tesol certificate. the mmbs course. january 2008eflclassroom.com/teachertraining/book1tesol.pdf ·...
TRANSCRIPT
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 1
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 2
The TESOL Certificate Studies Program
January 2008
Volume 1
Editors: Dr. Paul Robertson and Professor Rod Ellis
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 3
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 4
Published by the Asian EFL Journal Press
Asian EFL Journal Press
A Division of Time Taylor International Ltd
Time Taylor College
Daen Dong
Pusan
S. Korea
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com
© Asian EFL Journal Press 1999-2008
This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
no reproduction of any part may take place without
the written permission of the Asian EFL Journal Press.
No unauthorized photocopying
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the Asian EFL Journal.
Editor: Dr. Paul Robertson
Senior Associate Editor: Professor Rod Ellis
Advisor. Professor Rebecca Oxford
Director TTI. Shin Young
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 5
TESOL Certificate Studies
Philippines
MMBS
Index. The Asian EFL Journal 6
Biography 7
Introduction to course 8
Course Outline 9
Articles to read.
1. Important tasks of English education. Asia wide and beyond 10-14
2. The methodology of Task based teaching 15-31
3. Educational Settings and Second Language Learning 32-44
4. Effective Reading 45-50
5. The Importance of Teaching Pronunciation to Adult Learners 51-57
6. Learning Vocabulary Through Games. 58-64
7. Teaching English Pronunciation Skills to the Asian Learner. 65-77
8. The critical age hypothesis. 78-101
9. Questions for consideration 102-102
10. Picture description as a very useful learning tool 103-106
11. Lesson Plans 107-108
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 6
The Asian EFL Journal TESOL Certificate The Asian EFL Journal, a world leading academic research journal and leading
accredited TESOL Certificate provider, and Time Taylor College (Korea) is the world
accredited organization for teaching TESOL.
TESOL Certificates are unique and may only be presented by accredited
organizations. There are only two organizations in the world to do this (CELTA in the
UK) an the Asian EFL Journal
This is the only TESOL Certificate in the world supported by:-
a) International Conferences
b) 5 prestigious linguistics journal
c) in conjunction with a licensed college
d) with such a famous list of international EFL SLA experts
e) personally backed by world leaders Professors Rod Ellis and Rebecca Oxford
The Asian EFL Journal The Asian EFL Journal examines issues within the Asian EFL linguistic scene, and
considers how traditional educational Approaches are integrated with or contrasted
against what is arguably a very specialized and relatively new field of study. The
journal is accessible to the global academic and teaching community, where articles
relating to Asian EFL may be published and viewed by all EFL professionals. The
primary function of the Asian EFL Journal is to provide a freely accessible alternative
journal on a quarterly basis.
The AEJ also provides new insights into key issues and subjects that are emerging and
are of contemporary interest that may not gain space in a variety of hard copy and
more 'established' publications. Some of these publications, whilst of academic merit,
do not support an injection of new and future oriented thinkers. Thus the new
generations of high quality indigenous and native speaker authors now have a
professional accessible medium to post and read insightful and ground-breaking
articles.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 7
Biographies.
Dr. Paul Robertson
CEO Time Taylor Group of Companies.
Principal Time Taylor College. Founder of 7 international academic Language
Journals. Author of numerous books on Second Language Acquisition. Author of
legal tests on teacher and student responsibilities
Ba, LLb, Dip Law, Ma TESOL, Ma Law, PhD
International Attorney
Professor Rod Ellis
MA (Leeds), MEd (Brist), PhD (Lond)
Chair, Graduate School of Education; Professor, Teaching English to Speakers of
Other Languages; Applied language studies and Linguistics dept. Professor Ellis, a
renowned linguist, received his Doctorate from the University of London and his
Master of Education from the University of Bristol. A former professor at Temple
University both in Japan and the US. Prof. Ellis has taught in numerous positions in
England, Japan, the US, Zambia and New Zealand. Dr. Ellis, who is known as the
"Father of Second Language Acquisition", has served as the Director of the Institute
of Language Teaching and Learning at the University of Auckland. Author of
numerous student and teacher training textbooks for Prentice Hall and Oxford
University Press, Prof. Ellis's textbooks on Second Language Acquisition and
Grammar are core textbooks in TESOL and Linguistics programs around the world.
