STUDENTLERDI BIRLESTIRIW: XALÍQARALÍQ IZERTLEWLER HÁM PÁNLER BOYINSHA BIRGE
ISLESIW 1-XALÍQARALÍQ STUDENTLER KONFERENCIYASÍ. NÓKIS, 2025-JÍL 20-21-MAY
__
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
308
3. Sisoyev, P. V. Texnologii Veb 2.0: Sotsialniy servis podkastov v obuchenii inostrannomu
yaziku / P. V. Sisoyev, M. N. Yevstigneyev // Inostrannie yaziki v shkole. – 2009. № 6. – S. 8–
15.
4. Robb T.N. Podcasting for ELT – What, Why and How? // Kyoto Sangyo University
[Electronic
resource].
–
2007.
–
Mode
of
access:
http://www.cc.kyoto-
su.ac.jp/~trobb/podcasting2.html. – Date of access: 15.02.2017.
THE ESSENCE OF BILINGUALISM IN TEACHING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
Bekbosinova Dilfuza Kuralbayevna
ANNOTATION.
In this article provides empirically grounded insights for diagnosing as well as
informing policy and practice of bilingual education in the country. The study has emphasised the
pedagogical, social and cultural advantages of using pupils’ home languages for educational purposes,
as sufficiently illustrated above.
Key words:
Bilingual education, language, discuss, transitional, maintenance and enrichment
models.
Bilingual education has been used as a cover term for a variety of education provisions, including
those using a single language. In this study, however, bilingual education is defined as the use of two
languages as media of instruction, or in other words, the use of two languages to teach subjects other
than languages themselves[3].
This narrow definition of bilingual education has the advantage of setting restrictive criteria for
qualifying an education programme as bilingual: the use of two languages as media of instruction. It
excludes, therefore, various forms of monolingual education provision such as the so-called
submersion programmes and monolingual dominant-language medium programmes with a low-status
language as a subject, which in some typologies have been classified as bilingual just because they
serve pupils whose home languages are different from that of school[6].
In other typologies, although such monolingual programmes are presented and discussed, authors
are careful to indicate that these are not forms of bilingual education (e.g. Baker, 2006; Skutnabb-
Kangas and McCarty, 2008).
We adopt the typology proposed by Hornberger to describe and discuss the models and types of
bilingual education commonly found worldwide. Consistent with her definition, our study focuses on
‘bilingual education proper’, excluding therefore all forms of monolingual education.
Drawing on Trueba , Hornberger distinguishes between bilingual education models and
programme types. In her framework, models, which can be thought of as templates for programme
design and evaluation, are defined in terms of their linguistic, cultural and societal goals[5]. Based on
these criteria, three model types can be identified: transitional, maintenance and enrichment model
(Table 1). Programme types, which reflect different forms of implementing the models mentioned
above, are defined in terms of their student population, teachers and programme structure.
Transitional Model
Maintenance Model
Enrichment Model
language shift
language maintenance
language development
cultural assimilation
Strengthened cultural
identity
cultural pluralism
social incorporation
civil rights affirmation
social autonomy
STUDENTLERDI BIRLESTIRIW: XALÍQARALÍQ IZERTLEWLER HÁM PÁNLER BOYINSHA BIRGE
ISLESIW 1-XALÍQARALÍQ STUDENTLER KONFERENCIYASÍ. NÓKIS, 2025-JÍL 20-21-MAY
__
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
309
The transitional model includes bilingual education programmes which aim for language shift,
cultural assimilation and societal incorporation of speakers of low- status languages into a dominant
culture and socio-sphere. Early-exit and late-exit transitional programmes are prototypical of this
model type. Typically, in transitional programmes pupils of low-status languages are initially taught
in their first languages and then through a second language. The switch from first to second language
as a medium of instruction can occur in the first three years of schooling (early-exit) or later, usually
after five or six years of schooling (late-exit). In both cases, ‘the primary goal is proficiency in the
dominant language’ (Skutnabb-Kangas and McCarty, 2008, p.13) and academic achievement in such
language.
