Applied Linguistics

Lecture 9: Proposals for classroom teaching 1

9.1What is the best way to promote language learning in classroom?

  • There are six proposals for second and foreign language teaching:
  1. Get it right from the beginning
  2. Just listen …. and read
  3. Let’s talk
  4. Two for one
  5. Teach what is teachable
  6. Get it right in the end

9.2Get it right from the beginning

Hypothesis:

‘Get it right from the beginning’ technique, which is provided by structure-based approaches, helps learners develop high level of language accuracy.

  • Instruction is of two kinds: structure-based approaches and communicative approaches.

In Grammar Translation Method

▪ students are presented with vocabulary lists;

▪ students are asked to translate to their native language;

▪ grammatical rules are taught;

▪ the focus is on intellectual and academic abilities (i.e. accuracy) rather than the fluency.

In Audiolingual Mehtod

▪ much attention is paid on pronunciation;

▪ materials are provided directly in the target language (no translation);

▪ less attention is paid on grammar;

▪ the emphasis is on the oral language rather than spontaneous use of language (accuracy not fluency).

In Communicative Approach

▪ the emphasis is on the fluency then accuracy.

▪the classroominstructions are content-based focusing on the meaning

  • Studies prove that

▪ exclusive focus on accuracy and practice of particular grammatical forms does not mean that learners will be able to use the forms correctly outside the classroom.

▪ Instead, learners benefit from the opportunities meaning-based instructions forcommunicative practice, which does not mean less linguistic accuracy.

9.3 Just listen …. and read

Krashen’s (1985, 1989) Hypothesis:

Language acquisition takes place when learners are exposed to ‘comprehensible input’ through listening and/or reading.

The hypothesis was implemented in six instructional settings:

▫ comprehension-based instruction for children

▫ reading for words

▫ total physical response

▫ input flood

▫ enhanced input

▫processing instruction

In comprehension-based instruction for children

▪ students listen to tapes and read books

▪ no oral practice or instruction of the target language

▪ teachers do not teach but provide technical and organizational support.

▪ students guess the meaning

In reading for words

▪students read simplified material of age-appropriate content are available to them.

▪ students rely on themselves to enrich their vocabularies (student-centered)

In total physical response (TPR)

▪ The teacher gives commands in the target language (e.g. ‘stand up’ ‘put the book on the table’‘walk to the door’)

▪ students participate and act in the activities.

▪ students are not required to speak till they can.

In input flood

▪ classes are designed with communicative and task-based instruction

▪ instruction includes input flood of high-frequency exposure to a particular form

▪ students rely on themselves (student-centered)

In enhanced input

▪ variety of things are brought to learners to draw their attention to features of second language to increase the chances to learn these features.

▪ students rely on themselves to realize those features (student-centered).

In processing instruction

▪ learners are put in situations where they cannot comprehend a sentence a sentence by depending solely on context, prior knowledge, or other clues. Rather they must focus on the language itself.

▪learners receive explicit explanations and a variety of listening and reading exercises but no production practice.

  • Studies prove that

▪ learners can make considerable process if they have sustained exposure to language they understand.

▪ comprehension-based learning is excellent as a foundation for beginners but supplementary for advanced learners.

▪ ‘Just listen …. and read’ has a shortcoming. Only when learners start producing the language they can see the limitations in their interlanguage.

9.4 Let’s talk

Hypothesis:

Language acquisition takes place when learners access to both comprehensible input and conversational interactions including teacher-student and student-student interaction working together in task-based instruction.

The hypothesis was implemented in five instructional settings:

▫ learners talking to learners

▫ learner language and proficiency level

▫ dynamic of pair work

▫ interaction and second language development

▫ learner-learner interaction

In learners talking to learners

▪Learners participate in discussions with other learners in which they are compelled to ‘negotiate for meaning’.

In learner language and proficiency level

▪ Different-level learners play roles with two-way communication task.

▪ That is, low-proficiency learners in the ‘sender’ role interact with high-proficiency learners in the ‘receiver’ role.

In dynamic of pair work

▪ Two learners interact with each other.

▪ The nature of the interaction may take one of the four natures: ‘collaborative’ interaction, ‘dominant-dominant’,‘dominant-passive’, and ‘expert-novice’ between the two learners may

In interaction and second language development

▪learners are engaged in communicative tasks with native speakers of the target language.

In learner-learner in a Thai interaction

▪students engaged in interactional activities that discuss environmental problems of the local country (i.e. Thai)

▪ students use interactional features of negative feedback and modified output that facilitate second language learning:

▫negative feedback: clarification requests, explicit correction, and recasts.

▫ modified output: learner’s more accurate/complex reformulation of his or her previous utterance.

  • Studies prove that

▪ In the classroom, second language development is measured by learners’ immediate production following the interaction, however, it is difficult to draw any conclusions as to the long-term benefits.

▪ As for pair-work classroom activities that focus on a single grammatical feature,it is difficult to measure the effect of interactional features on second language learning over time.

▪ The Thai learners were accustomed to traditional grammar instruction. This is not always the case. Expressing the meaning in subject-matter instruction, learners may not respond to the teacher’s recasts in a way that they correct the language form.

9.5 Two for one

Hypothesis:

Learners acquire a second or foreign language through ‘two for one’ technique, that is learning the subject matter and the language at the same time,

‘two for one’ is implemented in three instructional settings:

▫French immersion programmes in Canada

▫ late immersion under stress in Hong Kong

▫ Inuit children in content-based programmes

In French immersion programmes in Canada

▪ Canadian French immersion programmes offer content-based instruction that expands opportunities for students to use their second language in cognitively challenging and informative course.

In late immersion under stress in Hong Kong

▪ Students in Hong Kong educational primary school study in Cantonese and in English at secondary school in order to succeed professionally and academically.

▪ To help students comprehend texts, teachers employed variety of strategies such as reducing the vocabulary load, simplifying the grammar, encouraging the use of bilingual dictionaries, and providing students with supplementary notes and charts in Chinese.

▪ Despite that the content subjects of the students were high, it did not help learn to use the syntactic and discourse structures in the second language to establish form-meaning relationship.

In Inuit children in content-based programmes

▪In Quebec, Canada, Inuit children are educated in their first language, Inktitut, from kindergarten to grade 2(age 5-7). Then, Canada’s official languages, French or English, are used in education.

▪ students had some difficulty coping with subject mater instruction in their second language and limited abilities to discuss more complex academic subject matter.

  • Studies prove that

▪ students need several years before their ability to use the language for cognitively challenging academic material has reached an age-appropriate level.

▪ Despite that bilingual education enables students to communicate with some fluency in the second language, their linguistic accuracy is not so high.

Reading for this lecture:

Lightbown & Spada (3th ed.): 137-160

1

LANE 423 –2014/15