Channels, Fall 2018

Channels • 2018 • Volume 3 • Number 1 Page 5 classroom. In such settings, using certain students’ L1 and not other’s would be unfair. Monolingual instruction, then, even in very low proficiency levels, is unavoidable in such settings (Keller, 2016). Therefore, this paper will discuss CM as related to foreign language classrooms in which the students have a common L1. Purpose of CM in Language Classrooms. CM can serve many purposes in the language classroom, and both teachers and students code-mix for various reasons. Teachers code- mix to enhance communication between them and their students and to increase students’ understanding of the material (Gilead, 2016; Keller, 2016; Makulloluwa, 2013). When teaching explicit grammar points, explaining abstract concepts, giving feedback on student performance, or giving instructions for an activity, CM is particularly useful to language teachers. They may give instructions, feedback, and the like in L2 and follow by repeating the same thing in L1 for reinforcement. Or, they may code-mix in both using words in L1 that students have not yet learned in their TL (Gilead, 2016; Keller, 2016). Teachers code- mix in order to gauge their students’ comprehension of the TL, especially in lower proficiency levels where students may not yet possess enough knowledge of L2 to express such lack of understanding (Gilead, 2016; Keller, 2016; Makulloluwa, 2013). Another reason why teachers may code-mix is “to help learners compare and contrast the two language systems” (Makulloluwa, 2013, p. 584), juxtaposing differences, or highlighting similarities between L1 and the TL. Teachers can use CM to encourage more student participation rather than intimidating new language learners who may not want to speak up if doing so requires exclusive L2 use (Keller, 2016; Kustati, 2014). According to Makulloluwa (2013), CM can be used to lower students’ affective filter, which, in turn, helps facilitate language acquisition. CM has the potential to create a classroom environment that is more conducive to language learning than an L2-only classroom might be (Makulloluwa, 2013). Language teachers’ use of L1 can also make students see their teacher as more sympathetic (Makulloluwa, 2013), which is another way CM can lower the affective filter of language learners in the classroom. This is connected to the idea of showing identity through CM; by using the students’ L1, the teacher is identifying with the students through language. Keller (2016) also says that CM can serve to lower students’ affective filter in the language classroom, but he adds that frequent use of L1 in the classroom could actually heighten language learners’ affective filter in real-life L2 contexts, since they are not used to exclusive L2 use. However, the same study found that CM can have a positive impact on language learners’ views of their TL since their affective filter is lowered, CM “strengthened students’ interest in and acquisition of [the TL]” (Keller, 2016, p. 30). Since motivation is an important factor in language learning, it is no surprise that piqued interest in one’s TL would correlate with improved acquisition. Students have their own reasons for CM as well. Communicating to the teacher what one understands often requires CM or even total use of L1 in lower proficiency levels. A strategy used by many lower-level students is repeating back in L1 or in mixed language what the teacher said in the TL, inserting L1 in the parts requiring clarification (Gilead, 2016; Keller, 2016). In this way, students can check their own comprehension of the material. CM has the additional advantage of maintaining the flow of conversation and helping the speaker hold the floor instead of pausing for long stretches of time in an