Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No.

2 269

Advanced Heritage Learners of

Spanish: A Sociolinguistic Profile
for Pedagogical Purposes
Irma Alarcón
Wake Forest University

Abstract: This article reports on an extensive survey administered to advanced

heritage language (HL) learners to examine their language behaviors, attitudes, and
backgrounds. To date, there have been no detailed categorizations of advanced HL
learners to guide classroom instruction and curriculum design. Thus the present study is
a first attempt to fill this gap by providing a sociolinguistic profile of these speakers,
including their identifying characteristics, linguistic needs, and similarities and differ-
ences with lower-proficiency speakers. Survey responses indicate that advanced HL
learners possess both productive and receptive skills in the HL, always use Spanish at
home, are fluent speakers of a standard variety, already have basic academic skills in
Spanish, and are therefore primarily interested in perfecting their academic writing
skills.

Key words: Spanish, attitudes, heritage language, language behavior, sociolinguistic

profile

Introduction
According to a May 1, 2008, report by the U.S. Census Bureau, the estimated His-
panic population in the United States has surpassed 45 million. At roughly 15% of
the total U.S. population, Hispanics comprise the largest minority group and their
presence continues to grow. Consequently, heritage language (HL) speakers of
Spanish have also become a rapidly growing presence at all levels of education,
from elementary school through college (Lynch, 2003). According to Valdés (1997,
2003), most of these bilingual speakers have been enrolled either in traditional
foreign language classrooms or in remedial courses intended to re-teach the basics
of the heritage language they supposedly have not learned well at home. Though
there has been substantial interest among researchers in this minority language
population, most existing goals and pedagogical practices have been inappropriate,
and few Spanish departments have offered special courses to target their real needs.
As Draper and Hicks (2000) indicated, this situation has led to frustration for both
language instructors and advanced HL speakers: Foreign language instructors have
not been trained to deal with these bilingual learners, and HL speakers have not
had their particular needs addressed. For example, although some HL speakers of

