Main result: difficult to draw conclusions on what works
The selected studies describe a variety of programmes to facilitate second-language instruction for different groups of students with foreign-language backgrounds, directly and indirectly. The programmes comprise introductory offers, language introductory offers, separate classes for newly arrived students, translanguaging/multilingual programmes, and first-language support. Each of the selected articles introduced interesting and relevant results on second-language learning.
However, as the studies and the educational systems in the Nordic countries are so diverse, it is difficult to draw clear conclusions from the material. The target student groups were very heterogeneous, consisting of students from different linguistic backgrounds and with various lengths of stay in the country. The aim and size of the different policies were equally different across the studies. Therefore, it is almost impossible to synthesise findings across individual studies conducted in different contexts.
Effects are particularly difficult to capture. The research review found only five rigorous studies that investigated the effect of educational measures on second-language learning in the Nordic countries. This means it is not possible to draw any generalising conclusions on the effect of specific programmes.
The studies do, however, give some indication of factors facilitating second-language learning among students with a foreign-language background. Wollscheid highlights a few results.
Determinants of second-language acquisition
A Swedish study by Bylund et al. (2021) found that the age of acquisition, not the child’s additional language skills, is the primary determinant of ultimate second-language attainment. Regardless of whether the child acquired two languages simultaneously, first learned one language and later another without maintaining the first, or was introduced to a new language only after establishing a mother tongue, the age at which the additional language was learned emerged as the strongest predictor of linguistic outcomes rather than the specific language constellation. Bilingualism may have a certain effect on some linguistic domains, such as lexis, while age of acquisition has more consistent effects over several domains. Bylund et al. (2021) stress the importance of considering heterogeneity among students with foreign-language background, i.e., different groups of second-language learners, when measuring effects of bilingualism.
Thordardottir (2020) further examined whether background variables could predict the need for L2 support in school. She found that learners of Icelandic as a second language were, as a group, performing significantly and visibly below native Icelandic-speaking peers. No consistent pattern in background characteristics emerged that could reliably be used to identify pupils in need of additional L2 instruction. The study did, however, indicate that progress in Icelandic tended to slow down with increased time spent learning the language, and that the age at acquisition also appeared to play a role. Overall, Thordardottir concluded that acquiring Icelandic as a second language in a school context is a time‑consuming process and not automatically successful. Based on these findings, the Reykjavík school board revised its allocation criteria, which now include individual assessments of Icelandic proficiency.
Inconsistent evidence on the role of first-language skills for learning Danish as a second language
Three studies, all from Denmark, were identified with a rigorous study design measuring the effects of first-language (mother-tongue) learning, or removal of first-language learning, on learning a second language (Danish in this case) or other learning outcomes. The findings were mixed and inconsistent.
In a study from 2017, Andersen et al. found that first-language learning did not seem to have a visible effect on foreign-language students’ linguistic abilities in Danish, their second language. At the same time, the study shows some positive effects for first-language instruction on students’ motivation, well-being, and parental school engagement.
However, assessing the effects of an asset-based approach on language learning in first grade, Andersen et al. (2022) showed some positive effects for reading skills in Danish. One year after the intervention, reading skills in Danish seemed to be significantly improved. The findings support an asset-based approach, suggesting that first-language instruction facilitates students’ engagement in school and their learning, also in their second language (Danish).
Finally, Tegunimataka (2021) showed that for male students the removal of first-language instruction had a negative effect on grades in Danish, but this did not apply for female students. Female students tend to have more training in their first language at home, and they score better in first and native language.
Findings from the remaining studies included in the review
The remaining eleven studies addressing second-language learning were not causal effect studies. They applied either a mixed method, a cross-sectional quantitative or a qualitative design. Most of the studies have a broader scope than second-language learning.
The studies addressed various research questions related to subgroups of students (such as age) and organisational aspects of second-language learning. The Finnish and Norwegian studies included were larger evaluations, whereas Swedish studies were of a smaller scale. For Sweden, the topic of multilingualism and translanguaging was present in several studies.
