to confusion, and parent disapproval. The utilization of code-switching has the potential to confuse students. Students who are not familiar with the mother language of the English learning students have the potential to become confused, which could cause a hinderance in their education. Moreover, there is also the idea of parent disapproval. There are cases in which the parents prefer their students to only learn in one language due to the belief that code-switching hinders language learning (Aljoundi, 2016). The Practices of Language Teaching The World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) began in 2003 as a response to the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) of 2001. WIDA was founded in Wisconsin when the Wisconsin Department of Public Education was awarded an Enhanced Assessment Grant. With the funding it received, WIDA developed the English Language Proficiency Standards. The English Language Proficiency Standards serve as a guide for educators to determine the amount of aid given to an English language learning student (WIDA, 2020). There are currently 40 states, including Utah, that have adopted the WIDA program. According to Mitchell (2017), upon implementing WIDA during the 2016-2017 the state of Nevada transition rate from English as a second language classes to mainstream classes for English learning students dropped from between 12-14% to approximately 2%. This means that in the entire state of Nevada, only 1,500 of the 75,000 English learners were identified as sufficient enough to transition to mainstream classes. When a student transitions too early from an English as a second language class, the student experiences significant academic difficulties, CODE-SWITCHING 14 and if the student transitions too late, their college preparation and academic careers are put in jeopardy (Mitchell, 2017). Utah Demographic Information and Statistics The state of Utah is located in the Rocky Mountain region of the United States, and shares a boarder with the states of Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada. The area of Utah covers 219,901 square kilometers, which places it in thirteenth place among the North American states. Utah is home to the Wasatch Fault line, Arches National Park, and several ski resorts. Utah is also home to the Great Salt Lake, which is the largest lake west of the Mississippi River (Utah.com, 2020). Utah gained its statehood in 1896, making it the 45th state in the Union. Although Utah is known for its settlement by the Mormon pioneers, the Utah region was first explored by Spanish explorers, and then part of Mexico until the Mexican American War from 1846-1848. Utah gets its name from the Ute Native American tribe that inhabited the land when settlers came from the East (Utah.com, 2020). Utah is one of the most important transportation and telecommunications centers in the American West. Approximately 88% of Utah's population lives in an urban concentration called the Wasatch Front, with the state's capital and largest city, Salt Lake City as its center. The most recent census figures certify that the total Latino population in Utah is more than 400,000 people, an increase of almost 15 percent over the previous census of 2010, constituting 13.7 percent of the total population of the state. The three largest metropolitan areas in Utah include the Salt Lake City, Ogden-Clearfield, and Provo-Orem areas. The table below illustrates metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas in Utah (Gardner, 2018). CODE-SWITCHING 15 Table 1 Utah Metropolitan and Metropolitan Statistical Area, 2017 Estimates. Area Associated County (s) 2017 Estimate 2016-2017 Percent Change 2016-2017 Absolute Change Metropolitan Statistical Areas Salt Lake City, UT Salt Lake, Tooele 1,203,105 1.4 17,127 Ogden-Clearfield, UT Weber, Davis, Morgan, Box Elder 665,358 1.9 12,363 Provo-Orem, UT Utah, Juab 617,675 2.7 16,197 St. George, UT Washington 165,662 4.0 6,425 Logan, UT-ID Cache, Franklin (ID) 138,002 1.7 2,313 Micropolitan Statistical Areas Cedar City, UT Iron 51,001 2.4 1,205 Summit Park, UT Summit 41,106 1.8 716 Vernal, UT Uintah 35,150 -2.9 -1,044 Heber, UT Wasatch 32,106 5.0 1,535 Price, UT Carbon 20,295 -.4 -76 Note: Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, 2017. Reference: (Gardner, 2018). Utah School System Utah School Districts In 2019, in the state of Utah, there are 41 school districts, serving over 600,000 students (Utah State Board of Education, 2019). According to the United States Census Bureau and the Utah State Office of Education, half of English language learning students resided in Granite (15,921), Ogden (3,133), and Salt Lake City (7,197) school districts in 2012 (United States Census Bureau, 2015). As of 2017, the top ten school districts with over 1,000 English language learners in the state of Utah are: Granite (12,876), Salt Lake City (4,516), Alpine (2,715), Davis (2,403), Jordan (2,272), Ogden (2,155), Canyons (2,081), Washington County (1,897), Provo CODE-SWITCHING 16 City (1,593), and Nebo (1,170) school districts (Utah State Board of Education, 2017). Below is a table demonstrating the demographic and percentages of English learning students in these school districts. Table 2 Number of ELs and EL Share of Students in Utah School Districts with More Than 1,000 Els, SY 2017-18 Number of ELs EL Share of Students in District (%) Granite School District 12876 19.50 Salt Lake City School District 4516 19.80 Alpine School District 2715 3.40 Davis School District 2403 3.30 Jordan School District 2272 4.20 Ogden School District 2155 18.40 Canyons School District 2081 6.10 Washington County School District 1897 6.30 Provo City School District 1593 10.00 Nebo School District 1170 3.60 Note: EL = English Learners, SY = School Year Source: Utah State Board of Education, "Superintendent's Annual Report - 2016-17 - Fall Enrollment by Demographics October 2017, " Accessed July 10, 2018, www.schools.utah.gov/superintendentannualreport?mid=1045&aid=1. Reference: (Utah State Board of Education, 2017) Utah Core Curriculum Classes Core curriculum classes are operationally defined as the classes that all students must take throughout their academic career. These classes include mathematics, social studies, language arts, and science. In order for a student to move on to the next academic level of studying, and eventually earn their high school diploma, they must pass their core classes. According to the Utah State Board of Education (USBE, 2020), a high school student needs four language arts credits, three mathematics credits, three social studies credits, three science credits, three and a half direct course work credits, two physical education health credits, and five and a CODE-SWITCHING 17 half elective credits, adding up to twenty-four credits in all (Utah State Board of Education, 2020). In Utah, if a student is unable to attain all required credits from core curriculum classes, there are options to make up those credits. Within a local school district, academic credits are made up online, and students meet with their school counselors to sign up for online makeup classes (Utah State Board of Education, 2020). Each school district has varying information concerning their form of make-up credits. Utah Official Language Code and ACLU As mentioned above, the official language of the state of Utah is English. The official state language policy affects government and judicial proceeding, and schools. The policy was passed in November 2019 and went into effect on May 1, 2020. According to the policy, the language of all government activity is English, and all documents, transactions, proceedings, meetings, publications, etc. are to be done in English (Utah Code, 2020). In the policy, section one confirms that English is the official language of Utah, and section five of the policy states that in regards the education in Utah, students should be able to read and write in English (Utah Code, 2020). This section of the policy became official in 2000. According to section five of the policy, all non-English speakers should learn to “read, write, and understand English as quickly as possible” (Utah Code, 2020, p. 1). In order to achieve this, schools of Non-English-speaking students should do everything in their power to help English language learning students and parents learn English as “as quickly as possible” and to ensure that all communication is understood. Furthermore, the judicial system defended the policy by reminding those who criticized it that the policy is nonrestrictive and more of a symbol. The CODE-SWITCHING 18 policy is not to be strictly enforced but is to be promoted based on principle (Utah Code, 2020, p. 1). The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a nonprofit organization that defends individual rights and liberties of every person in the country, and they have historically opposed the English Only policy. They believed that the implications of the movement and the policies made in its wake were unconstitutional. For instance, the policy implied that non-English speakers are not able to freely, or coherently, communicate with the government. Because of that, immigrants are unable to follow and comprehend trial proceedings, obtain a license, are restricted to speak only English in the workplace, and are denied bilingual education in schools, jeopardizing a child’s right to education (ACLU, 2017). Allowing code-switching in classrooms would be one way of helping students gain a better understanding of the English language, as well as aid ACLU to ensure an equal and just opportunity for those learning English. Summary In looking at the laws of the state, and the regulations for the WIDA, it is easy to see the struggle that can arise for students who are not yet proficient in English, and yet are attempting to study materials for their core curriculum classes. When English language learners are enrolled in school, they are put into some sort of English as a second language class. After a year enrolled in that class, they are administered the