Irma Alarcón (PhD, Indiana University) is Assistant Professor of Romance Lan-

guages at Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, NC.
270
stigmatized varieties of Spanish1 might
need to resolve identity issues before con-
centrating on improving communicative
proficiency, more advanced speakers might
want to improve their textual competence
rather than developing the communicative
proficiency they already possess.
Despite significant progress in curricu-
lum development for teaching heritage
speakers, a recent survey conducted by the
National Foreign Language Center (NFLC)
and the American Association of Teachers
of Spanish and Portuguese (AATSP) re-
ported that only 18% of the colleges and
universities sampled (146 campuses) have
classes for HL learners (Ingold, Rivers,
Tesser, & Ashby, 2002, pp. 324–329).
Moreover, most Spanish departments cur-
rently offering courses tailored for HL
learners offer only a 2-semester sequence
that parallels the 4-semester language cour-
ses required for traditional foreign language
learners (Valdés, 1997). Consequently, HL
speakers wanting to pursue a Spanish major
or minor often have no upper-level courses
to help them continue developing their lin-
guistic competencies or maintain their HL.
But who are these advanced HL speak-
ers? What are their identifying char-
acteristics and concrete linguistic needs?
How different are they from their lower-
proficiency counterparts? This article con-
siders these questions by examining the
sociolinguistic profile of advanced HL
speakers of Spanish who responded to an
extensive survey. In the present context,
‘‘sociolinguistic profile’’ means a descriptive
summary of a specific group of speakers
that highlights their language usage as well
as the social and cultural factors influencing
their linguistic choices, attitudes, and mo-
tivations, such as age, education, and ethnic
identity. The goal of this study is to provide,
for pedagogical purposes, a detailed and
accurate categorization of advanced HL
speakers. Current typologies of HL speakers
are of limited classroom utility, particularly
with regard to advanced HL learners. For
example, some classifications are based on
terminology applicable to sociolinguistic
Summer 2010
research on immigrant speakers, such as
generational categorizations (e.g., first- or
second-generation). Others, such as Val-
dés’s typologies (1995, 1997), focus
narrowly on time of arrival, schooling, aca-
demic skills, and contact variety, and thus
are not directly relevant for the advanced
HL students in the present study.
Heritage Language Speakers
Valdés (2000) defined a heritage speaking
student as ‘‘a student who is raised in a
home where a non-English language is spo-
ken, who speaks or merely understands the
heritage language and who is to some de-
gree bilingual in English and the heritage
language’’ (p. 1). This definition, which fo-
cuses on language proficiency, captures the
wide variation among heritage speakers,
with some displaying only basic compre-
hension of the spoken HL and others
fully proficient speakers. In the Spanish-
language teaching literature, these speakers
are variously referred to as native speakers,
quasi-native speakers, L1/L2 users, bilin-
gual speakers, residual speakers, and home-
background speakers. Because of their
diverse Spanish linguistic competencies,
Valdés (1997) proposed a general typology
of eight types of HL speakers based on the
speakers’ schooling, academic skills in both
English and Spanish, level of fluency, and
the Spanish variety they produce. Her cate-
gorization ranged from those speakers who
have been schooled in a Spanish-speaking
country to those who have merely receptive
skills in the HL. Thus, HL speakers do not
constitute a homogeneous group, but rather
appear to be ‘‘a collection of types of learn-
ers who share the characteristic of having
identity and linguistic needs that relate to
their family background’’ (Carreira, 2004,
p. 21).
The HL learner profile becomes even
more intricate when accounting for addi-
tional issues these students bring into the
classroom, such as the amount of previous
language(s) exposure, the quality and fre-
quency of social interactions in the HL,
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2
identity and cultural questions, attitudes
toward the HL, and unique linguistic
strengths and weaknesses. All these issues
reveal the sociolinguistic complexity of this
minority language group of speakers, and
the difficulty in describing their inter- and
intra-individual language variation. Conse-
quently, language instructors facing the task
of teaching HL learners for the first time
benefit significantly from sociolinguistic
accounts describing HL learners’ main
traits, attitudes, and linguistic needs. It is
often the case that HL students are taught
by traditional foreign language instructors
who have had no additional training for
working with HL speakers and who receive
inadequate support within their own
schools (Draper & Hicks, 2000). Thus HL
instructors, beyond their own personal ex-
periences and skills, depend on information
about the needs and goals of HL speakers
obtained from research profiles to be able to
provide these students with a successful
learning experience. This article aims at
helping HL instructors in their pedagogical
decision making by supplying sociolinguis-
tic knowledge about advanced HL learners
stemming from a qualitative categorization
of their language behaviors, attitudes, and
needs.
Review of the Literature
A number of recent studies have investi-
gated Spanish HL speakers at the university
level, including learners at all proficiency
levels (e.g., Beaudrie & Ducar, 2005; Blake
& Zyzik, 2003; Edstrom, 2007; Lynch,
2008; Schwarzer & Petrón, 2005). These
studies have offered insights about various
aspects of HL learning and teaching, in-
cluding reading abilities (e.g., Hislope,
2003); oral production (e.g., Achugar,
2003; Fairclough & Mrak, 2003); self-
perceptions of Spanish skills (e.g., Hasson,
2008); sociocultural background variables
that predict successful mastery of the HL
(e.g., Oh & Au, 2005); HL and second lan-
guage (L2) learners’ interactions (e.g., Blake
& Zyzik, 2003); written production and
271
students’ writing strategies (e.g., Martinez,
2007; Schwartz, 2003); similarities and
differences between HL and L2 learners
(e.g., Lynch, 2008; Montrul, 2005); stu-
dents’ opinions on language use in HL
classes (Ducar, 2008); and HL speakers’
perspectives in linguistically mixed classes,
which include both L2 learners and native
speakers of Spanish (Edstrom, 2007).
Nonetheless, according to Schwarzer and
Petrón (2005), ‘‘Nowhere is the lack of
information concerning heritage speakers
more apparent than in the area of student
attitude and perceptions’’ (p. 569). To date,
few studies (e.g., Beaudrie & Ducar, 2005;
Mikulski, 2006) have explored in depth HL
college learners’ sociolinguistic profile
through extended questionnaires, inter-
views, or journals. Such studies would
serve two purposes. First, they give stu-
dents an opportunity to analyze their own
linguistic skills, strategies, and attitudes.
Second, language instructors could use the
information regarding students’ linguistic
needs and sociocultural opinions and con-
cerns to guide their teaching in more
effective and relevant directions (Carrasco
& Riegelhaupt, 2003).
With respect to Spanish university HL
learners’ profiles, the most thorough char-
acterization to date has been done by
Beaudrie and Ducar (2005), who investi-
gated the cultural and Spanish language
attitudes of 20 beginning-level HL speakers
of Spanish enrolled in a first-semester HL
course at the University of Arizona. The
researchers administered a survey and con-
ducted follow-up interviews addressing
language contact, attitudes, and linguistic
behaviors. Their results showed that these
low-level HL speakers had strong receptive
proficiency, but little or no productive
skills. The majority of the students, who
came from mid-level socioeconomic back-
grounds, seldom used Spanish with their
families, even though they were exposed to
the language at home. Overall, they had
positive attitudes toward the language and
culture and were highly motivated to study
Spanish, but they lacked confidence in their
272
oral Spanish abilities and had little respect
for the prestige of the Spanish dialect to
which they had been exposed at home.
Consequently, their main goals for taking
an HL class were to improve their fluency
and to learn a standard Spanish dialect.
These findings were supported by
Schwarzer and Petrón’s (2005) case study of
three lower-proficiency HL learners who,
despite considering Spanish part of their
identity and their family relations a major
factor in their desire to become more fluent
speakers, reported no interest in taking
more Spanish classes at the university level.
Their first and only HL class disappointed
them because the emphasis was on pre-
scriptive grammar rather than oral
proficiency. Lynch’s (2008) study of five
lower-proficiency HL students and four L2
learners found that, even though all of the
HL students had initially acquired and used
Spanish as a first language (L1), their
grammatical and lexical abilities in an oral
interview strikingly resembled those of the
L2 learners. Lynch attributed this linguistic
similarity to the social exposure to the lan-
guage: The HL learners spoke primarily
English at home, used English as the main
language of formal cognitive development
and peer socialization, and did not
have significant Spanish language contact
experiences.
In another study, Mikulski (2006)
investigated HL students’ motivations, atti-
tudes, and goals in taking a college HL
course. She found that the four HL learners
participating in her study enrolled in the
class for both personal and academic rea-
sons, and their goals included mastery of
orthographic accentuation, grammar, and
improvement of writing skills. In addition,