The difficulty to generalise findings for the whole group of students with a foreign-language background was mentioned in numerous studies. As stated earlier, the target student population differs in the various studies when it comes to age, time of arrival, and background. In addition, there are different practices in different regions and areas. For instance, in Norway the implementation of introductory offers for newly arrived students at the municipal level has led to a high local variation in these offers (Lødding et al., 2024).
A description of each of the studies and their findings are available in Appendix 1, with links to the original publication, if applicable.
Recommendation: better data and more research
Given the heterogeneity in student groups, measures and differences in country contexts, the study implies that it is not possible to draw a clear conclusion on which programmes work for students with a foreign-language background. The recommendation is therefore to conduct more effect studies with an experimental or quasi-experimental design, addressing the second-language learning of specific groups. The researchers also recommend a longitudinal perspective and support studies in several Nordic countries to provide more knowledge.
‘In particular, we need more studies with a causal design that can measure the effect of programmes on different student groups, if this is possible. To progress, stakeholders must collaborate to obtain better data on students’ backgrounds and language proficiency, especially in the case of newly arrived students,’ Sabine Wollscheid concluded.
Wollscheid also stresses that experimental studies may be hard to conduct in a Nordic setting. Lødding et al. (2020) has argued that the principle of equality, a fundamental value of the educational system in the Nordic countries, may conflict with the principle of a randomised controlled trial. If the intervention group gets an offer that the control group does not receive could mean an ethical clash. Further, it is challenging to randomise a minority group of students (for example, newly arrived students) into a control and intervention group, as the design requires a certain group size.
The weak data basis is another challenge for further research, in particular for the group of newly arrived students. For example, in Norway national databases do not register whether the student receives an introductory offer, or which type of offer the student gets. Datasets on language assessment tests or national tests are also lacking, as newly arrived students in Norway are exempt from participating in them and are assessed to a lesser degree.
Nevertheless, good timing opens possibilities for further studies. Newly introduced reforms provide an opportunity for studies comparing students before and after the implementation of a reform, as they have done in Denmark regarding the role of first-language instruction.
References
(* studies included in the research review)
* Andersen, S. C., Humlum, M., & Guul, T. (2017). Modersmålsbaseret undervisning – Modersmålsundervisning på 1. klassetrin. TrygFondens Børneforskningscenter.
* Bylund, E., Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2021). Age of acquisition – not bilingualism – is the primary determinant of less than nativelike L2 ultimate attainment. Bilingualism-Language and Cognition, 24(1), 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728920000188 Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard Educational Review, 56(1), 18–37.
* Dávila, L. T., & Bunar, N. (2020). Translanguaging through an advocacy lens: The roles of multilingual classroom assistants in Sweden. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0012 Dollmann, J. (2016). Less choice, less inequality? A natural experiment on social and ethnic differences in educational decision-making. European Sociological Review, 32(2), 203–215. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44075437 * Fejes, A., & Dahlstedt, M. (2020). Language introduction as a space for the inclusion and exclusion of young asylum seekers in Sweden. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 15, 9, Article 1761196. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2020.1761196 Heck, T., Keller, C., & Rittberger, M. (2024). Coverage and similarity of bibliographic databases to find most relevant literature for systematic reviews in education. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 25(2), 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-023-00364-3 * Ingves, A. (2024). Vägar mot ett svenskt ordförråd: Nyanlända ungdomars ordförrådsutveckling på språkintroduktionsprogrammet [Doctoral dissertation, Uppsala University].