Rebecca L. Oxford, Ph.D.
Curriculum and Instruction Professor, Rebecca L. Oxford, named University
Distinguished Scholar-Teacher for 2006-07. Professor in the Department of
Curriculum and Instruction, has been selected as one of six faculty as a recipient of
the 2006-07 University of Maryland Distinguished Scholar-Teacher Award. Oxford
will be recognized during the 23rd
Annual Faculty and Staff Convocation that will be
held during fall semester 2006.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 8
Introduction to Course
By Dr. Paul Robertson
Welcome to the TESOL Certificate course. I hope we can make good
friendships over the next few days and that you will hear some things of interest to
help you in your teaching duties. I have been teaching English as a second language
since 1993 (interspersed with a few years working as an attorney,) yet at all times
with Education authorities and in the Second Language Acquisition area. I have
gained various qualifications culminating in my PhD in English Education, however,
the more knowledge I have gained, there is one thing that I have learnt very clearly,
and that is there are always questions that I do not have an answer to, for the study of
English and its teaching is a vast area that no one person can fully master.
You are in a profession that is still in its early days of development. It was not
long ago (1980s) that Dr. Stephen Krashen pronounced his Language Acquisition
Device as the answer to how one learnt a second language. Whilst largely discredited,
there have since been few pronouncements (Chomsky on Universal Grammar) to
really test Krashen’s bold statement. These days MRIs are helping us understand the
workings of the brain in so far as language storing in the brain goes, but that science is
still in its early days.
Ten yeas ago there was no such as thing as Culture affecting language
acquisition. In 1999 I began the Asian EFL Journal based on the premise that
language learning and culture were inextricably connected. Now it is largely agreed
that this I so, but as the concept is still very hard to quantify, it is often avoided as
being ‘too difficult.’ Another area of dispute goes to ‘pronunciation’ and just what
constitutes good pronunciation. I hope we can discuss this much more in our group
sessions.
Finally’ let me just say - English is no longer the property of the English,
Australians, Americans or Canadians. English is as much the property of you, the
Filipino teachers, as me. English is an International Language (EIL) and you have the
skills and professionalism to teach English as good as anyone across the globe. Never
doubt that. Enjoy the course, ask questions often, and I will do my best to make you
great teachers in the eyes of your students.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 9
Course Outline
Day 1.
Lesson 1. Introduction to EFL and EIL
Lesson 2. Preparing the best lesson – Lesson Plans
Lesson 3. Theories in Second Language Acquisition
Lesson 4. Pronunciation issues
Lesson 5. Task Based Teaching
Lesson 6. Test
Day 2.
Lesson 7. One on One – teacher student expectations
Lesson 8. Extensive Reading
Lesson 9. Grammar for TESOL
Lesson 10. Games in the TESOL Classroom
Lesson 11. Test (Group work)
Lesson 12. Overview of your responsibilities
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 10
Title
Important Tasks of English Education:
Asia-wide and Beyond
Author
David Nunan
Bio Data:
Professor David Nunan is Director of the English Centre and Professor of Applied
Linguistics at the University of Hong Kong. He has worked as an ESL/EFL teacher,
researcher, curriculum developer, and materials writer in many parts of the world,
including Australia, Oman, Japan, Singapore, Thailand, and the UK.
Professor Nunan has published books on language teaching curriculum development,
discourse analysis, second language teacher education, language teaching
methodology, and research methods in applied linguistics.
Dr. Nunan is on the Advisory Board of the Asian EFL Journal
We need to look deeply at times into the specific needs of learners in Asia and the
Pacific region who we cannot forget are still very much living in local contexts -not
only an evidently increasingly global one. That being said, there is much to learn from
these studies that can be borrowed and lent across a number of frontiers. Further, it is
evident that we must not exclude research into second language learning because of it
its geographical or cultural source. That has to underlay an important part of the
integrity of research and this book is very much devoted to that principle.