The maintenance model includes bilingual education programmes which aim for language
maintenance, the strengthening of cultural identity, and civil rights affirmation. In maintenance
programmes, pupils from a low-status language are taught in their first language and a dominant,
second language, but with emphasis on the first language. These programmes not only contribute to
strengthen pupils’ cultural identity but also affirm the rights of ethnolinguistic groups in a given
society.
Thus, although both transitional and maintenance models target pupils of low- status home
languages, they differ in that whereas in the former case the goal is proficiency and academic
achievement in a second language, in the latter case bilingualism, biliteracy and academic
achievement in two languages are the desired goals.
The enrichment model includes bilingual education programmes which aim for development and
extension of lower-status languages, cultural pluralism and social autonomy [4].
Whereas immersion programmes are designed for pupils from dominant home languages, two-
way programmes target pupils of both low- and high-status languages. In immersion programmes,
pupils from a higher-status language learn a lower-status language in addition to their first language,
at the same time that both languages are used as media of instruction.
In dual language programmes, pupils of a low-status language learn a high-status language and
pupils of a high-status language learn a low-status language, being both languages used as media of
instruction in a balanced way.
Hornberger suggests that models of bilingual education should not be
viewed as hermetic nor programme types as bound to particular models[3]. Any of the three
models mentioned above may be implemented via different programme types and a given programme
may be identified with goals associated with different models. For example, theoretically, immersion
and two-way bilingual programmes have also maintenance goals since, in both cases, pupils not only
add a second language but also maintain and develop their first language and associated culture.
We subscribe to this pragmatic approach to classifications of bilingual education.
Therefore, despite cognitive, cultural and psychological advantages that advocates of bilingual
education have been using to support instruction in children’s first language, considerations about
socio-economic rewards associated with dominant languages and cultures pose a real challenge that
needs to be addressed[4]. Adjudicating the right to mother tongue education is not enough, it must
also lead to the acquisition of the resources equated with upward social mobility or at least lead to a
reconstruction of a low-status language as a valid capital in mainstream markets; otherwise, people
may opt out of such a right.
REFERENCES:
1.
Grosjean, F. (1982) Life in two languages: an introduction to bilingualism. Massachussetts:
Harvard University Press.
2.
García, O. (2009) Bilingual education in the 21 st century: a global perspective. Oxford:
Blackwell.
3.
Hornberger, N.H. (1988) Bilingual education and language maintenance: a southern Peruvian
Quechua case. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
STUDENTLERDI BIRLESTIRIW: XALÍQARALÍQ IZERTLEWLER HÁM PÁNLER BOYINSHA BIRGE
ISLESIW 1-XALÍQARALÍQ STUDENTLER KONFERENCIYASÍ. NÓKIS, 2025-JÍL 20-21-MAY
__
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
310
4.
Hornberger, N.H. (1991) “Extending enrichment bilingual education: revisiting typologies and
redirecting policy.” In García, O. (ed.) Bilingual education: focusschrift in honor of Joshua A.
Fishman. Vol. I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 215-234
5.
Trueba, H.T. (1979) “Bilingual-education models: types and designs.” In Trueba, H.T. and
Barnett-Mizrahi, C. (eds.) Bilingual multicultural education and the professional: from theory to
practice. Rowley: Newbury House Publishers. pp. 54-73
6.