language assessment from WIDA to determine whether or not they can enter mainstream classrooms for the subsequent school year. If the results from their test indicate that the student’s English is adequate, they are sent to mainstream English only classes. If the test results indicate need for language improvement, the students remain in the English as a second language class. CODE-SWITCHING 19 If student are integrated into mainstream classes before they are ready, they run the risk of not being able to understand what is taught and falling behind. If students are not integrated soon enough, they run the risk of missing out on important knowledge, and still falling behind peers. A solution to that problem is allowing bilingual teachers to utilize code-switching in the classroom as an aid for their students. In utilizing code-switching as a teaching aid in classrooms, teachers gain a better chance of building rapport with their English language learning students, which helps students gain a greater trust in their teachers. Along with building a stronger rapport with students, utilizing code-switching aids students in the social aspects of school, as it helps to increase the innate bias of sociostatic value that all humans develop as infants (Schumann, 1998). Above all, a major reason for allowing code-switching is that it has a positive effect on student academia. When students understand the content delivery language, they are more likely to understand that content as well. Code-switching ensures that the student is understanding the content and allows students to grasp concepts they might not have been able to grasp without it. One benefit of code-switching is that it can be faded out as time goes on (Gardner, 2020). It is meant to be a training wheel, and not a crutch. PURPOSE Since the 1700s, the United States has been known as the “Great American Melting Pot”. People from all over the world have been coming to the United Stated for religious, political, and other freedoms (Martin, 1988). Policies and practices surrounding the issues of language, translations, and communication with immigrants, or non-English speaking persons have been debated, changed, and enforced throughout all of American history, with the earliest case dating back to the 1750’s. At that time, there was an influx of German immigrants entering the new CODE-SWITCHING 20 country. In Pennsylvania, signs and other written materials were generously written in both English and German, however, when tensions between the two countries escalated during World War I; Americans rejected German writing and translations, furthermore, going so far as to remove German publications from their libraries (Martin, 1988). This example is one of many that has led the American society to push for an English only society. Since then, there has been debate, controversy, and news about various English only policies that have appeared throughout the United States. Some of the argument stems against the idea that America is a melting pot that embraces immigration and diversity while others see America as an English, or American speaking country based on its government and history. Immigration has been a touchy subject at some points of the nation’s history and the climate around it can upset the public opinion surrounding language, speech, and education. Through curiosity, and desire to make a contribution in the academic field, specifically for those students who have immigrated from non-English-speaking countries, or merely for those students whose dominant language is not English, yet they are currently studying in traditional public high school in which they must face the colossal challenges of learning a new language on top of that, to learn all the required subjects for the school curriculum. Despite laws and regulations stating that English is the official language of the state of Utah, students have a right to receive an equal opportunity level of education. Part of the Official Language policy states that English language learning adults and children should learn to “read, write, and understand English as quickly as possible.” It also encourages foreign language instruction and suggests that “formal and informal programs in English as a Second Language should be initiated, continued, and expanded.” (Utah Code, 2020). CODE-SWITCHING 21 The purpose of the current study is to outline the psychological, sociological, and academic benefits of code-switching, moreover, to endorse and support the hypothesis of the researcher under the premise that based on teachers’ perceptions; teachers believe that student learning will improve in a classroom that allows code-switching. It is the goal of the researcher to find out if the teachers’ perceptions support this hypothesis. Moreover, it is desired to bring a seed of curiosity along with the possibility of additional tools for the Utah teaching community, furthermore, to be able to open a hopeful door to future researchers and perhaps a contribution to the American society as a whole. METHOD Participants For the current study, participants consisted of teachers selected from various public high schools and middle schools in the four largest metropolitan areas in Utah: Salt Lake City, Ogden- Clearfield, Provo-Orem and St George. The schools were randomly selected utilizing the Utah School Districts Directory (Utah State Board of Education, 2021). The researcher made a list of school districts within the four largest Utah metropolitan areas (see tables 1 & 2). Within each district, each school was listed, and, using SPSS, three schools from each district list were selected. Of the schools that were selected, each teacher in the school whose email address was readily available was invited to participate, and survey links were sent out to all teachers regardless of the grade level and subject taught. A total of 722 teachers were invited to participate in this study, in which 172 started the survey and did not finish, 550 teachers did not open the survey, and 121 teachers successfully finished the survey. Only successfully finished surveys were considered in the data collection of this study. All participants were teachers from public schools; therefore, it is assumed that they were certified teachers. CODE-SWITCHING 22 Design The current study utilized a quantitative research design. A survey (Appendix C) was distributed to determine and gather the opinion of teachers concerning the utilization of code-switching in the classroom, and responses were based on a seven-point Likert scale. A seven-point scale was chosen as they have been proven to be easier to use, and they offer a better representation of how the participant truly thinks because of the large variation in choices (Finstad, 2010). On the scale, one was equal to “Strongly Disagree,” and seven was equal to “Strongly Agree” in order to obtain an unbiased and more precise data collection. An example of an affirmation from the survey is “It is acceptable for two students who speak a language other than English to communicate with each other in their mother tongue for academic purposes.” An institutional review board (IRB) was required to distribute the survey, and participants were asked to provide informed consent prior to beginning the survey. In the informed consent form (Appendix B), the purpose of the survey was disclosed in full, as well as how it pertained to the current study. Upon volunteering consent, participants were then asked questions about their teaching background, as well as demographic information about themselves and their students. Instruments The survey statements and questions were unbiased while being carefully formulated to obtain consistent responses from the teachers. There were three parts to the survey. The first part gathered demographic information including teachers’ age, years of experience, and percentage of their students that were bilingual. Demographic questions were presented as multiple choice, in which teachers selected from a few different ranges or percentages, and yes/no questions. The next two parts affirmed the teacher’s perceptions and opinion on code-switching. These questions were answered by the teachers choosing a point on a scale of one to seven, where one CODE-SWITCHING 23 equaled strongly disagree, and seven was equal to strongly agree. The first set of affirmations involved teachers’ opinions on their students’ use of code-switching in classrooms. The second set of affirmations involved teachers’ opinions on teacher use of code-switching in the classroom. In both sets, teachers were exposed to different hypothetical scenarios that helped them consider their own perception of the use of code-switching. The survey had 23 questions in total and the researcher received a response of 121 completed surveys. Survey questions and affirmations were created by the researcher based on various survey examples found online. The survey was created utilizing the Qualtrics Survey Tool. It supports all most question types and saves all data in downloadable files. The Qualtrics Survey Tool provides over 50 survey templates that are signed by industry experts that suit eight question types, including the disagree to agree scale of one to seven that was used in the survey for this thesis. The survey was appealing and easily distributed to participants’ emails. The Qualtrics Survey Tool has a more advanced set of features when it comes to both questionnaire design as well as reporting options. Statistical data for the current study was processed and analyzed utilizing the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS). SPSS is a software designed for statistical data analysis, and it can handle large amounts of data and clean visual interface. Weber State University provided the license for its students and faculty. Relevant codes In order to simplify the interpretation and subsequent data analysis, the following abbreviations have been established: CODE-SWITCHING 24 Table 3 Abbreviations and codes used in present research work. Labels Abbreviations or codes Research