One approach, that does seem to meet a wide range of cross-regional needs and to
which a number of the authors deal with directly or indirectly is one to which I have
continuously been drawing attention and analysis for more than two decades. It is that
of task based learning. Interestingly, its popularity is accelerating in East Asia as well
as elsewhere. A demonstration of this is the fact that I was asked by the Chinese
Government to prepare a new task based publication for the English curriculum.
China represents, as Li (2004) states in his included work, the world's largest source
of English learners, let alone the largest segment of EFL learners anywhere in the
world.
India with its huge population and apparent new boom for English learning as
mentioned by Gupta (2005) is also a large beacon of English learning. Just these two
countries alone and their appetites for English education give us a new sense of the
increased diversity of language ownership; something Phan Le Ha (2005) touches on
in her article on the internationalization of the language and non-natives increasing
critical role in teaching, development and learning. It signals the reality that those
learning English will be significantly centered around or originating from Asia.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 11
Therefore educators need evermore to recognize the importance and distinctive
context based needs of those requiring education in English outside the traditional
native speaker contexts. This is not inherently contradictory with those with persistent
arguments that many general principles of acquisition should be understood and
appropriately applied by educators within their distinctive classroom settings and
communities.
In keeping with such thoughts, I believe it can be reasonably well argued that the task
based teaching as I have largely described in various publications -more recently, "An
introduction to Task Based Teaching", 2004, Cambridge University Press- does
provide a flexible, functionally compatible and contextually sensitive approach for
many learners, as well as teachers. There may not be a magic approach anywhere for
this region or others, but let us look at some of the attractive features of task based
learning. It offers the potential for the following:
1. A replacement to or a supportive infusion of more student centered learning to
certain single approach based syllabi.
2. Utilizing more authentic experiences and materials as well as principles of
constructivism compared to top down teaching.
3. More of a sense of personal and active accomplishment including developing a
greater sense of language ownership.
4. Increased student participation when task teaching is well planned and
implemented sensitive to learners' learning styles, learning and communicative
strategies, personalities, multiple intelligences and the overall local contexts, for
example.
5. Making specific lesson goals more evident through movement towards and/or
success of task completion.
6. Important and ongoing assessment and "washback" to both teacher and learner.
Tasks, well chosen and developed which are centered around relevant acquisition
principles, as well as sensitive to context have also the potential to lessen the need for
test cramming and excessive reliance on a result/test based oriented syllabi.
Cramming, described by Poole (2003) in the Asian EFL Journal amongst others as
part of an "Exam Hell" represents a significant phenomenon in a large part of Asia.
Further, a result based syllabus, especially one with a narrow focus on grammar-
translation and reading and vocabulary may not provide a full set of language skills
needed by various L2 learners including those wishing to become communicatively
capable.
Tasks can be also fun and highly student centered when borrowing on effective games
and other such activities though task is not a substitute word for games. Where
students are conscious of marks, including many Asian high school students, if tasks
are not clearly supportive of good grades, they may find such exercises as either
irrelevant or even label them as bad teaching. For games may not be always
supportive of important curricular goals. Nevertheless, it can be argued that putting
fun (back) into learning represents positive motivation that can achieve even
worthwhile outcomes in respect to the curriculum. It is really difficult to think of most
learners whatever their context as appreciating boring teaching on a sustained basis.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 12
It is also learners' complaints that that they do not always understand the teaching
goals through teacher centered lectures that make task based teaching potentially
dynamic for learning. Such task approaches can represent to students not only
achieving the better learning of a language item but in organizing time effectively,
learning to work cooperatively -an important Asian value- and using a variety of
intelligences and skills such as computer mediation. Thus, students can become
cognitively and pragmatically more fully engaged which can reduce tedium and make
class work more challenging and relevant to their wider needs and interests.