the students’ positive attitudes toward
learning Spanish increased throughout the
semester as they self-reported progress to-
ward their language goals and gained
confidence in their Spanish skills. More
important, their positive experience with
the HL class motivated them to continue
taking Spanish courses. Consequently, by
examining advanced HL learners’ language
Summer 2010
behaviors and attitudes, the present article
contributes to the existing literature by
providing a sociolinguistic profile of a
group of HL learners whose linguistic goals
and needs have not been addressed in these
terms.
The Present Study
This study investigates the sociolinguistic
profile, including language attitudes, lan-
guage contact, and linguistic behaviors, of
five advanced HL students at a small private
university.2 This university does not have a
large undergraduate Hispanic population,
but freshman enrollment in the 3 years
studied reveals a gradual and steady in-
crease. In fall 2005, 2.2% of freshmen (a
total of 25) identified themselves as His-
panic; in fall 2006, this rose to 2.7% (30),
and it grew to 3.4% (38) the following year
(fall 2007). These small though increasing
numbers, explain the absence of HL courses
addressing the needs of these students. In
spring 2008, however, the university of-
fered the first course for heritage Spanish
speakers in the curriculum: an upper-
level grammar and composition course
specifically designed for English-Spanish
bilinguals competent in spoken Spanish but
wanting to improve their writing skills and
vocabulary.
The data from the participants were
collected through a lengthy survey (cf.
Beaudrie & Ducar, 2005), which is part of a
larger study on the effects of instruction on
advanced HL learners’ written production
(information available upon request). The
emerging profile provides qualitative and
practical knowledge that instructors of ad-
vanced HL learners can use in their
curriculum design and classroom practices.
Since the present study is qualitative in
terms of its goal, design, sample, mode of
analysis, and findings (see Merriam, 1998,
for a detailed discussion), the researcher,
who was also the instructor of the HL
course, was an integral part of the research
process. Furthermore, the students were
aware of the pilot nature of the HL course
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2
and willingly responded to the survey, which
was presented as a research tool to gather in-
formation about their language background
and proficiencies in order to adjust the course
curriculum according to their linguistic ob-
jectives, needs, and interests. Their candid
responses were extremely helpful, contribut-
ing substantially to the success of the course.
The survey was administered both at the
beginning of the course and after its comple-
tion, so the research process did not influence
the grading for the course.
The following research questions moti-
vated the study:
1. What are the distinctive characteristics
of advanced HL speakers of Spanish?
2. How are they different from lower-
proficiency HL speakers?
3. What are the pedagogical implications
for HL programs stemming from the
qualitative analysis of the present data?
The study concludes by presenting the
pedagogical implications of the profile of
these advanced HL learners and the sug-
gestions made by the learners themselves
when asked about their ‘‘ideal’’ Spanish
course.
Method
Participants
The HL speakers of Spanish who partici-
pated in this study were the five students
enrolled in the first course specifically de-
signed for HL speakers at their university.
All five of the students in Grammar and
Composition for Heritage Speakers of
Spanish, which was offered in the spring
2008 semester, were self-identified as HL
speakers. The average age of the four fe-
males and one male was 19.6. The present
study identifies them as Carmen, Isabel,
Vicky, Rosa, and Pablo. Rosa audited, but
the other four students took the course for
credit. Carmen and Isabel were freshmen,
Pablo was a sophomore, Vicky was a junior,
and Rosa was a senior.
These HL learners initially received a
departmental online diagnostic test con-
273
sisting of 50 multiple-choice questions
on basic grammatical knowledge. This
diagnostic test is regularly given to high-
intermediate/advanced L2 learners of Span-
ish at the beginning of their grammar and
composition class, a parallel course. In ad-
dition to determining internal placement,
administering the diagnostic test to the HL
speakers allowed comparisons of their
grammatical competence with that of tradi-
tional L2 learners. The average score among
traditional L2 learners, based on 5 sections
offered in an earlier semester, was 28/50
(SD 7.06, range 17–45). Results among the
HL learners were clearly superior: their av-
erage was 43/50 (SD 5.59, range 35–48).
The individual scores were: Carmen – 45,
Isabel – 44, Pablo – 35, and Vicky – 48. Rosa
was unable to take the online diagnostic test
because she was auditing. These test results
revealed little variation among the ad-
vanced HL speakers, and even the lowest
score among them was higher than the av-
erage for L2 learners. Consequently, these
HL students were considered advanced
learners, although it is the survey responses
providing a full profile of these speakers
that proves they are actually advanced, ra-
ther than lower-level, HL learners (e.g.,
Lynch, 2008).
Data Collection Instrument
To address the research questions, partici-
pants completed an extensive socio-
linguistic survey consisting of 56 questions,
including open-ended, closed-ended, and
multiple-choice items, measuring their
background, language behaviors, attitudes,
and self-assessments. The survey was de-
veloped from an original version used and
tested by the researcher with L2 learners
(Alarcón, 2006). This survey was improved,
expanded, and adapted based on similar
instruments previously developed by HL
researchers (e.g. Beaudrie & Ducar, 2005;
Mikulski, 2006), and was intended as a
classroom survey to help the instructor
learn more about the students’ sociolin-
guistic backgrounds (cf. Carreira, 2003). In
274
addition, since this survey is part of a larger
study of instruction effectiveness in improv-
ing the written production of advanced HL
students, some questions address the stu-
dents’ expectations and goals for their first
college HL class and request their opinions
on their ideal HL course. Surveys of this
nature, which rely on self-reported data per-
taining to language behavior, have been
demonstrated to be highly accurate data col-
lection tools (Hasson, 2008). Moreover,
researchers have found that Spanish-English
bilinguals evaluate their Spanish skills more
precisely than their English skills (Delgado,
Guerrero, Goggin, & Ellis, 1999). The com-
plete survey is presented in the Appendix.
Procedure
The researcher administered the survey in
two sessions. The first part (the first 37
questions) was given during the first class
meeting in order to obtain information nec-
essary for adjusting the course objectives,
content, design, and methodology to coin-
cide as closely as possible with the students’
needs. The second part (questions 38–56)
was administered the following semester and
was intended to expand upon some of the
earlier questions as well as to provide further
insights and feedback regarding the students’
experience in their first HL university-level
course. The following sociolinguistic profile
and qualitative analysis is based on the HL
learners’ responses to all 56 survey questions,
which correspond to the eight main topics
presented below.
Analysis and Results
The survey questions were categorized by
topic, and the data were first analyzed by
tabulating the responses to each question.
Subsequent analysis involved identifying
and synthesizing emerging themes in order
to elucidate patterns in the data.3 The va-
lidity of the findings was enhanced in
various ways, including feedback, rich data,
and simple descriptive statistics (cf. Mikul-
ski, 2006). The researcher organized the
data analysis according to the following
Summer 2010
topics, each of which appears in detail be-
low: (1) personal background; (2) language
contact situations and interlocutors, in-
cluding type and amount of input exposure;
(3) attitudes toward language and culture,
with particular attention to language usage;
(4) identity and culture issues; (5) aware-
ness of Spanish dialects; (6) self-assessment
of language abilities in both English and
Spanish; (7) personal motivations and fu-
ture use of the language; and (8) reasons for
enrolling in an HL course.
1. Background
All the participants were born in the United
States, were exposed to Spanish in early
childhood, and came from families of mid-
dle or upper socioeconomic class. Their
parents came from different regions of Latin
America but have lived in the United States
for at least 20 years. Except for two moth-
ers, all the parents have college degrees,
some of them have graduate degrees, and all
are professionals, including physicians,
professors, social workers, and business-
men. Their English oral and written
proficiencies range from intermediate to
native-like. Table 1 displays more back-
ground details about the HL learners and
their parents.
2. Language Contact
2.1. Family Situations and Interlocutors
All participants reported speaking Spanish
at home, when visiting their relatives
abroad, and when talking with them by
telephone or computer. Although the par-
ents speak Spanish at home, Rosa, Vicky,
and Pablo also indicated using English with
them. Though Spanish is occasionally used
in interactions with siblings, with grand-
parents and other relatives Spanish is used
exclusively. Nonetheless, the students’
dominant language is English, which they
use most frequently in their daily life, at
school and social events, and when con-
versing with friends both in the United
States and abroad.
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2 275