questions RQ Hypothesis H Question from the Survey Q Additional questions AQ Acceptance in the Use of Code-Switching M(Q20, Q21,Q24) Code-Switching Improves M(Q19, Q23,Q25) Note: The nomenclature provided was the researcher's initiative, it is not standardized; thus, it is for referential purposes only. Relevant Survey Questions to be Considered Below are some of the questions formulated in the survey (Appendix C). The questions are the pillar, the fundamental piece, on which the analysis was based. Since the questions were formatted with the Qualtrics Survey Tool, the questions will be named with their original number along with a justification of their selection. Q6) What is your range of age? For this question, the surveyed teachers had five options which were (18-24), (25- 34), (35-44), (31-45), (55 +). The question is part of the demographic section of the survey. It is meant to help classify the teachers according to their age in order to observe any distinction in answers between the age ranges. Q8) What grade level do you teach? (Select all that apply) This demographic survey question was designed to classify the teacher according to the grade level that they teach. In this question, the three possible answers are (K-6), (7-9), (10-12), classified respectively in elementary school, junior high/middle school and high school. The participants had the opportunity to manually enter up to three answers; for instance, a teacher may claim to be teaching in a (7-9) and also a (10-12) grade range. CODE-SWITCHING 25 Q9) How many years of teaching experience do you have? This survey question was designed to classify the teachers according to their professional teaching experience. The surveyed teachers had four options which were (1- 3), (4-5), (6-9), or (10+) years which represent the range of teaching experience they have. Q10) What is/are your subject area(s)? The purpose of this question was to classify teachers in different groups according to their subject area. Teachers were allowed to enter up to three different subject areas manually to obtain a survey as accurate as possible and to classify the foreign language teachers from the others. Q14) About what percentage of your students are bilingual? The percentage ranges of students that are bilingual that the participant was able to choose from were, (5% or less), (6%-15%), (16%-30%), (31%-45%), or (46% or greater). This question is necessary for knowing the quantity of bilingual students a teacher has in their roster. Q15) Do any of your students code-switch in class? In this question, there were two possible answers which were yes or no. The teachers participating in the survey determined whether they recognized that a student uses code-switching in the classroom setting. Q19) Code-switching is a hindrance to the academic success of ESL and ELL students. This survey statement took account of the teacher's opinion regarding the use of code-switching by the students in the ELL and ESL programs. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly CODE-SWITCHING 26 agreed, therefore, the greater the agreement, the more negative the teachers' perception regarding the academic success of the use of code-switching in the ELL or ESL programs became. Q20) It is acceptable for two students who speak a language other than English to communicate with each other in their mother tongue for academic purposes. This survey statement was designed to gather information about the teachers' acceptance regarding the use of code-switching by the students for academic purposes. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed, therefore, the greater the agreement implied a greater acceptance of the use of code-switching. Q21) It is acceptable for non-English speaking students to alternate between English writing and writing in their mother tongue if they cannot find the word they are looking for to express their ideas. This survey statement gathered information about the teachers' acceptance regarding the use of code-switching in writing by the students. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed, therefore, the greater the agreement implied a greater acceptance of the use of code-switching. Q23) ELL and ESL students who use code-switching are at an academic disadvantage compared to those ELL and ESL students who do not use code-switching. This statement in the survey for gathering teachers’ opinions regarding the use of code-switching by the ELL and ESL students. In this statement, teachers provided their opinion when comparing the academic advantage between English language learner CODE-SWITCHING 27 students who are using code-switching to those who do not use code-switching. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed, therefore, the greater the agreement, the more negative the teacher’s perception on the implementation of code-switching became. Q24) Regardless of whether or not I could speak the native language of my non-English speaking students, I would allow them to use code-switching for academic purposes in my classroom. This statement was designed to survey unbiased information about the teachers that would allow the use of code-switching by the students, despite any possible language barrier that may occur between the teacher and their student. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed, therefore, the greater the agreement, the more they would allow code-switching in class for academic purposes in the classroom setting. Q25) I believe that the implementation of code-switching is a priority in our classrooms in order to help improve the students’ academic performance. The amount the teacher agreed with this survey statement determined the teacher’s belief about the implementation of code-switching being a priority in the classroom and if they believe that code-switching would help students improve their academic performance. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed. The more that the teacher agreed, the greater the teacher’s belief in implementing code-switching as a priority became. Q28) I feel as though a bilingual teacher who speaks the same mother tongue of a student who is learning English should support students in utilizing code-switching by providing them with the CODE-SWITCHING 28 necessary keywords in the student's mother tongue to ensure the correct understanding of the key concepts. This survey statement was designed to learn about how the teachers feel about a bilingual teacher supporting students through the utilization of code-switching, providing key words and understanding of key concepts in the student’s mother tongue if the teacher is able to communicate in that same language. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed. The greater the agreement, the more positively the teacher felt about a bilingual teacher code-switching to provide a student with key words and concepts in that student’s mother tongue. Q30) A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance The intention of this survey statement was to create a broad statement for the teachers to either agree or disagree upon the psychosocial approach state of students’ environment in relation to the hypothetical academic performance of the students being improved by the use of code-switching. This statement was formulated on a seven-point scale, where one strongly disagreed and seven strongly agreed. The more that the teacher agreed, the more positively the teacher felt about code-switching and its possible benefits to a student’s psychosocial environment. Research Questions Teachers are a fundamental pillar, the primary source, the first line in transmitting the knowledge including the necessary tools for students to achieve personal, academic, and professional success. It is due to the invaluable contribution that teachers make to society, added CODE-SWITCHING 29 to their vast academic background and various personal experiences, that for the purpose of this research, to know their opinions is considered extremely important, relevant, furthermore, significant for the correct data analysis and validation of the hypothesis. For that reason, the researcher has carefully formulated a set of questions and affirmations in a survey to disclose from the first source and in unbiased form the teacher's perception in regard to code-switching for subsequent data analysis and interpretation of the results which will be the prelude to support the validity of the information in which it is intended to answer the hypothesis. The current study attempts to answer the following research questions: 1. Do high school teachers have a better acceptance of the benefits of using code-switching in the classroom compared to their junior high school and elementary school counterparts? 2. Will foreign language teachers be less accepting of the use of code-switching than teachers in a non-language learning class? 3. Will teachers of classes with a larger percentage of bilingual students be more tolerant of code-switching than teachers with a smaller percentage of foreign language speaking students? 4. Will younger teachers be more accepting of code-switching than older teachers? Hypothesis The research questions along with the statistical analysis of the survey determined the outcome of the hypothesis. The hypothesis was formulated in the following way: • H1: Teachers believe that student learning will improve in a classroom that allows code-switching. CODE-SWITCHING 30 • H2: Teachers believe that student learning will worsen in a classroom that allows code-switching. • H0: Teachers believe that allowing or not allowing code-switching in a classroom makes no difference in student learning. Additional Research Questions While analyzing the data, the researcher was able to determine two additional research questions to aid in recognizing the hypothesis. Additional research questions are as follows: 1. Is there a difference between the surveyed teacher who answered yes or no to the question “Do any of your students code-switch in class?” and H2 teachers who believe that student learning will worsen in a classroom that allows code-switching? 