Again, too many students in the region and elsewhere may become overly committed
to rote, passive approaches and formulaic thinking associated with certain multiple
choice questions that are simply re-stylized from practice tests. Combined within a
teacher centered, top down approach, students may simply associate English with a
kind of assembly line and formulaic work to be tolerated but not to be enjoyed. The
end result is that English becomes firmly embedded within some students thinking as
a chore and not really being authentic enough to act as a door to a whole new world of
possibilities, career or otherwise -be it in the business world or other sectors. Rather,
many students in Asia and elsewhere may, see their own world and future successes
in terms of fulfilling tasks especially when the teacher reinforces such a link with
practical activities.
It is not to argue against there being merit at times for the grammar-translation, audio-
lingual approaches or lexical approaches, many of which remain popular and central
to quite a few teachers in the region. Learners' needs, proficiency, teacher competency
and confidence, government policy and a host of other factors may determine the
validity of how instructors’ best deal with instructed learning.
In fact, Chew (2005) in her article on reviewing the evolution of syllabi in
Singaporean English education, indicates that the single centered approach to a
syllabus may be ebbing, increasingly substituted by a more eclectic one. Whether this
experience will be replicated in other countries in the region, may be difficult to
exactly say. It may be that we are in a period of the "end of methods". But like others
in different social sciences who harkened the end of ideology, it may be more prudent
to view change as largely evolutionary with recurring ebbs and flows depending upon
the current contextual streams of challenges.
However, the attractiveness of task based learning relates not only to the enumerated
benefits. It provides rather a useful practice that that can be applied across many
approaches, as well as boundaries. Task based learning may provide an enduring
legacy that meets the test of time. It may also provide a curricular and syllabus
framework of flexibility that logically students and teachers will be drawn to even if it
need not be the central leitmotif for certain places.
For example, tasks could include, completing a grammar bingo game after a
contrastive analysis, grammar-translation based presentation. Subsequently, task
based communicative teaching practices could be supported to incorporate the
appropriate grammar into developing two way oral skills through an interview
exercise. Again, the task approach does not deny that in some Asian classes -or
anywhere in the world for that matter- that certain traditional approaches need to have
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 13
their day. Rather it is especially supportive of an integrated approach, or even where
the needs of the learner may be solely communicative. However, again task selection
and development is the key to better ensure specific needs are met. In doing this, the
educator needs to be conscious of principles and aspects of acquisition.
In this respect Ellis, (2005) has so well summarized here with authority and clarity the
general understanding in the profession on instructed language learning. We are
further faced with the fact that the true task of learning a second language in the many
EFL environments that Asian learners find themselves are removed from a lot of
'naturalistic", non-classroom, English speaking settings. Such an understanding of
these realities and the principles that surround realistic classroom learning can be of
service to classroom teachers wondering what methods, approaches and practices to
choose at a specific time. It reminds us of the value of the extensive reading
programmes to which Helgesen (2005) alludes can be so useful for Asian learners
where they are limited in their accessibility to communicative English in a natural
environment.
Teachers in such contexts may need to be reminded, at times to extend the task work
outside the classroom with proper direction that permits students to develop
independent learning skills that facilitate students to do the extensive work necessary
to gain fluency. In cultures where top down approaches are in the main, instructors be
they native teachers or not, need to be cognizant of these realities and limitations. We
can not simply, for example, put all learners on the Internet or through CALL, clap
our hands and say "go to it". Again learning context, as related to acquisition can be
highly relevant, which Ellis (2005) would seem to imply.
Countries that have ESL environments, some of which appear comparatively
advanced in terms of their English education systems such as Singapore and Hong
Kong, may for historical or special leadership reasons have cultivated English as a
second language. Here students may have to be approached differently in general as
they may be better motivated through seeing English on a daily basis in coming to
terms as to why they may be spending more than a thousand hours to learn it within
the school system. They may also have more opportunities to integrate classroom
learning into day to day usage if not immediately then possibly in the relatively near
future when they obtain employment. Task work in such circumstances can even draw
on giving real world assignments of surveying store managers and others in English
that extend instruction quantitatively to a level that helps develop real authentic
competency.