2.2. Language Exposure in School

All these HL students received their school-
ing entirely in English (ages 6–181).
Spanish instruction
Although they reported having had some
in high school
formal Spanish instruction before starting
Yes their current college education, this instruc-
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
tion occurred at different stages during their
education: Pablo had Spanish only at the el-
ementary level, Isabel and Vicky only in high
school, Rosa had Spanish in both middle and
high school, and Carmen reported having
formal education

had Spanish classes all through her elemen-

Language in

tary and secondary education. Carmen,

English
English
English
English
English

Isabel, and Pablo had never studied or lived

in a Spanish-speaking country, but both
Vicky and Rosa had spent a total of 6–7
months abroad in Argentina and Spain. At the
college level, all of them had taken at least
Advanced Heritage Learners of Spanish

Spanish & English

Spanish & English
Spanish & English

Spanish & English

Spanish & English

one literature course designed for L2 Spanish

used at home
Language

learners, but no previous HL courses.

2.3. Language Exposure Outside

the Classroom
Other than Rosa, all these HL learners
spoke only Spanish until age 5. After be-
home country

ginning school, however, there is variation

Nicaragua

Argentina
Parents’

Mexico

Cuba
Perú

in the type and amount of Spanish input

they received outside the classroom. Such
variation has persisted. For example, even
though all participants reported reading in
Spanish less than 1 hour per day, and
acquisition
Age of HL

English more than 2 hours daily, only two of

Birth
Birth

Birth
Birth
Birth

them (Vicky and Rosa) visit Spanish-

language Web sites either for news or to
chat with friends and relatives. Similarly,
they are the only students who regularly
North Carolina
North Carolina
 5 Only mother, father is American

read Spanish outside of class. With regard to

New York
Vermont
Florida
Home
state

speaking, rather than reading, all the sub-

jects except Isabel speak Spanish outside the
classroom. As for listening, Carmen, Vicky,
and Rosa reported listening to Spanish music
and radio, as well as watching Spanish-
Age
18
18
21
21
20

language television and films.