2. Does a non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance? Procedure Upon completion of the proposal for this study, a copy was sent to the IRB committee for appropriate approval. While awaiting approval, the researcher selected random schools throughout the four largest metropolitan areas in the state in order to distribute the survey. Schools were selected at random from the Utah State Board of Education website. Of the schools selected, every teacher with an available email address from the school was selected to participate. It should be noted that not all of the schools selected had teacher emails readily available. Once IRB approval was obtained (Appendix A), the researcher contacted the selected schools in order to introduce himself and extend an invitational email. Following the email and introduction, a survey link was distributed to each teacher along with a recruitment letter CODE-SWITCHING 31 informing them of the research study and the opportunity they had to share their opinion of the utilization of code-switching. Three days after the initial survey invitation was distributed, a follow up email with the survey link was sent; furthermore, approximately one week after distributing the survey, the researcher sent a follow up email to all teachers who received the survey reminding them of their opportunity to participate. The survey remained open for approximately two weeks before data were collected. At the end of the allotted survey period, the survey was closed, data were collected and analyzed, and a final email was sent to participants informing them of the survey outcome and thanking them for their help in furthering the research of the use of code-switching in the classroom. Using SPSS, the researcher proceeded to analyze data based on teacher responses from the survey. Data were analyzed in various different ways taking into account each independent variable, such as teacher age, gender, subject taught, and other demographic questions, and were compared against their responses to sections one and two of the code-switching and ELL/ESL affirmation statements. Statistical results were analyzed and used to answer the above stated research questions, as well as acknowledge the researcher’s hypothesis. Additionally, results obtained struck various other questions not previously considered, and will be mentioned in the discussion section. Data Analysis Using SPSS, in preparation to analyze research question one, the researcher proceeded to create a new variable that contained the mean of the questions Q20, Q21 and Q24. This variable was named "Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching." It was taken into consideration that the surveyed teachers were allowed to enter up to three answers, for instance, a teacher may have selected more than a single option. In order to analyze this problem unbiased, only the teachers CODE-SWITCHING 32 who teach in one category were considered in this step, in addition, the variable (Others) was assigned to refer to all those teachers who teach in more than one group. Therefore, RQ1 was analyzed through a One-way ANOVA test. The "Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching" was claimed as a dependent variable with "Teachers' Grade Level" as the independent variable. Research question two was addressed by conducting an Independent Sample T-Test. it stated the variable, "Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching," as the dependent variable and “Foreign Language Teachers” as the independent variable. Research question three was addressed by conducting a categorical independent variable test using bivariable correlation to state the variables “Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching" and Q14. Research question four was addressed by conducting a categorical independent variable test using bivariable correlation to state the variables "Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching" and Q6. The hypothesis was addressed by creating a new variable that contained the mean of the questions Q19, Q23 and Q25. This variable was named "Code-Switching Improves." This analysis conducted by a categorical independent variable using bivariable correlation to state the variables Q24 and Q28. The additional research question one was addressed by conducting a categorical independent variable, a bivariable correlation stating the variables, “Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching,” “Code-Switching Improves” and Q15. The additional research question two was addressed by conducting a categorical independent variable, a bivariable correlation stating the variables, “Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching,” “Code-Switching Improves” and Q30. CODE-SWITCHING 33 RESULTS As mentioned above, the purpose of this research was to ascertain teachers’ opinions of the use of code-switching in a classroom setting. In this section, data retrieved from the forementioned survey will be analyzed for later discussion. The researcher will look at data related to the research questions, as well as the hypothesis. Furthermore, the researcher will analyze data for additional research questions. Research Question 1 Data results demonstrated that there was no significant difference between middle, high, and elementary school teachers (Table 5, Figure 1). There were only four teachers at the elementary grade level who responded to the survey, while grades seven through nine had 36 respondents and ten through twelfth grades had 50 (Table 21, Figure 9). Therefore, elementary schools only contributed 3.4% of responses out of the three groups. However, all three grade levels held the opinion, though slightly lowered by the middle and high schools, that they lean more positively toward the implementation and use of code-switch, seeing as on average they marked at least five out of seven on the Likert scale on Q20, Q21, and Q24 (Table 17). Table 4 Descriptive statistics Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Grade. N M SD SE 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum K-6 4 6.83 .33 .17 6.30 7.36 6.33 7 7-9 32 5.98 .97 .17 5.63 6.33 3.67 7 10-12 45 5.65 .34 .20 5.25 6.05 2 7 Total 81 5.84 .19 .13 5.58 6.10 2 7 CODE-SWITCHING 34 Table 5 ANOVA: Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Grade level. SS df MS F p Between Groups 6.16 2 3.08 2.22 .12 Within Groups 108.09 78 1.39 Total 114.25 80 Thus, there was not a significant difference in Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching between middle school, high school, and elementary school teachers. F(2, 78) = 2.22, p = .12 Figure 1 Research Question 2 Survey data demonstrated that this was correct. Students who are learning a new language might not benefit from code-switching, or rather, from relying on their mother language (Table 7, Figure 2). Based on the survey responses, it can be inferred that teachers who do little assessment on English language or foreign language proficiency in writing and speaking CODE-SWITCHING 35 are generally more accepting of code-switching. Out of the total 121 surveyed teachers, 14 of them were foreign language teachers, and the other 102 taught other subjects (Table 22, Figure 10). The two groups of teachers demonstrated very similar results (Table 18) with 12% of the total responses comprising of foreign language teachers (Table 22). Though the foreign language teachers were significantly less accepting of code-switching than the other teachers, it was found that both groups had a mean above five out of seven with foreign language teachers averaging at 5.26 and other teachers averaging at 5.94 on the Likert scale for Q20, Q21, and Q24 (Table 7, Figure 2). This shows that teachers across subjects are mostly accepting of the idea of code-switching seeing as the average opinions are over the neutral four within the scale. Table 6 Group Statistic: Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Subject Area Foreign Language Teachers N M SD SE Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching. Language Teachers 14 5.26 1.37 .37 Other Teachers 89 5.94 1.12 .12 Table 7 Independent Samples Test: Use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Subject Area Levene's Test for Equality of t-test for Equality of Means Variances F p t df p (2- tailed) MD Acceptance in the use of Code- Switching. Equal variances assumed 1.48 .23 -2.06 101 .04 -.68 -1.78 15.87 .10 -.68 Equal variances not assumed CODE-SWITCHING 36 Thus, there was a significant difference in acceptance in the use of code-switching between foreign language teachers and other subject area teachers, t(101) = -2.06, p = .04. Specifically, foreign language teachers were less in favor of code-switching (M = 5.26, SD = 1.36) compared to other teachers (M = 5.94, SD = 1.12). Figure 2 Research Question 3 Data from the survey demonstrated that the percentage of bilingual students out of all students did not affect the teachers’ acceptance to code-switching. The 23 teachers with 5% or less bilingual students had a nearly identical level of agreement with the 23 teachers with 46% or greater bilingual students. The other three percentages in between fluctuate slightly up and down (Table 22, Figure 10). The averages of all five percentages were marked as a five on the Likert scale, however, closer to a six out of seven on the Likert scale for Q20, Q21, and Q24 (Table 9, CODE-SWITCHING 37 Figure 3). The five groups of teachers with different percentages of bilingual students had an even sample size which should be cause for avoiding bias or disparages in the responses. The results demonstrate that teachers might handle the use of code-switching the same regardless of the quantity of bilingual students enrolled in their class. Table 8 Descriptive Statistics: Use of Code-Switching and Q14 M SD N About what percentage of your students are bilingual? 2.89 1.44 114 Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching. 5.86 1.17 104 Table 9 Correlations: Use of Code-Switching and Q14 About what percentage of your students are bilingual? Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching. About what percentage of your students are bilingual? r 1 .03 p .73 N 114 104 Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching. r .03 1 p .73 N 104 104 CODE-SWITCHING 38 Thus, there is not a significant correlation between acceptance in the use of code-switching and the percentage of students that are bilingual, r = .03, p = .73. Figure 3 Research Question 4 Teacher responses to the survey demonstrated that the age of the teacher was not a significantly great indicator of a teacher’s acceptance of code-switching (Table 19). The teachers aged 18-24 averaged at six out of seven on the Likert scale for Q20, Q21, and Q24 (Table 11, Figure 4). Furthermore, each subsequent age group decreased only a few decimal points until the age group 55+ which was well above five out of seven on the Likert scale (Table 19, Figure 7). Table 10 Descriptive Statistics: Use of Code-Switching and Q6 M SD N Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching. 5.86 1.17 104 What is your range of age? 8.03 1.25 117 CODE-SWITCHING 39 Table 11 Correlations: Use of Code-Switching and Q6 Acceptance in the use of Code- Switching. What is your range of age? Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching. r 1 -.11 p .27 N 104 104 What is your range of age? r -.11 1 p .27 N 104 117 There is not a significant correlation between age and acceptance in the use of code-switching, r = -.11, p = .27. Figure 4 CODE-SWITCHING 40 Addressing the Hypothesis There is a positive correlation between belief that code-switching improves learning and agreement with the statement “Regardless of whether or not I could speak the native language of my non-English speaking students, I would allow them to use code-switching for academic purposes in my classroom”, r = .54, p < .001. There is a positive correlation between belief that code-switching improves learning and agreement with the statement “I feel as though a bilingual teacher who speaks the same mother tongue of a student who is learning English should support students by providing them with the necessary keywords in the student's mother tongue to ensure the correct understanding of the key concepts,” r = .38, p < .001. For this analysis a categorical independent variable was conducted; a bivariable Correlation. Table 12 Descriptive Statistics: Code-Switching Learning and Q24 and Q28 M SD N Code-Switching Improves 5.11 1.02 104 Regardless of whether or not I could speak the native language of my non- English speaking students, I would allow them to use code-switching for academic purposes in my classroom. 5.63 1.53 104 I feel as though a bilingual teacher who speaks the same mother tongue of a student who is learning English should support students in utilizing code-switching by providing them with the necessary keywords in the student's mother tongue to ensure the correct understanding of the key concepts. 5.53 1.39 99 CODE-SWITCHING 41 Table 13 Correlations Code-Switching Learning and Q24 and Q28 Code- Switching Improves Q24 Q28 Code-Switching Improves r 1 .54** .38** p .00 .00 N 104 104 99 Regardless of whether or not I could speak the native language of my non-English speaking students, I would allow them to use code-switching for academic purposes in my classroom. r .54** 1 .49** p .00 .00 N 104 104 99 I feel as though a bilingual teacher who speaks the same mother tongue of a student who is learning English should support students in utilizing code-switching by providing them with the necessary keywords in the student's mother tongue to ensure the correct understanding of the key concepts. r .38** .49** 1 p .00 .00 N 99 99 99 Note: ** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed). Thus, it is inferred by the correlation that teachers believe that student learning would improve in a classroom that allows code-switching as opposed to a classroom that did not CODE-SWITCHING 42 Figure 5 Figure 6 CODE-SWITCHING 43 Additional Research Question 1 There was a significant difference between teachers who say their students code-switch or not and belief that Code-Switching improves academic learning, t(102) = 2.51, p = .01, d = .54, Teachers who say their students Code-Switch in class believe that it improves academical learning (M = 5.26, SD = .99) relative to teachers who say their students do not Code-Switch in class (M = 4.72, SD = .99). Table 14 Group Statistics: Code-Switching Improves by Q30 Do any of your students code-switch in class? N M SD SEM Code-Switching Improves Yes 74 5.26 .99 .12 No 30 4.72 .99 .18 Teachers' Willingness to allow the use of Code-Switching in the classrooms Yes 74 5.64 1.13 .13 No 30 5.38 1.53 .28 Table 15 Independent Samples Test Code-Switching Learning by Q24 and Q28 Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F p t df p (2- tailed) MD SED Code- Switching Improves Equal variances assumed .04 .84 2.51 102 .01 .54 .21 Equal variances not assumed 2.51 53.76 .02 .54 .21 Teachers' Willingness to allow the Equal variances assumed 3.25 .07 .95 102 .34 .26 .27 CODE-SWITCHING 44 use of Code- Switching in the classrooms .84 42.36 .41 .26 .31 Equal variances not assumed Additional Research Question 2 Table 16 Correlations Improves & Acceptance Q30 Improves & Acceptance Pearson Correlation 1 .153 Sig. (2-tailed) .131 N 104 99 A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance Pearson Correlation .153 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .131 N 99 99 There was not a significant correlation between Acceptance in the use of Code- Switching, Code-Switching Improves and the statement “A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance” r = .15 p = .13 CODE-SWITCHING 45 Figure 7 DISCUSSION The current study was designed to gain a better understanding of the use of code-switching in the classroom; specifically, on teachers’ opinions of the use of code-switching in the classroom. Based on research on code-switching, linguistics, psychology, sociology, and Utah demographics and school system information, it was hypothesized that overall, teachers were of the opinion that the use of code-switching in a classroom setting would increase student academics. The following section is meant to discuss the overall findings of the study based on the research questions, hypothesis, and additional research questions and suggestions for future studies. Research Questions Results from the survey demonstrated that the hypothesis that overall, teachers were of the opinion that the use of code-switching in a classroom setting would increase student CODE-SWITCHING 46 academics was proven correct among the sample size. Data showed a correlation between teachers’ opinions of code-switching in the classroom and the belief that student learning would improve (Table 16). The hypothesis was that teachers believe that student learning would improve in a classroom that allows code-switching. The results of the research questions proved to have similar results, however the outcome for the questions were slightly different than what was expected by the researcher. Research Question 1 stated that high school teachers were more accepting of code-switching than their junior high and elementary school teacher counterparts. This did not prove to be the case. The researcher believes that the principal reason was because of the disproportionate quantity of respondents in each school level in the sample size. In total, there were only four elementary school teachers (K-6 grades). It is speculated by the researcher that a larger sample size of each teaching grade range would yield different results. Research Question 2 states that foreign language teachers would be less accepting than teachers who do not teach a foreign language. This did prove to be true, but overall, both types of teachers demonstrated an acceptance for code-switching. Research Question 3 involves teachers’ opinion of code-switching based on the number of bilingual students in their classrooms. Overall, teachers were about equal in their responses. This was unexpected, as it was thought that a higher population of bilingual students would make code-switching appear more often in the classroom, thus skewing responses one way or the other in comparison to teachers who rarely interact with a bilingual student; specifically, a student who is learning English. Research Question 4 refers to teachers’ age in correlation to their opinions on the use of code-switching in the classroom. Survey data reveled that while response numbers were skewed closer toward the negative end as age decreased, the difference was not dramatic enough to draw CODE-SWITCHING 47 a convincing conclusion that code-switching elicits a negative response in older teachers, above all when the average responses were agreeable to the implementation code-switching. For this analysis a categorical independent variable was conducted; a bivariable correlation. Additional Research Questions Upon analyzing survey data, the researcher speculated as to whether or not there was a correlation between teachers who indicated that they do, or would if they could, utilize code-switching in class, and those who also indicated that they believed that code-switching improved learning. Teachers who code-switch in class also advised that they believed that code-switching improves academic learning. The level of their agreement is averaged at 5.26 on the scale of one to seven. Teachers who said that their students do not code-switch, whether because they have not noticed, or because they have not been implementing any type of code-switching, have demonstrated that they agreed as well, but significantly lower on the scale, at 4.72 (Table 15). There are also a group of teachers who believe that student learning would worsen in a classroom that allows code-switching. It may be possible that when a teacher from this group sees code-switching happening in class, they discourage it and prefer that the student tries communicating in English as much as they are able (Table 16). The researcher was also