Simply speaking, English is not foreign to all parts of the region. This should draw
more Asian educators towards thinking about what techniques and experiences within
their own region itself that can be borrowed and/or adapted from places like Hong
Kong. This is a place I know personally for its significant daily use of English
especially in the professional areas.
Whatever one argues is precisely workable, there is no denying that the future of
English education, as so well discussed by the likes of Ellis, (2005) Chew, (2005)
Helgesen (2005) and many others at the Asian EFL Journal Conference (2005) is well
secured in respect to its growth.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 14
Chew, P. (2005). Change and Continuity: English Language Teaching in Singapore
[Electronic version]. Asian EFL Journal Vol. 7, Issue 1.
Ellis, R. (2005).Principles of Instructed Language Learning [Electronic version].
Asian EFL Journal Vol. 7, Issue 3.
Gupta, D. (2005). ELT in India: A Brief Historical and Current Overview [Electronic
version]. Asian EFL Journal Vol. 7, Issue 1.
Helgesen, M. (2005). Classroom Practices & Materials. Future Directions [Electronic
version]. Asian EFL Journal Vol. 7, Issue 3.
Li, M. (2005). Culture and Classroom Communication: A Case Study of Asian
Students in New Zealand Language Schools [Electronic version]. Asian EFL Journal
Vol. 6, Issue 1.
Nunan. D. (2004). An introduction to Task Based Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Phan Le Ha. (2005). Toward a critical notion of appropriation of English as an
international language [Electronic version]. Asian EFL Journal Vol. 7, Issue 3.
Poole, G. (2003). Assessing Japan's Institutional Entrance Requirements [Electronic
version]. Asian EFL Journal Vol. 5, Issue 1.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 15
Article Title
The Methodology of Task-Based Teaching
Author
Rod Ellis
University of Auckland
Dr. Ellis is on the Advisory Board of the Asian EFL Journal
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to consider methodological procedures for teaching tasks.
These are of two basic kinds. Firstly, there are those procedures relating to how the
tasks specified in a task-based syllabus can be converted into actual lessons. Secondly,
there are procedures relating to how the teacher and learners are to participate in the
lessons. This paper will address only the first of these.
The design of a task-based lesson involves consideration of the stages or components
of a lesson that has a task as its principal component. Various designs have been
proposed (e.g. Estaire and Zanon 1994; Lee 2000; Prabhu 1987; Skehan 1996; Willis
1996). However they all have in common three principal phases, which are shown in
Figure 1. These phases reflect the chronology of a task-based lesson. Thus, the first
phase is 'pre-task' and concerns the various activities that teachers and students can
undertake before they start the task, such as whether students are given time to plan
the performance of the task. The second phase, the 'during task' phase, centres around
the task itself and affords various instructional options, including whether students are
required to operate under time-pressure or not. The final phase is 'post-task' and
involves procedures for following-up on the task performance. Only the 'during task'
phase is obligatory in task-based teaching. Thus, minimally, a task-based lesson
consists of the students just performing a task. Options selected from the 'pre-task' or
'post-task' phases are non-obligatory but, as we will see, can serve a crucial role in
ensuring that the task performance is maximally effective for language development.
Access to a clear framework for a task-based lesson is of obvious advantage to both
teachers and learners. Richards (1996) shows how many experienced teachers adhere
to a maxim of planning ('Plan your teaching and try to follow your plan') while
Numrich (1996) reports on how novice teachers feel the 'need to be creative and
varied in teaching'. A framework such as the one outlined in Figure 1 caters to both
needs. It provides a clear structure for a lesson and it also allows for creativity and
variety in the choice of options in each phase.
The pre-task phase
The purpose of the pre-task phase is to prepare students to perform the task in ways
that will promote acquisition. Lee (2000) describes the importance of 'framing' the
task to be performed and suggests that one way of doing this is to provide an advance
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 16
organizer of what the students will be required to do and the nature of the outcome
they will arrive at. Dornyei (2001) emphasizes the importance of presenting a task in
a way that motivates learners. Like Lee, he sees value in explaining the purpose and
utility of the task. This may be especially important for learners from traditional
'studial' classrooms; they may need to be convinced of the value of a more
'experiential' approach. Dornyei also suggests that task preparation should involve
strategies for whetting students' appetites to perform the task (e.g. by asking them to
guess what the task will involve) and for helping them to perform the task. Strategies
in this latter category are discussed below.