Speaker
Carmen

3. Language Attitudes and

Isabel
Vicky

Pablo
Rosa
TABLE 1

Ease of Use
These HL speakers have extremely positive
attitudes towards their parents’ language
and culture. Furthermore, they have confi-
276
dence in their own Spanish language abili-
ties, which is manifested in their approach
to speaking (3.1), listening (3.2), reading
(3.3), and writing (3.4). Positive attitudes
are also reflected in their responses to
questions on identity issues (Section 4 be-
low), their own Spanish variety (Section 5),
and motivations to learn more about Span-
ish and Hispanic culture (Section 7).
3.1. Attitudes Toward Speaking
in Spanish
Other than Pablo, the students claimed to
feel as comfortable speaking Spanish as En-
glish, ‘‘especially with family and friends,’’
as Vicky remarked. Rosa wrote, ‘‘I love
speaking Spanish. I do it as often as possi-
ble. It connects me with my heritage and I
speak it every chance I get. I feel nearly as
comfortable speaking in Spanish as I do in
English.’’ Pablo, though, claimed he has an
American accent when speaking Spanish
and feels much more comfortable in En-
glish. (His accent, however, is native-like;
his difficulties with Spanish generally in-
volve overall grammatical and lexical
proficiency.)
3.2. Attitudes Toward Listening
to Spanish
Students’ responses revealed that they all
feel comfortable when listening to others
conversing in Spanish. Carmen claimed, ‘‘I
like listening to other people speak Spanish
especially because everyone has a different
Spanish accent.’’ Vicky added, ‘‘When I lis-
ten to people speak Spanish I am happy
because it reminds me of Argentina,’’ and
Pablo said, ‘‘I have no issue whatsoever un-
derstanding people speak in Spanish, but
occasionally an accent can be troublesome.’’
Isabel synthesized her attitude toward lis-
tening as ‘‘comfortable and at easeF
reassuring.’’
3.3. Attitudes Toward Reading
in Spanish
Most of these HL learners feel very com-
fortable reading, as Isabel claimed, ‘‘Very
Summer 2010
comfortable. I learned how to read in Span-
ish before learning how to read in English.’’
Nonetheless, some of them also realized
that reading is a different and more com-
plex task than speaking. Rosa said, ‘‘I like
reading in Spanish, though it is a lot more
difficult than speaking.’’ Pablo put it this
way: ‘‘I usually understand the meaning of
the sentences, but will often have to look up
a few words per page that I am unfamiliar
with to understand it fully.’’
3.4. Attitudes Toward Writing
in Spanish
While all the participants indicated feeling
very comfortable writing in English, their
answers varied when asked about Spanish
writing. Two reported not feeling comfort-
able (Isabel and Pablo), while the others
reported being very/somewhat comfortable.
Pablo indicated that ‘‘I will frequently have
to double-check what I’ve written,’’ while
Rosa affirmed, ‘‘I feel pretty confident writ-
ing in SpanishFI know my grammar is
good, although again if I am writing some-
thing academic I often find my vocabulary
inhibiting.’’ Even though Isabel had re-
ported not feeling comfortable, she
commented later, ‘‘I write well but I’d like to
develop my style and learn to write more
eloquently.’’
4. Identity and Culture Issues
These advanced HL speakers are proud
of their Hispanic heritage, and they self-
identify themselves as Hispanic (Carmen,
Vicky, and Pablo), Latino/a (Isabel), and
Latin American (Rosa). For Pablo, knowing
the language means ‘‘to truly understand
your heritage,’’ and for Vicky it means ‘‘ev-
erything, it is how I communicate with my
family, the most important people in my
life.’’ In addition, most of them associate
Spanish with prestige, though Carmen con-
nects Spanish with ‘‘cultural diversity and
uniqueness’’ and Pablo thinks that ‘‘it is part
of my heritage and I feel it is an obligation
to my culture to understand the language.’’
When expressing how proud they feel of
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2
their Hispanic heritage they enthusiastically
responded: ‘‘Incredibly proud. To know that
I come from such an interesting, rich and
diverse culture makes me feel patriotic and
happy’’ (Isabel); ‘‘Love it! I am so proud to
be Latina! I really embrace it and would
readily self-identify as Cuban’’ (Rosa); and
‘‘I am extremely proud of my heritage. It has
given me a different perspective of the
world’’ (Carmen).
5. Spanish Dialect Awareness
The students know the Spanish variety they
speak and do not attach any negative con-
notation to their dialect. For example,
Isabel knows she speaks ‘‘the Mexican dia-
lect from Mexico City,’’ Rosa insists hers is
‘‘some strange mix of Cuban, Argentine
castellano, and castellano ‘puro’, i.e., Spain
Spanish, with my Cuban dialect being the
dominant one,’’ and Carmen declared, ‘‘I’m
a Nicaraguan so the dialect is from there.’’
Nonetheless, when judging their own
dialect, some displayed contradictory re-
sponses indicating misunderstanding of
sociolinguistic terminology, as the terms
they applied to their dialect are mutually
exclusive. Pablo, for instance, thinks his
dialect is both ‘‘standard’’ and ‘‘less edu-
cated,’’ and Rosa referred to hers as both
‘‘standard’’ and ‘‘stigmatized.’’ More impor-
tant, though, is that most of them believed
that all Spanish varieties have the same
value, and that no variety is more presti-
gious than any other. Carmen expressed
this most directly: ‘‘No, I don’t think any
dialect is more prestigious than any other
one. They are all just different but no one is
better than the other.’’ Pablo supported this
idea: ‘‘I think every dialect is a reflection of
its culture. To believe that a dialect is more
prestigious than another, I believe, would
be claiming a culture is better than
another’s.’’
6. Self-Assessment of HL Proficiency
The survey also measured the HL learners’
perception of their own abilities in both
their HL and dominant language. For
277
Spanish, all participants evaluated their
speaking, listening, and reading abilities as
either advanced or native-like. However,
most HL learners rated writing skills as in-
termediate. Only Rosa assessed her writing
skills as advanced. These self-evaluations
differed sharply with the assessments of
their English capabilities, for which almost
all HL speakers rated themselves as native
in all four language skills. (The single ex-
ception was Carmen, who assessed her
reading and writing skills in English at an
advanced level, even though she had also
reported feeling ‘‘very comfortable’’ writing
in English.)
7. Motivations and Future Use
of the Language
All the HL learners were intrinsically in-
vested in Spanish, and they displayed
both integrative (learning a language for
personal reasons, such as cultural identifi-
cation) and instrumental (learning a
language for functional purposes, such as
getting a job) motivations.4 They were
very interested in learning more about
Spanish, their Hispanic culture, and other
Spanish-speaking countries, and they have
considered either living or working in a
Spanish-speaking country at some point in
their lives. Their reasons include being
closer to their relatives abroad (Carmen and
Vicky), experiencing the culture their par-
ents grew up in (Isabel), teaching at a Latin
American university (Rosa), and even per-
fecting their Spanish (Pablo). Each of these
students is currently pursuing either a ma-
jor or minor in Spanish or a concentration
in Latin American Studies. Moreover, they
are also planning to use their knowledge of
Spanish in various ways, including both
volunteer and paid work, and for research
and publishing in Spanish. They are con-
scious of the many advantages their Spanish
skills offer them, for both professional and
personal growth. Finally, given the oppor-
tunity, all these advanced HL learners
reported that they would have their chil-
dren learn Spanish, another reflection of
278
their commitment to maintaining their cul-
ture, language, and identity.
8. Reasons for Taking a Heritage
Language Course in College
All these HL students believe they speak
Spanish well. As Rosa put it, ‘‘Most of us
speak it more than we learned it in school.’’
Isabel commented, ‘‘I know the language
but never actually had any schooling.’’ Yet
they also realize a need to strengthen their
ability to write in Spanish using a more for-
mal register and vocabulary. Consequently,
their main reason for taking an HL course
was ‘‘to become better with writing in
Spanish’’ (Vicky). Recall that it was their
writing skills that received the lowest self-
ratings. All the students agreed that their
HL course should stress, in order, writing,
grammatical accuracy, and vocabulary.
Discussion
Based on the survey results, the three re-
search questions motivating this study,
which are repeated here for convenience,
can now be addressed.
1. What are the distinctive characteristics
of advanced HL speakers of Spanish?
2. How are they different from lower-
proficiency HL speakers?
3. What are the pedagogical implications
for HL programs stemming from the
qualitative analysis of the present data?
Characteristics of Advanced
Heritage Language Learners
Colombi and Roca (2003) reminded re-
searchers that: ‘‘As language instructors we
need to take into account the attitudinal
and sociohistorical factors affecting stu-
dents in the environment in which we
teach. We should understand that teaching
Spanish as a heritage language in Los An-
geles can and will vary widely from the
experience of teaching it in Miami’’ (p. 4).
Similarly, there are significant differences in
teaching HL learners of varied cultural
Summer 2010
backgrounds, proficiency levels, attitudes,
and linguistic needs. Therefore, informa-
tion concerning HL learners’ profiles is an
indispensable tool for HL instructors to
develop more effective HL courses and
programs, because each specific HL
population requires different objectives,
materials, and activities.
The analysis of the survey responses
yielded the following sociolinguistic profile
of advanced university HL learners (see
Table 2), reflecting the most relevant and
pervasive characteristics of these students
for HL instructors to consider when de-
signing and implementing new courses for
this population. One can consider nine
main themes: background, education,
Spanish variety and oral proficiency, HL
contact, attitudes, identity, self-assessment
in the HL, motivations and future use of HL,
and linguistic needs.
Similarities and Differences Between
Lower-Level and Advanced
Heritage Language Speakers
According to Valdés (2000), some of the
background experiences of HL speakers are
widely shared: ‘‘They speak or hear the her-
itage language spoken at home, but they
receive all of their education in the official
or majority language of the countries in
which they live’’ (p. 1). This applies, in
varying degrees, to both lower-level and
advanced HL speakers of Spanish. Further-
more, based on the results of both the
current study and of Beaudrie and Ducar’s
profile of beginning HL learners (2005),
both lower-level and advanced HL individ-
uals display positive attitudes toward
Spanish; have a high degree of motivation
to study the language; perceive the benefits
attached to knowledge of Spanish, both
personally and professionally; and feel
proud of their Hispanic heritage. These
common characteristics reflect essentially
sociocultural background variables, partic-
ularly identification with Hispanic culture
and participation in Hispanic cultural
activities, which have been found to be
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2 279