desirous to know whether or not teachers believed that utilizing code-switching to increase academic achievement would in turn increase students’ psychological environment. It was believed that teachers would agree, yet data demonstrated that there was no significant correlation between teachers’ acceptance of code-switching, and their belief that students’ psychological experience would increase (Table 16, Figure 7) CODE-SWITCHING 48 Connection to the Literature Review In the Literature Review, three definitions of code-switching were analyzed: Linguistic, Sociolinguistic, and Psychosocial. The focus of this study was to gain information on the use of code-switching in the classroom from a psychosocial perspective. A psychosocial perspective of code-switching implies that code-switching is used when there is a lack of knowledge in one or both languages (Balukas & Koops, 2015). As illustrated in the Results section, based on the survey sample outcomes, the researcher found that, in general, teachers in Utah are accepting of the use of code-switching for academic purposes on a psychosocial level. Data from the survey indicated that teachers do not believe that there is a strong correlation between students’ increasing their English level and their increasing their psychological levels. Table 2 shows the school districts in Utah with over 1,000 ELs and EL Share students in Utah. Data from the survey demonstrated that, of the sample, most teachers in the four largest metropolitan areas in Utah (Table 1), most teachers have between 6%-15% bilingual students in their classrooms. Data also showed that 19% of teachers in the sample have 49% or greater bilingual students, 16% of teachers had 31-45% bilingual students, and 19% of teachers had 5% or less bilingual students in their classes. Only 14% of participants had 16-30% bilingual students. The Nature of the Problem states that “In an ideal situation, the bilingual teachers would be able to utilize their multilingual skills in order to assist the increasing number of English language learning students in Utah classrooms.” Results from participants in the survey demonstrate that teachers, if they could speak the language of their bilingual students, would be willing to utilize code-switching for academic purposes. Furthermore, those teachers who cannot CODE-SWITCHING 49 speak the language of their bilingual students were willing to utilize tools such as google translate to communicate with their students. Limitations Although it was found that, in general, teachers are overall accepting of code-switching, there were certain limitations to this study. Some of the limitations included in this study included the grade range of participants, as well as the geographical areas of participants involved in the study. Survey results demonstrated that only four kindergarten through sixth grade teachers participated in the study, thus limiting the data available to answer RQ1. Having only four responses caused data to be seen as unconclusive, therefore, limiting the answers to research questions. The current study included teachers from the four greater metropolitan areas in Utah; Salt Lake, Ogden-Clearfield, Provo-Orem, and St. George. Within these areas, schools were selected at random, and invited to participate, thus limiting the number of participants in the study to the number of teachers within the schools selected and allowing for a chance that more schools were chosen in some areas than others. If schools were to be selected at random again in the future, one thing to consider might be selecting x number of schools from each area, thus giving each area equal representation. To not limit the number of participants in the study, each public school in the state could be invited to participate, and thus the data would be representative of the whole population, and not simply a sample size from only large areas. Suggestions for Future Research Conduction In considering conducting studies similar to the current one in the future, it is suggested that the researcher keep the above stated limitations in mind, as well survey questions used. The survey included certain questions that were not utilized in gathering data for questions asked in CODE-SWITCHING 50 this study but were created keeping future studies of code-switching in mind. One example of this is Q30. Survey question 30 states “A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance.” Data analyzed did not demonstrate a strong relation between the utilization of code-switching in the classroom and students’ psychological environments (Table 26, Figure 7). Despite not being usable as data for the current study, subsequent studies pertaining to code-switching and psychology may benefit from data analyzed in this study. The current study was designed to gain insight on code-switching; specifically, teachers’ perceptions on the use of code-switching in Utah classrooms. In measuring between foreign language teachers and teachers who do not teach foreign languages, it was found that foreign language teachers – although they demonstrated a positive acceptance level – are less accepting of code-switching, furthermore, there was no significant correlation between age or number or years of teaching experience and accepting the utilization of code-switching in the classroom. Data suggest that overall, teachers in general are accepting of the utilization to increase academic achievement. Conclusions The current study has analyzed teacher opinion of the use of code-switching in an academic setting. Before this could be done, the researcher gathered information on different types of code-switching, as well as the psychological and sociological effects that code-switching has on the brain. The researcher also gathered information on the Utah school system, as well as Utah demographical information in order to select a research participant sample area. Participants were taken from the four largest metropolitan areas in Utah. The researcher believed that teachers’ responses to the survey would indicate that overall, student learning would CODE-SWITCHING 51 improve in a classroom that allows code-switching. Moreover, the researcher believed that high school teachers would be more accepting than their junior high school and elementary school counterparts, foreign language teachers would be less accepting of code-switching, teachers with a higher percentage of bilingual students, as well as younger teachers as opposed to older teachers would be more accepting of the usage of code-switching in the classroom. Results showed that in general, teachers believe that student learning will increase in a classroom that allows code-switching. The current study was designed to help further research on the use of code-switching. Moreover, the current study was meant to enlighten future researchers on future use of code-switching in academic settings in hopes that in the future schoolboards and law makers might see that teachers are willing to utilize code-switching in the classroom as an academic aid in order to increase student success. The current study suggests that code-switching in the classroom could prove to be beneficial to the increase of English language learners and English as a second language students. CODE-SWITCHING 52 References ACLU. (2017). Some highlights why we do what we do. ACLU History. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/about/aclu-history?redirect=aclu-history Aljoundi, E. K. (2013). The strengths and weakness of code-switching and bilingualism in the language classroom. Research Gate. Doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5051.1762 Anderson, J. R. (2000). Learning and memory: An integrated approach (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons Inc. Balukas, C., & Koops, C. (2015). Spanish-English bilingual voice onset time in spontaneous code-switching. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(4), 423-443. Dewaele, J. M. (2011). Reflections on the emotional and psychological aspects of foreign language learning and use. Anglistik: International Journal of English Studies, 22(1), 23- 42. Du, L. (2010). Assess the critical period hypothesis in second language acquisition. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 219-224. Finstad, K. (2010). Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: evidence against 5-point scales. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(3), 104-110. Retrieved from: https://uxpajournal.org/wp-content/ uploads/sites/8/pdf/JUS_Finstad_May_2010.pdf Gardner, K. (2018). U.S. United States Census Bureau estimates by county, metropolitan, and micropolitan areas, 2017. Fact Sheet. Policy Institute. University of Utah. Retrieved from https://gardner.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/CountyMSAFactSheet_Final.pdf Grinder, R. E. (1969). The concept of adolescence in the genetic psychology of G. Stanley Hall. Child Development, 355-369. CODE-SWITCHING 53 Hall, G. S. (1915). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relations to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion and education (Vol. 2). D. Appleton. Hopewell, S., & Abril-Gonzalez, P. (2019). ¿ “Por que estamos” code-switching? Understanding language use in a second-grade classroom. Bilingual Research Journal, 42(1), 105-120. Jingxia, L. (2010). Teachers’ code-switching to the L1 in EFL classroom. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 3(10), 10-23. Kuhl, P. K. (2010). Brain mechanisms in early language acquisition. Neuron, 67(5), 713-727. Lackstorm, J. (2017). Code-switching in the DLI classroom. Perspectives on Effective Teaching in Dual Language Immersion and Foreign Language Classrooms Vol. 2. Lin, A. (2013). Classroom code-switching: Three decades of research. Applied Linguistics Review, 4(1), 195-218. Lin, A. (2016). Code-switching in the classroom: research paradigms and approaches. Research Methods in Language and Education, Encyclopedia of Language and Education, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-02329-8_34-1 Magalhães, R. (2019). What happens to your brain when you learn a new language? Understanding with Unbabel. Martin, J. J. (1988). An American Adventure in Bookburning: In the Style of 1918. R. Myles. Mitchell, A. J. (1937). The effect of bilingualism in the measurement of intelligence. The Elementary School Journal, 38(1), 29-37. Mitchell, C. (2017). Thousands of English-learners fall short on test of language skills. Education Week, 36(37), 1-4. Montes-Alcalá, C. (2000). Attitudes towards oral and written codeswitching in Spanish-English bilingual youths. In Roca, A. (Eds.), Research on Spanish in the US, (pp. 218-227). CODE-SWITCHING 54 Morrison, C. D. (2017). Code-switching. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/code-switching Nieto, S. (2017). Becoming sociocultural mediators: what all educators can learn from bilingual and ESL teachers. Issues in Teacher Education, 26(2), 129-141. Nordquist, R. (2020). Learn the Function of Code-switching as a Linguistic Term. Thoughtco: Glossary of Grammatical and Rhetorical Terms. Okada, B. (2016). Utah language data report. Utah Department of Health; Office of Health Disparities. Retrieved from https://health.utah.gov/disparities/data/ohd/UtahLangaugeDataReport2016.pdf Possel, H. (2020). Bilingualism. Retrieved from https://www.smart-words. org/bilingualism.html#:~:text=Language%20Learning%20%2D%20Categories&te xt=Also%20called%20Compound%20bilingual%20(amalgamated).&text=Called%20Co ordinate%20bilingual%20when%20the,tongue)%20dominates%20the%20daily%20life. Powers, F. (1995). English as official language: An act of unification or segregation? Joint National Committee for Languages. Washington, DC. Prince, E. F., & Pintzuk, S. (2000). Bilingual code-switching and the open/closed class distinction. Current Work in Linguistics, 6 (3), 237-258. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics. Purdue Writing Lab. (2020). Code-switching in student writing. Purdue Writing Lab. Retrieved from https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/english_as_a_second_language/esl_instructors_tutors/esl_teac her_resources/code_switching.html CODE-SWITCHING 55 Ricento, T. (1995). A brief history of language restrictionism in the United States. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED426599.pdf Ruark, E. A. (2012). English language learners and public education in Utah. Fair. Retrieved from https://www.fairus.org/sites/default/files/2017-08/Utah_LEP_final.pdf Sakaria, S., & Priyana, J. (2018). Code-switching: A pedagogical strategy in bilingual classrooms. American Journal of Educational Research, 6(3), 175-180. Scheu, U. D. (2000). Cultural constraints in bilinguals’ codeswitching. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24(1), 131-150. Schumann, J. (1998). The neurobiology of affect in language. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1998. Shofner, K. (2020). Linguistic code-switching: what it is and why it happens. ULG’s Language Solutions Blog. United Language Group. Ted Ed. (2015). The benefits of a bilingual brain [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.smart-words. org/bilingualism.html#:~:text=Language%20Learning%20%2D%20Categories&te xt=Also%20called%20Compound%20bilingual%20(amalgamated).&text=Called%20Co ordinate%20bilingual%20when%20the,tongue)%20dominates%20the%20daily%20life. Treffers-Daller, J. (2009). Code-switching and transfer: an exploration of similarities and differences (pp. 58-74). Cambridge University Press. United States Census Bureau (2015). Census Bureau reports at least 350 languages spoken in U.S. homes. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-185.html Utah Code. (2020). Official state language. Utah State Legislature. Retrieved from https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title63G/Chapter1/63G-1-S201.html CODE-SWITCHING 56 Utah.com. (2020). Utah state symbols and facts. Utah Travel Industry Website. Retrieved from https://utah.com/state-facts-symbols Utah State Board of Education. (2021). Utah school districts directory. Retrieved from https://www.schools.utah.gov/schooldistricts Utah State Board of Education. (2020). Graduation requirements. Teaching and Learning. Utah State Board of Education. https://www.schools.utah.gov/curr/graduationrequirements?mid=1014 Utah State Board of Education. (2017). District counts and state totals by demographics. Superintendent’s annual report. Utah State Board of Education. https://www.schools.utah.gov/superintendentannualreport?mid=1045&tid=2 Utah State Board of Education. (2019) Fall enrollment by demographics and grade levels. Superintendent’s Annual Report. Utah State Board of Education. https://www.schools.utah.gov/superintendentannualreport?mid=1045&tid=0 Van Hell, J. G., Litcofsky, K. A., & Ting, C. Y. (2015). Intra-sentential code-switching: Cognitive and neural approaches. The Cambridge handbook of bilingual processing, 459- 482. WIDA. (2020). Continuously responding to educator needs and advancing the field of language development. Mission and History. Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Retrieved from https://wida.wisc.edu/about/mission-history Yip, V. (2013). Simultaneous language acquisition. In 1172522861 879048840 F. Grosjean & 1172522862 879048840 P. Li (Authors), The Psycholinguistics of Bilingualism (1st ed., pp. 119-134). Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing. CODE-SWITCHING 57 Young, V. (2009). "Nah, we straight": An argument against code-switching. JAC, 29(1/2), 49- 76. Yu, Y., Lu, S., Wu, Y., Wu, Q., & Wu, J. (2017). Dementia and language bilingualism helps ward off Alzheimer's disease. Improving the Quality of Life for Dementia Patients through Progressive Detection, Treatment, and Care, 1 CODE-SWITCHING 58 Appendix CODE-SWITCHING 59 Appendix A IRB Approval CODE-SWITCHING 60 March 6, 2021 Natalie Williams George Bazaes Students, Teacher Education Re: Exempt - Initial - IRB-AY20-21-293 TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON THE USE OF CODE-SWITCHING IN UTAH CLASSROOMS Dear Natalie Williams: Weber State Institutional Review Board has rendered the decision below for TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON THE USE OF CODE-SWITCHING IN UTAH CLASSROOMS. Decision: Exempt Approval: March 6, 2021 Expiration: -- Selected Category: Category 2. (i). Research that only includes interactions involving educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures, or observation of public behavior (including visual or auditory recording). The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human subjects cannot readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects. Category 2. (ii). Research that only includes interactions involving educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures, or observation of public behavior (including visual or auditory recording). Any disclosure of the human subjects’ responses outside the research would not reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects’ financial standing, employability, educational advancement, or reputation. Findings: Research Notes: Sincerely, Weber State Institutional Review Board CODE-SWITCHING 61 Appendix B Weber State University Informed Consent CODE-SWITCHING 62 IRB STUDY #IRB-AY20-21-293 WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY INFORMED CONSENT Teachers’ Perceptions on the use of Code-Switching in Utah Classrooms. You are invited to participate in a research study of the use of code-switching in a classroom setting. You were selected as a possible subject because you are a teacher in the state of Utah. We ask that you read this form and ask any questions you may have before agreeing to be in the study. The study is being conducted by George Bazaes under the supervision of Dr. Tom Mathews in the Weber State University Education Department. STUDY PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to understand teachers’ views on the possible effects of Code- Switching in the classroom. NUMBER OF PEOPLE TAKING PART IN THE STUDY If you agree to participate, you will be one of about 100 participants throughout Utah who will be participating in this research. PROCEDURES FOR THE STUDY If you agree to be in the study, you will do the following things: Take a short survey of 25 questions. There is no time limit for answering any of the questions, and you can opt-out of the survey at any time by clicking the exit button in the upper left-hand corner of the screen. This survey will consist of multiple-choice affirmations, and you will be asked to rate your perspective on a scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree). This survey should last approximately 5-10 minutes. RISKS OF TAKING PART IN THE STUDY For face-to-face research, the risks include the possibility of being infected by the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) or other communicable diseases. The risks involved in taking part in this study are minimal. You will be offering your opinion about various aspects of Code-Switching. We will do our best to minimize any potential risks, however, there may be some risks that are currently unforeseeable. Possible risks could include feeling uncomfortable while answering questions and/or eye fatigue from looking at the computer screen for a possibly extended amount of time. BENEFITS OF TAKING PART IN THE STUDY You will not receive payment for taking part in this study. If you choose to participate in this study, you will be contributing to the study of the effects of Code-Switching in an educational setting. ALTERNATIVES TO TAKING PART IN THE STUDY CODE-SWITCHING 63 Instead of being in the study, you have these options: opt not to continue on past the consent form or exit the survey at any time. COSTS/ COMPENSATION FOR INJURY There is no cost in completing this survey. Because the risks of taking this survey are minimal, there will not be compensated for an injury that arises from participation. In the event of physical injury resulting from your participation in this research, necessary medical treatment will be provided to you and will be billed as part of