Évaluation des habiletés de communication orale chez des élèves de l'élémentaire utilisant AIM

Abstract

This article explores the efficiency of AIM (the accelerative integrated method), used in core French classes, by comparing the oral communication skills of Grade 3 French as a second language (FSL) students in a class using AIM to those of Grade 3 FSL students in a regular core French program. AIM has been gaining momentum across Canada since 2000; its objective is to bring FSL learners to a higher level of proficiency relative to other programs using communicative methods (Maxwell, 2001). AIM allows students to use French in context and differs from other teaching practices in its use of gestures corresponding to each word taught. In this study, data were collected during individual interviews. Our results show few significant differences between the AIM group and the non-AIM group.

Assessing AIM: A Study of Grade 8 Students in an Ontario School Board

“…Future research in this respect could focus on comparing AIM and non-AIM students' oral fluency (Bourdages & Vignola, 2009), or comparing AIM and non-AIM students' perceptions of their language skills and language learning experience over a longer period. This line of inquiry would address the ongoing trend of disturbingly negative attitudes towards French held by some students and reported by teachers and administrators across Canada (Canadian Parents for French, 2006;Lapkin, MacFarlane, & Vandergrift, 2006).…”

To what extent are Canadian second language policies evidence-based? Reflections on the intersections of research and policy

“…In short, the Bourdages and Vignola (2009) study, contrary to the claims of its authors, provides strong support for the findings of smaller-scale studies showing that the AIM methodology can significantly increase students’ fluency in French. As Arnott (2011) points out, it is not possible to identify which components of AIM are most effective in scaffolding comprehension and production of French but there is clearly a case to be made for incorporating elements of AIM into both Core FSL and French immersion programs.…”

“…The authors chose to focus on the fact that both groups of early stage learners were making similar grammatical errors rather than on the fact that AIM students demonstrated much greater fluency in French and ability to continue speaking French rather than revert to English when attempting to express themselves. The logic entailed in the conclusions of the Bourdages and Vignola (2009) study is equivalent to claiming that there are no differences in French proficiency between a student who produced more than 20 utterances in the interview, the vast majority of which were in French only, compared to a student who produced only 10 utterances, only four of which were exclusively in French, just because a similar proportion of utterances of each student contained errors of various kinds.…”

“…The findings of the Bourdages and Vignola (2009) study are also interpreted in very problematic ways by the authors. They interpreted their results as showing “few significant differences between the AIM group and the non-AIM group” (p. 731) in oral interviews conducted with 18 AIM and 16 non-AIM Grade 3 students.…”

“…Arnott (2011, p. 157) points out that research carried out on the effectiveness of AIM has shown positive results in a number of small scale studies “while larger-scale quantitative and mixed method research suggested that merely using AIM does not make students significantly more proficient in French (Bourdages and Vignola, 2009; Mady et al, 2009). ” Her own research focused on exploring the ways in which teachers implemented AIM rather than attempting to compare AIM and non-AIM methods.…”