TABLE 2
Sociolinguistic Profile of Advanced Heritage Learners of Spanish at the
University Level

Background
U.S.-born citizens (second generation)
Spanish acquisition in early childhood (0–5 years old)
Middle/high socioeconomic background
At least one parent of Hispanic descent
Parents are professionals with college educations
Education
U.S. English schooling
Spanish formal instruction in high school (at a minimum)
Spanish variety and oral proficiency
Fluent speakers of a standard Spanish variety
Heritage language contact
Always speak Spanish at home and with relatives
Exposure to Spanish music, radio, television, movies, Internet sites, and varied
readings
Spanish college classes
Attitudes
Strong positive attitudes toward Spanish and Hispanic culture
Feel comfortable speaking, listening, reading, and writing in Spanish
Identity
Hispanic or Latino
Proud of Hispanic heritage
Self-assessment in heritage language
Native-like proficiency in speaking, listening, and reading
Intermediate proficiency in writing
Motivations and future use of language
Majors/minors in Spanish
Plan to use Spanish in future jobs
Have considered working or living in a Spanish-speaking country
Intend to have their children learn Spanish
Linguistic needs
Language maintenance
Improve grammatical accuracy
Increase formal vocabulary
Perfect academic writing skills
280
positively correlated with mastery of a
Spanish accent (Oh & Au, 2005). HL
students who display strong cultural iden-
tification are more motivated to study the
language and to speak Spanish with a na-
tive-like accent.
However, as Colombi and Roca (2003)
observed, ‘‘The degrees of language profi-
ciency in particular cases and the number of
variables in the profiles of these students are
complex and dependent on multiple cir-
cumstances’’ (p. 3). So there are some
significant differences between beginning-
and advanced-proficiency HL speakers. In
light of Beaudrie and Ducar’s findings
(2005), most beginning proficiency HL
speakers grow up speaking English as their
native language, seldom speak Spanish at
home, and thus feel ‘‘anxious, intimidated,
challenged, and shy’’ when they are
required to produce Spanish (p. 10). Al-
though they tend to be interested when
listening to the language (good receptive
skills), they fear that teaching Spanish to
their children would hinder the children’s
acquisition of English, they lack confidence
in their Spanish speaking skills, they per-
ceive the dialect they learned at home as
being stigmatized, and they want to become
fluent speakers of a standard variety. By
contrast, advanced HL learners acquired
Spanish since birth, always speak Spanish at
home, feel very comfortable both speaking
and listening to the language (good recep-
tive and productive skills), are committed
to teaching their children the language, feel
confident about their language skills,
accept the dialect they speak without nega-
tive biases, and want to become better
writers in Spanish (cf. Mikulski’s case study,
2006).
One crucial difference between these
two groups of HL speakers, however, has
deep repercussions in their language be-
haviors and attitudes: the age of their first
exposure to Spanish. A number of studies of
both first and second language acquisition
(e.g., Long, 1990) have established three
related phenomena. First, there are long-
term advantages for learners who begin as
Summer 2010
children, such as native-like attainment.
Second, sensitive periods occur that affect
language development, during which nor-
mal acquisition of various linguistic
abilities takes place and after which acqui-
sition is either incomplete or irregular.
Third, first language loss may begin as early
as age 6 in some individuals. These findings
are associated with maturational con-
straints in general and can be related to the
comprehensively defined notion of lan-
guage proficiency, including grammatical
competence (Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson,
2003). Furthermore, HL students who are
exposed to and use Spanish more often have
better productive grammar abilities (Oh &
Au, 2005), which leads to greater confi-
dence in their own perceived language
skills. The advanced HL students partici-
pating in this study had been exposed to
Spanish since birth, had experienced unin-
terrupted language development, and had
continued to use the language in significant
social interactions.
Pedagogical Implications
Since the backgrounds, attitudes, linguistic
needs, and expectations of lower-level
and advanced-proficiency HL learners
are not the same, course objectives and
classroom practices should also vary.
Most notably, beginning HL learners often
strive to talk more articulately, while ad-
vanced HL learners concentrate on
improving their formal writing skills. The
HL learner profile obtained from the pres-
ent study can help the HL instructor to
better understand the complexity of ad-
vanced HL populations and thus ‘‘create a
more relevant and culturally responsive
teaching and learning environment for her-
itage learners’’ (Carrasco & Riegelhaupt,
2003, p. 176).
The design of courses for HL students
should not be dictated by any HL or foreign
language textbook, or course syllabus,
or the instructor’s own agenda, but by
the linguistic needs of the HL students
themselves. Therefore, sociolinguistic back-
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2
ground surveys, such as the one included in
the present study, administered at the be-
ginning of a course, can provide the
language instructor with sociolinguistic in-
formation relevant for designing the
curriculum for that particular class. Conse-
quently, the main challenge facing HL
instructors is to ‘‘mold instructional prac-
tices’’ to fit each individual class (Carreira,
2003, p. 72).
In HL courses specifically designed for
advanced-proficiency learners, those who
grew up using Spanish at home, and those
who have had constant language exposure
and interaction, the pedagogical approach
should be based on the native speaker
model (e.g., Potowski & Carreira, 2004).
Advanced HL students already have recep-
tive and productive skills, and they usually
have little need to develop their basic com-
municative abilities. They are closer to
the native speaker norm than are lower-
proficiency speakers, who more closely
resemble the L2 norm (see Lynch, 2008, for
detailed discussion). Furthermore, a cur-
rent ‘‘bio-developmental definition’’ of
native speaker (Davies, 1996, p. 156) also
applies to HL speakers, as ‘‘an individual is a
native speaker of the L1 learnt in child-
hood’’ (Cook, 1999, p. 186). As native
speakers, HL learners have an implicit
knowledge of the grammar of the language,
an intuitive grasp of word meanings, the
ability to communicate within diverse so-
cial contexts, a wide range of linguistic
skills, and the capacity for using the
language creatively (Stern, 1983). Conse-
quently, advanced HL students will benefit
more from instruction focused on reading
and writing that helps them develop and/or
reacquire linguistic capacities that might be
incomplete or lost due to variable and in-
sufficient language exposure (Montrul,
Foote, & Perpiñán, 2008).
When asked to describe their ‘‘ideal’’
university HL Spanish course, the students
in the present study made the following
suggestions. They largely agreed that the
class should be conducted entirely in Span-
ish, with no preference for the dialect of the
281
instructor. They also insisted that a small
class provides a better environment for
individual attention, because ‘‘we all got
along, helped each other, knew each other’s
strengths and weaknesses, and were taught
according to our individual needs’’ (Isabel).
Moreover, they preferred a course focusing
on literature and grammar, but not on cul-
ture, because ‘‘people know culture on their
own’’ (Rosa) and ‘‘literature will essentially
incorporate culture if good, contemporary
authors are selected’’ (Isabel). The students
did not favor any particular teaching meth-
odology, instead suggesting that a mixture
of lectures, group discussions, and seminars
would be most beneficial. They found
useful activities involving questions-and-
answers, self-correction, and drills, but not
pair-work, which ‘‘is often . . . inefficient’’
(Isabel). Perhaps surprisingly, they wel-
comed instructor correction of their verbal
errors, if it was not excessive, because ‘‘we
have to figure out our mistakes on our own’’
(Carmen), and for it to be accompanied not
merely by a substitution of the correct form
‘‘but an explanation of the mistake you
make if it was grammar’’ (Pablo). Finally,
most of the students emphasized the value
of daily quizzes to evaluate their learning
progress over other assessment forms, such
as journals, oral presentations, and papers,
because ‘‘[it] makes the student keep up
with the reading and puts less pressure on
tests’’ (Isabel).
Conclusion
By using an extensive sociolinguistic back-
ground survey, the purpose of this study
was to analyze advanced Spanish HL
speakers’ language attitudes, language con-
tact, and linguistic behaviors in order to
obtain a profile sufficiently detailed for
practical issues in course design. Survey re-
sults provided valuable information about
advanced HL speakers, a group whose pro-
file had not previously been fully described
and accurately categorized. Advanced HL
Spanish students are educated and fluent
speakers of the standard variety in their
282
parents’ native countries and are proud of
their Hispanic heritage, confident in their
language abilities, and interested primarily
in perfecting their academic writing skills
in Spanish.
The low number of participants in the
present study is not a representative sample
of advanced HL speakers, which implies
that the results cannot be generalized to all
advanced college HL learners. Due to the
small enrollment of Hispanic students at the
university where the study was conducted,
and the fact that the course was new in the
curriculum, only five students took the HL
course. Future research that includes larger
numbers of participants is needed to con-
firm the findings of this study, which was
also intended partially as a prototype for
further studies. Nonetheless, the character-
ization of advanced HL learners from this
study is a useful reference for instructors
who are teaching advanced HL students of
Spanish for the first time, or who would
like to contrast and compare their own