your medical expenses. Costs not covered by your health care insurer will be your responsibility. Also, it is your responsibility to determine the extent of your health care coverage. There is no program in place for other monetary compensation for such injuries. However, you are not giving up any legal rights or benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you are participating in research that is not conducted at a medical facility, you will be responsible for seeking medical care and for the expenses associated with any care received. CONFIDENTIALITY Efforts will be made to keep your personal information confidential. We cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality. Your personal information may be disclosed if required by law. Your identity will be held in confidence in reports in which the study may be published and databases in which results may be stored. Organizations that may inspect and/or copy your research records for quality assurance and data analysis include groups such as the study investigator and his/her research associates, the Weber State University Institutional Review Board or its designees, the study sponsor, Weber State University, and (as allowed by law) state or federal agencies, specifically the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [for FDA-regulated research and research involving positron-emission scanning], the National Cancer Institute (NCI) [for research funded or supported by NCI], the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [for research funded or supported by NIH], etc., who may need to access your medical and/or research records. CONTACTS FOR QUESTIONS OR PROBLEMS For questions about the study contact the researcher or the researcher’s mentor George Bazaes at georgebazaes@weber.edu Thomas Mathews at tmathews@weber.edu For questions about your rights as a research participant or to discuss problems, complaints or concerns about a research study, or to obtain information, or offer input, contact the Chair of the IRB Committee IRB@weber.edu. VOLUNTARY NATURE OF STUDY Taking part in this study is voluntary. You may choose not to take part or may leave the study at any time. Leaving the study will not result in any penalty or loss of benefits to which you may be entitled. Your decision whether or not to participate in this study will not affect your current or future relations with Weber State University. PARTICIPANT’S CONSENT In consideration of all of the above, I give my consent to participate in this research study. CODE-SWITCHING 64 Appendix C The Survey CODE-SWITCHING 65 The Survey There are several definitions regarding Code-switching. For the purpose of this survey, we will define it as the process of shifting from one language or dialect (linguistic code) to another, depending on the social context or conversational setting (such as Spanglish). This survey specifically looks at the use of code-switching in the classroom setting, either among students or between students and their teachers. This section is meant to gather general demographic information • What is your range of age? 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+ • What is your gender? Male Female Transgender Other • What grade level do you teach? (Select all that apply) K-6 7- 9 10 - 12 • How many years of teaching experience do you have? 1 -3 4 - 5 6 - 9 10+ • What is/are your subject area(s)? - - - • In which of the following settings do you teach? Charter/Private School Public School District • Do you teach in a Dual Language Immersion Program? Yes No o What is a Dual Language Immersion Program? CODE-SWITCHING 66 • Do you speak any languages other than English? Yes No • About what percentage of your students are bilingual? 5% or less 6% - 15% 16% - 30% 31% - 45% 46% or greater • Do any of your students code-switch in class? Yes No Students' Use of Code-Switching This section is meant to gather statistical information about your opinion of student use of code-switching in the classroom. Response Options Strongly Disagree 2 3 4 5 6 Strongly Agree • A non-English speaking student who is actively learning English through ELL or ESL programs and at the same time is taking all the required subjects for the school curriculum is at a clear learning disadvantage. • ELL or ESL programs are enough for a non-English speaking student to have success and face all the school challenges. • As a teacher, I see a significant academic improvement performance for those students who actively code-switch. • Code-switching is a hindrance to the academic success of ESL and ELL students. • It is acceptable for two students who speak a language other than English to communicate with each other in their mother tongue for academic purposes. CODE-SWITCHING 67 • It is acceptable for non-English speaking students – if they cannot find the word, they need to express their ideas in English written form – to transition into their mother tongue to write that specific word and then continue in English. • For non-English speaking students who are learning English, asking a word or a concept in their mother tongue would help them to grasp and learn the content more quickly and effectively in order to later be used in the English language. • ELL and ESL students who use code-switching are at a disadvantage compared to those ELL and ESL students who do not use code-switching. • Regardless of whether or not I could speak the native language of my non-English speaking students, I would allow them to use code-switching for academic purposes in my classroom. • I believe that the implementation of code-switching is a priority in our classrooms in order to help improve the students’ academical performance. Teachers' use of Code-Switching This section is meant to gather statistical information about your opinion on teachers' use of code-switching in the classroom. • A teacher who uses or allows code-switching in the classroom is thwarting the ELL and ESL students' prospective learning. • As a teacher, I feel comfortable with the current ELL or ESL programs for my non- English speaking students. • I feel as though a bilingual teacher who speaks the same mother tongue of a student who is learning English should support students in utilizing code-switching by providing them CODE-SWITCHING 68 with the necessary keywords in the student's mother tongue to ensure the correct understanding of the key concepts • If I do not speak a language other than English, in order to support the students that are learning English, I would be willing to use technological tools, such as Google translator, to translate some words in my written instructions in order to help students grasp the concepts and incorporate them. • A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance. This is the conclusion of the survey. Thank you for your participation. As mentioned before, the purpose of this survey was to understand teachers’ views on the possible effects of code-switching in the classroom. We thank you for your time spent taking this survey. Your response has been recorded. CODE-SWITCHING 69 Appendix D Relevant Descriptive Statistic CODE-SWITCHING 70 Table 17 Tests of Homogeneity of Variances Acceptance in the use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Grade Level Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. Code-Switching Based on Mean 3.11 2 78 .05 Based on Median 2.08 2 78 .13 Based on Median and with adjusted df 2.08 2 64.85 .13 Based on trimmed mean 2.63 2 78 .08 Table 18 Independent Samples Effect Sizes: Use of Code-Switching and Teachers’ Subject Area Standardizera Point Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Lower Upper Code-Switching Cohen's d 1.15 -.59 -1.16 -.02 Hedges' correction 1.16 -.59 -1.15 -.02 Glass's delta 1.12 -.61 -1.18 -.04 Note: The denominator used in estimating the effect sizes. Cohen's d uses the pooled standard deviation. Hedges' correction uses the pooled standard deviation, plus a correction factor. Glass's delta uses the sample standard deviation of the control group. Table 19 Independent Samples Effect Sizes Standardizera Point Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Lower Upper Code-Switching Improves d .99 .54 .11 .97 Hedges' correction .00 .54 .11 .97 Glass's delta .99 .54 .09 .99 Teachers' Willingness to allow the use of Code- Switching in the classrooms d 1.25 .21 -.22 .63 Hedges' correction 1.26 .21 -.22 .63 Glass's delta 1.53 .17 -.26 .59 CODE-SWITCHING 71 Note: The denominator used in estimating the effect sizes. Cohen's d uses the pooled standard deviation. Hedges' correction uses the pooled standard deviation, plus a correction factor. Glass's delta uses the sample standard deviation of the control group. Table 20 What is your range of age? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 18-24 7 6 6 6 25-34 35 29 30 36 35-44 27 22 23 59 45-54 36 30 31 90 55 + 12 10 10 100 Total 117 97 100 Missing System 4 3 Total 121 121 121 100 Figure 8 CODE-SWITCHING 72 Table 21 Teachers' Grade Level Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid k-6 4 3 3 3 7-9 36 30 31 34 10-12 50 41 43 77 Other 27 22 23 100 Total 117 97 100 Missing System 4 3 Total 121 121 100 Figure 9 CODE-SWITCHING 73 Table 22 Foreign Language Teachers Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Language Teachers 14 12 12 12 Other Teachers 102 84 88 100 Total 116 96 100 Missing System 5 4 Total 121 121 100 Figure 10 CODE-SWITCHING 74 Table 23 About what percentage of your students are bilingual? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 5% or less 23 19 20 20 6% - 15% 32 26 28 48 16% - 30% 17 14 15 63 31% - 45% 19 16 17 80 46% or greater 23 19 20 100 Total 114 94 100 Missing System 7 6 Total 121 121 100 Figure 11 CODE-SWITCHING 75 Table 24 A non-English speaking student who is allowed to code-switch will have an improved psychosocial environment, as a result, improving their academic performance Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 4 9 7 9 9 5 22 18 22 31 6 31 26 31 63 Strongly Agree 37 31 37 100 Total 99 82 100 Missing System 22 18 Total 121 121 100 Figure 13