Villarreal, A. (1999) Rethinking the education of English language learners: transitional
bilingual education programs. Bilingual Research Journal, 23 (1): 11-45
BOLALARDA MILLIY MULOQOT KOMPETENSIYASINI SHAKLLANTIRISH
Davlatova Hulkaroy Uktamovna
Andijon davlat chet tillari instituti
Ingliz tili nazariy aspektlari kafedrasi dotsenti
Annotatsiya:
Har bir millat uchun o‘z ona tili haqiqiy xazina hisoblanadi. Til inson dunyosi va
madaniyatini aks ettiradi. Tilning eng muhim vazifasi shundaki, u madaniyatni saqlab qoladi va uni
avloddan avlodga yetkazadi. Shuning uchun ham til shaxsiyat, milliy fe’l-atvor, xalq, millat
shakllanishida juda muhim hisoblanadi. Shuning uchun til va madaniyatning o‘zaro ta’siri masalasi
mutaxassislar – kulturologlar, tilshunoslar, faylasuflar uchun ilmiy qiziqish doirasiga kiradi.
Kalit so‘zlar:
millat, bola, nutq, kompotensiya, mutaxassis, tilshunoslar, milliy fe’l-atvor, xalq,
millat
Albatta, madaniyatlarning o‘zaro ta’siri har doim bo‘lgan va bo‘lib kelmoqda. Jahon tarixiga
nazar tashlasak, ushbu tabiiy jarayon odatda ular bilan aloqada bo‘lgan madaniyatlarning o‘zaro
boyishiga olib keladi. Ammo zamonaviy ommaviy axborot vositalari va aloqa tufayli bir
madaniyatning ikkinchisiga ta’siri juda tez seziladi
32
.
Bola jamiyatning a’zosiga aylana borar ekan, o‘ziga xos milliy qadriyatlar ta’siri uning nutqiga
ham singib boradi
33
. Shaxslar muloqot vositasi orqali o‘zaro munosabat o‘rnatar ekanlar, nutqiy
faoliyat insonlargagina xos bo‘lgan muloqotning asosiy manbasidir
34
. Jamiyatning kichik a’zosi o‘z
ehtiyojlarini insoniy munosabatlar hamda nutqiy muloqot natijasidagina qondirish mumkin bo‘lgan
sharoitda voyaga yetadi
35
.
Psixologik nuqtai nazardan olib qaralganda, ba’zi bolalar yoshlik chog‘laridan tabiatan kam gap
bo‘ladilar. Bola kam gapirsa-da, unga gapirilayotgan hamma so‘zlarni tushunadi. Bolalarning so‘zga
chechan va gapdon bo‘lishlari bevosita ularni o‘rab turgan ijtimoiy-lisoniy muhitga bog‘liq.
Bolalar nutqidagi milliy so‘zlarni hech kim maxsus o‘rgatmaydi, bola qaysi millat vakili bo‘lsa,
yashab turgan ijtimoiy muhiti ularning nutqida aks etadi. O‘zbek, ingliz, fransuz, xitoy, kim
bo‘lishidan qat’iy nazar, o‘z ichki ehtiyojlaridan kelib chiqib milliyligiga oid so‘zlarni muloqot
jarayonida qo‘llaydi
36
. Har bir millatga xos milliylikni bildiruvchi so‘zlarning kelib chiqishi bevosita
tarixga bog‘liq. Masalan: o‘zbek bolalari uchun bosh va ustki kiyimlarni ifodalovchi
do‘ppi, salla,
cho‘girma, to‘n, chopon
kabi milliylikni bildiruvchi so‘zlarini hech kim o‘rgatmaydi, milliylikni
32
Х.У Давлатова. (2019) The variation of teaching kids to greeting in Uzbekistan and Great Britain. Молодой ученый,
(1), 212-213
33
Davlatova Khulkaroy. (2023). The role of psycholinguistics in the study of a foreing languages. international
engineering journal for research & development. VOL. 8 NO. 4: VOLUME 8
34
Ольшанский В.Б. Социализация //Философская энциклопедия. Т. 5. М.: Сов. энциклопедия, 1970. – С.66-67.
35
Леонтьев А.Н. Психология общения. – Тарту, 1974. – С. 218.
36
Davlatova, H. (2022). BOLALARNING AQLI VA NUTQI RIVOJLANISHIDA OILANING TA’SIRI. Scientific
journal of the Fergana State University, (1), 51-51.
