{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02046783625730994, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004873294346978557, 'mean_word_length': 5.005847953216374, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Teaching and learning L2 in the classroom: It's about time

Abstract One of the challenges facing second and foreign language (L2) teachers and learners in primary and secondary school settings is the limited amount of time available. There is disagreement about how to meet this challenge. In this paper we argue against two ‘common sense’ recommendations for increasing instructional time – start as early as possible and use only the L2 (avoiding the use of the first language (L1)) in the classroom. We propose two better ways to increase the instructional time: provide periods of intensive instruction later in the curriculum and integrate the teaching of language and content. Studies in schools settings around the world have failed to find long-term advantages for an early start or exclusive use of the L2 in the classroom. Nevertheless, many language educators and policy makers continue to adopt these practices, basing their choice on their own intuitions and public opinion rather than on evidence from research.