* Karlsson, A., Nygård Larsson, P., & Jakobsson, A. (2020). The continuity of learning in a translanguaging science classroom. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09933-y * Laimi, T. V., S.; Saarinen, J.; Seppälä, S.; Hietala, R.; Kaivola, J.; Merimaa-Jovanovic, R.; Sulonen, K. & Yeasmin, N. (2024). Myöhään maahan tulleet oppilaat koulupolulla – Kehittävä arviointi maahanmuuttotaustaisten oppilaiden koulunkäyntivalmiuksia tukevassa toimenpideohjelmassa. (Education paths of immigrant students who arrived in Finland late. Enhancement-led evaluation in the action plan supporting the capabilities for attending school of students with an immigrant background). Finnish Education Evaluation Centre (FINEEC).
* Lødding, B., Kindt, M. T., Randen, G. T., Lynnebakke, B., Vennerød-Diesen, F. F., Vika, K. S., & Grøgaard, J. B. (2022). Norskinnlæring, faglig utvikling og nye venner–er det mulig på samme tid? Delrapport fra prosjektet Forskning på opplæringstilbud til nyankomne elever (8232705809). NIFU Report 2022:26. https://hdl.handle.net/11250/3043817 * Lødding, B., Kindt, M. T., Vennerød-Diesen, F. F., Randen, G. T., Grøgaard, J. B., Tahir, H., & Samuelsen, Ø. A. (2024). Vilkår for inkluderende opplæring: Sluttrapport fra prosjektet Forskning på opplæringstilbud til nyankomne elever (8232706376). NIFU Report 2024:4. https://hdl.handle.net/11250/3132566 Lødding, B., Salvanes, K. V., Reegaård, K., Lillevik, R., & Kavli, H. C. (2020). Hvordan finne effekter av opplæringstilbud til nyankomne elever med innvandrerbakgrunn? En vurdering av vilkår for evaluering. FAFO Report 2020:18.
Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., Carroll, C., Booth, A., & Wong, R. (2010). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 27(2), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00863.x Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C. M., McInerney, P., Soares, C. B., Khalil, H., & Parker, D. (2015). The Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers’ manual 2015: Methodology for JBI scoping reviews. The Joanna Briggs Institute.
* Repo, E. (2023). Together towards language-aware schools. Perspectives on supporting increasing linguistic diversity [Doctoral dissertation, University of Turku].
* Tegunimataka, A. (2021). Does first-language training matter for immigrant children’s school achievements? Evidence from a Danish school reform. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 11(3), 316–340. https://doi.org/10.33134/njmr.418 Thomas, J., Newman, M., & Oliver, S. (2013). Rapid evidence assessments of research to inform social policy: Taking stock and moving forward. Evidence and Policy, 9(1), 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426413X662572 * Thordardottir, E. (2020). Are background variables good predictors of need for L2 assistance in school? Effects of age, L1, amount, and timing of exposure on Icelandic language and nonword repetition scores. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(4), 400–422. https://tungumalatorg.is/sisl/files/2018/04/ET-2017-IJBEB.pdf * Venäläinen, S., Laimi, T., Seppälä, S., Vuojus, T., Viitala, M., Ahlholm, M., Latomaa, S., Mård-Miettinen, K., Nirkkonen, M., & Huhtanen, M. (2022). Linguistic skills and capacities to attend school – evaluation of preparatory education and instruction in the student’s own mother tongue. Finnish Education Evaluation Centre FINEEC. Retrieved from https://www.karvi.fi/en/publications/linguistic-skills-and-capacities-attend-school * Warren, A. R. (2016). Multilingual study guidance in the Swedish compulsory school and the development of multilingual literacies. Nordand: Nordisk tidsskrift for andrespråksforskning, 11(2), 115–142.
Wollscheid, S., Flatø, M., Hjetland, H. N., & Smette, I. (2017). Effekter av opplæringstilbud for tospråklige elever og kompetansetiltak for voksne innvandrere. Report 2017:30.
Wollscheid, S., & Tripney, J. (2021). Rapid reviews as an emerging approach to evidence synthesis in education. London Review of Education, 19(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.19.1.32. * Aarsaether, F. (2021). Learning environment and social inclusion for newly arrived migrant children placed in separate programmes in elementary schools in Norway. Cogent Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1932227