HL learners to these advanced students.
Furthermore, although it is not directly rel-
evant here, the present study, despite a
limited number of participants, could in-
form more theoretical research pertaining
to differences between L1 and L2 acquisi-
tion.
Finally, this study is a first attempt to
provide a profile of advanced university-
level HL learners for language instructors to
use in their course designs. The next step is
to investigate HL learners’ linguistic abili-
ties in concrete production tasks, such as
writing samples or grammaticality judg-
ment tasks, in order to complement the self-
reports of the present study with more ob-
jective proficiency assessment tools
targeting HL learners’ implicit language
systems.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to Drs. Anne Edstrom and
Jennifer Ewald for their comments and sup-
port, and to the anonymous reviewers whose
feedback greatly improved this article.
Summer 2010
Notes
1. A stigmatized variety of Spanish implies
a nonstandard or nonacademic use of
the language.
2. Although this sample is small, all partic-
ipants display comparable language fea-
tures and sociolinguistic backgrounds.
Their characteristics and experiences
are typical of the type of heritage Span-
ish speakers enrolled in this specific
institution.
3. See Bogdan and Biklen, 2006, for a dis-
cussion of similar methodology.
4. For a detailed discussion of motivation
in general, and integrative versus instru-
mental motivation in particular, see Gass
and Selinker, 2008, pp. 426–432, and
Ellis, 2008, pp. 677–691. Although a de-
tailed exploration of the role of moti-
vation in HL speakers goes beyond the
scope of the present study, it is an
issue well worth pursuing, especially
because it has not received the attention
from HL researchers that its importance
suggests.
References
Achugar, M. (2003). Academic registers in
Spanish in the U.S. A study of oral texts pro-
duced by bilingual speakers in a university
graduate program. In A. Roca & M. C. Col-
ombi (Eds.), Mi Lengua: Spanish as a heritage
language in the United States (pp. 213–234).
Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press.
Alarcón, I. (2006). The second language acqui-
sition of Spanish gender agreement: The effects
of linguistic variables on accuracy. Munich:
Lincom Europa.
Beaudrie, S., & Ducar, C. (2005). Beginning
level university programs: Creating a space for
all heritage language learners. [Electronic
version]. Heritage Language Journal, 3. Retrie-
ved from http://www.heritagelanguages.org
Blake, R. J., & Zyzik, E. C. (2003). Who’s
helping whom? Learner/heritage-speakers’
networked discussions in Spanish. Applied
Linguistics, 24, 519–544.
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2006). Quali-
tative research for education: An introduction to
theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Carrasco, R. L., & Riegelhaupt, F. (2003).
META: A model for the continued acquisition
of Spanish by Spanish/English bilinguals in
the United States. In A. Roca & M. C. Colombi
(Eds.), Mi Lengua: Spanish as a heritage lan-
guage in the United States (pp. 170–197).
Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press.
Carreira, M. (2003). Profiles of SNS students
in the twenty-first century: Pedagogical im-
plications of the changing demographics and
social status of U.S. Hispanics. In A. Roca &
M. C. Colombi (Eds.), Mi Lengua: Spanish as a
heritage language in the United States (pp. 51–
77). Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press.
Carreira, M. (2004). Seeking explanatory ad-
equacy: A dual approach to understanding the
term ‘‘heritage language learner.’’ [Electronic
version]. Heritage Language Journal, 2. Retrie-
ved from http://www.heritagelanguages.org
Colombi, M. C., & Roca, A. (2003). Insights
from research and practice in Spanish as a heri-
tage language. In A. Roca & M. C. Colombi
(Eds.), Mi Lengua: Spanish as a heritage language
in the United States (pp. 1–21). Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press.
Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native
speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quar-
terly, 33, 185–209.
Davies, A. (1996). Proficiency or the native
speaker: What are we trying to achieve in
ELT? In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.),
Principle and practice in applied linguistics
(pp. 145–157). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Delgado, P., Guerrero, G., Goggin, J. P., & El-
lis, B. B. (1999). Self-assessment of linguistic
skills by bilingual Hispanics. Hispanic Journal
of Behavioral Sciences, 21, 31–46.
Draper, J. B., & Hicks, J. (2000). Where we’ve
been; What we’ve learned. In J. B. Webb & B.
L. Miller (Eds.), Teaching heritage language
learners: Voices from the classroom (pp. 15–35).
Yonkers, NY: ACTFL.
Ducar, C. M. (2008). Student voices: The
missing link in the Spanish heritage language
debate. Foreign Language Annals, 41, 415–429.
Edstrom, A. (2007). The mixing of non-na-
tive, heritage, and native speakers in upper-
283
level Spanish courses: A sampling of student
opinion. Hispania, 90, 755–768.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language
acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fairclough, M., & Mrak, A. (2003). La en-
señanza del español a los hispanohablantes
bilingües y su efecto en la production oral. In
A. Roca & M. C. Colombi (Eds.), Mi Lengua:
Spanish as a heritage language in the United
States (pp. 198–212). Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press.
Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second
language acquisition. An introductory course.
New York: Routledge.
Hasson, D. J. (2008). Self-perceptions of na-
tive language abilities in bilingual Hispanic
young adults. Language, Culture, and Curricu-
lum, 21, 138–153.
Hislope, K. (2003). A reading study of Spanish
heritage speakers. The Reading Matrix, 3,
1–21.
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2003).
Maturational constraints in SLA. In C. J.
Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook
of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588).
Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Ingold, C., Rivers, W., Tesser, C. C., & Ashby,
E. (2002). Report on the NFLC/AATSP survey
of Spanish language programs for native
speakers. Hispania, 85, 324–329.
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints
on language development. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285.
Lynch, A. (2003). Toward a theory of heritage
language acquisition: Spanish in the United
States. In A. Roca & M. C. Colombi (Eds.), Mi
Lengua: Spanish as a heritage language in the
United States (pp. 25–50). Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press.
Lynch, A. (2008). The linguistic similarities
of Spanish heritage and second language
learners. Foreign Language Annals, 41, 252–
281.
Martinez, G. (2007). Writing back and forth:
The interplay of form and situation in heritage
language composition. Language Teaching Re-
search, 11, 31–41.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and
case study applications in education. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mikulski, A. (2006). Accent-uating rules
and relationships: Motivations, attitudes,
284
and goals in a Spanish for native speakers
class. Foreign Language Annals, 39, 660–682.
Montrul, S. (2005). Second language acquisition
and first language loss in adult early bilinguals:
Exploring some differences and similarities.
Second Language Research, 21, 199–249.
Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpiñán, S. (2008).
Gender agreement in adult second language
learners and Spanish heritage speakers: The
effects of age and context of acquisition. Lan-
guage Learning, 58, 503–553.
Oh, J. S., & Au, T. K. (2005). Learning
Spanish as a heritage language: The role of
sociocultural background variables. Language,
Culture, and Curriculum, 18, 229–241.
Potowski, K., & Carreira, M. (2004). Teacher
development and national standards for
Spanish as a heritage language. Foreign Lan-
guage Annals, 37, 427–437.
Schwartz, A. M. (2003). ÍNo me suena! Heri-
tage Spanish speakers’ writing strategies. In A.
Roca & M. C. Colombi (Eds.), Mi Lengua:
Spanish as a heritage language in the United
States (pp. 235–256). Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press.
Schwarzer, D., & Petrón, M. (2005). Heritage
language instruction at the college level: Re-
ality and possibilities. Foreign Language
Annals, 38, 568–578.
APPENDIX
Heritage Learners of Spanish Survey
Please respond to these questions as candidly as possible.
Sex: male – female Age: ____________________
1. Where were you born?
2. If you were not born in the United States, how old were you when you first arrived in the
United States?
3. Where were your parents born?
4. What language do they speak at home?
5. What language do you speak with them at home?
6. What language do you speak most frequently in your daily life?
7. What language did you use most between these ages?
0–5: ____________________
6–18: ____________________
181: ____________________
Summer 2010
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of
language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
U. S. Census Bureau. (2008, May). U. S. Cen-
sus Bureau News. [Electronic version].
Retrieved May 1, 2008, from http://www.cen
sus.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/
population/011910.html.
Valdés, G. (1995). The teaching of minority
language as ‘‘foreign’’ languages: Pedagogical
and theoretical challenges. Modern Language
Journal, 79, 299–328.
Valdés, G. (1997). The teaching of Spanish to
bilingual Spanish-speaking students: Out-
standing issues and unanswered questions.
In M. C. Colombi & F. X. Alarcón (Eds.), La
enseñanza del español a hispanohablantes:
Praxis y teorı́a (pp. 8–44). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Valdés, G. (2000). Spanish for native speakers:
Vol. 1. AATSP Professional development series
handbook for teachers K-16. New York: Har-
court College Publishers.
Valdés, G. (2003). Making connections:
Second language acquisition research and
heritage language teaching. In R. Salaberry &
B. Lafford (Eds.), The art of teaching
Spanish: Second language acquisition from re-
search to praxis (pp. 193–212). Washington,
DC: Georgetown University Press.
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2 285

8. Did you take Spanish . . .

(a) in elementary school? yes – no

(b) in middle school? yes – no
(c) in high school? yes – no

9. Have you studied Spanish in a Spanish-speaking country? If yes, which one and for how
long?
10. Have you lived in a Spanish-speaking country? If yes, which one and for how long?
11. When do you speak Spanish?

12. Where do you speak Spanish?

13. With whom do you speak Spanish?

14. How comfortable do you feel speaking Spanish?

15. How comfortable do you feel speaking English?

16. How comfortable do you feel writing in Spanish?

17. How comfortable do you feel writing in English?
18. How would you rate your Spanish skills in . . . .?
(a) speaking ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
(b) listening ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
(c) writing ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
(d) reading ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
19. How would you rate your English skills in . . .?
(a) speaking ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
(b) listening ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
(c) writing ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
(d) reading ! none – low – intermediate – advanced – native-like
20. How many hours per day do you read Spanish?
(a) 0–1
(b) 1–2
(c) more than 2

21. How many hours per day do you read English?

(a) 0–1
(b) 1–2
(c) more than 2
22. Do you access the Internet in Spanish? If so, what types of material and why?

23. When you’ve taken Spanish at the college level, did you speak Spanish outside of class?
yes – no
If yes, how often (hours/week)? ____________________
To whom did you talk (a Mexican friend, my instructor, etc.)? ____________________
286 Summer 2010

24. When you’ve taken Spanish at the college level, did you read Spanish outside of
class?
yes – no
If yes, how often? ____________________
What did you read (magazines, newspapers, short stories, etc.)?

25. When you’ve taken Spanish at the college level, did you listen to Spanish music/radio?
yes – no
If yes, how often? ____________________

26. When you’ve taken Spanish at the college level, did you watch Spanish television/mov-
ies?
yes – no
If yes, how often? ____________________
27. Do you identify yourself as . . .
(a) American
(b) Latino/a
(c) Hispanic
(d) Other ____________________
28. What does it mean to you to know Spanish?
29. Have you considered working or living in a Spanish-speaking country? Why or why not?

30. Is Spanish your major/minor?

31. Are you planning to use your Spanish in the future? If yes, how?

32. What are some of the benefits for you of speaking Spanish?
33. Would you have your children learn Spanish?

34. What are the main reasons for your taking this course?
35. What are your expectations from a course for ‘‘Heritage Speakers’’?

36. What types of material would you like to read in this course? (poems, newspapers, plays,
short stories, etc.)
37. On what aspect of language would you like this course to focus? Please circle all the
choices that are important to you.
(a) speaking
(b) writing
(c) listening
(d) reading
(e) grammatical accuracy
(f) vocabulary

38. How often (always, often, sometimes, etc.) do you speak Spanish with . . . .?
(a) your father
(b) your mother
(c) your brother(s) and/or sister(s)
(d) your grandparents (or other relatives)
Foreign Language Annals  vol. 43, No. 2 287

(e) your friends abroad

(f) your friends in the United States
(g) others (specify)
39. How often (always, often, sometimes, etc.) do you speak Spanish in these places?
(a) at school
(b) at work
(c) at social events
(d) others (specify)
40. How often (always, often, sometimes, etc.) do these people address you in Spanish?
(a) mother
(b) father
(c) brother(s) and/or sister(s)
(d) grandparents (or other relatives)
(e) your friends abroad
(f) your friends in the United States
(g) others (specify)
41. How do you feel when having to speak in Spanish? Explain.
42. How do you feel when listening to people speaking in Spanish? Explain.
43. How do you feel when reading in Spanish? Explain.
44. How do you feel when writing in Spanish? Explain.
45. With what do you associate Spanish? Circle one. If more than one, please explain.
(a) prestige
(b) low economic status
(c) other (specify)
46. How do you feel when identified as a Latino or Hispanic? Explain.
47. How proud are you of your Hispanic heritage? Explain.

48. How interested are you in learning about your Hispanic culture? Explain.
49. How interested are you in learning more about other Spanish-speaking countries?
Which ones? Why?
50. What dialect of Spanish do you speak?
51. How do you judge the Spanish dialect you speak? Circle all that apply.
(a) standard
(b) educated
(c) correct
(d) stigmatized
(e) less educated
(f) incorrect
(g) other (specify)
52. Do you think that some dialects are more prestigious than others? Explain.
53. Do you speak other Spanish dialects? If yes, which ones? If not, which one(s) would you
like to learn, and why?
288 Summer 2010

54. Please complete this information about your parents:

Father Mother
How long have they lived in the United States?
Highest educational level completed
Current occupation
English oral proficiency
(a) basic
(b) intermediate
(c) advanced
(d) other (specify)
English written proficiency
(a) basic
(b) intermediate
(c) advanced
(d) other (specify)

55. Please describe the ideal Spanish course for you. Consider the following.
(a) language spoken in class (Spanish, English, both?)
(b) instructor’s specific Spanish variety (any preference? If so, why?)
(c) group size (why? advantages/disadvantages?)
(d) content (literature, grammar, culture, etc.)
(e) methodology used by your instructor (lecture, seminar, group discussions, etc.)
(f) Class activities (pair-work, drills, question-and-answer, self-correction, etc.)
(g) instructor’s correction of your Spanish (how and why?)
(h) evaluation (daily quizzes, journals, presentations, exams, etc.)
(i) others (specify)
56. Any additional comments that you think would help in developing a heritage language
program at your university?
Copyright of Foreign Language Annals is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.