Skehan (1996) refers to two broad alternatives available to
the teacher during the pre-task phase:
an emphasis on the general cognitive demands of the task, and/or an emphasis
on linguistic factors. Attentional capacity is limited, and it is needed to
respond to both linguistic and cognitive demands … then engaging in
activities which reduce cognitive load will release attentional capacity for the
learner to concentrate more on linguistic factors. (p. 25).
These alternatives can be tackled procedurally in one of four ways; (1) supporting
learners in performing a task similar to the task they will perform in the during-task
phase of the lesson, (2) asking students to observe a model of how to perform the task,
(3) engaging learners in non-task activities designed to prepare them to perform the
task or (4) strategic planning of the main task performance. We will consider each in
some detail.
Performing a similar task
The use of a 'pre-task' was a key feature of the Communicational Teaching Project
(Prabhu 1987). It was carried out as a whole-class activity with the teacher and
involved the learners in completing a task of the same kind as and with similar
content to the main task. Thus, it served as a preparation for performing the main task
individually. For example, if the main task involved working out a class timetable
from the timetables of individual teachers, then the pre-task would be the same but
with different information in the teachers' timetables.
Prabhu explains that the pre-task was conducted through interaction of the question-
and-answer type. The teacher was expected to lead the class step-by-step to the
expected outcome, to break down a step into smaller steps if the learners encountered
difficulty and to offer one of more parallels to a step in the reasoning process to
ensure that mixed ability learners could understand what was required. The teacher
was provided with a lesson plan that included (1) the pre-task and (2) a set of graded
questions or instructions together with parallel questions to be used as needed. When
implemented in the classroom, the plan results in a 'pedagogic dialogue'. Prabhu
emphasises that the pre-task was not a 'demonstration' but 'a task in its own right'. It is
clear from this account that the 'pre-task' serves as a mediational tool for the kind of
'instructional conversation' that sociocultural theorists advocate. The teacher, as an
expert, uses the pre-task to scaffold learners' performance of the task with the
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 17
expectancy that this 'other-regulation' facilitates the 'self-regulation' learners will need
to perform the main task on their own.
Providing a model
An alternative is to ask the students to observe a model of how the task can be
performed without requiring them to undertake a trial performance of the task (see
Aston (1982) for an early example of such an approach). Minimally this involves
presenting them with a text (oral or written) to demonstrate an 'ideal' performance of
the task. Both Skehan (1996) and Willis (1996) suggest than simply 'observing' others
perform a task can help reduce the cognitive load on the learner. However, the model
can also be accompanied by activities designed to raise learners' consciousness about
specific features of the task performance - for example, the strategies that can be
employed to overcome communication problems, the conversational gambits for
holding the floor during a discussion or the pragmalinguistic devices for performing
key language functions. Such activities might require the learners to identify and
analyze these features in the model texts. Alternatively, they might involve pre-
training in the use of specific strategies. Nunan (1989) lists a number of learning
strategies (e.g. 'Learning to live with uncertainty' and 'Learning to make intelligent
guesses') that students can be taught to help them become 'adaptable, creative,
inventive and above all independent' (p. 81) and thus more effective performers of a
task. However, the effectiveness of such strategy training remains to be convincingly
demonstrated.
Non-task preparation activities
There are a variety of non-task preparation activities that teachers can choose from.
These can centre on reducing the cognitive or the linguistic demands placed on the
learner. Activating learners' content schemata or providing them with background
information serves as a means of defining the topic area of a task. Willis (1996)
provides a list of activities for achieving this (e.g. brainstorming and mind-maps).
When learners know what they are going to talk or write about they have more
processing space available for formulating the language needed to express their ideas
with the result that the quantity of the output will be enhanced and also fluency and
complexity. Recommended activities for addressing the linguistic demands of a task
often focus on vocabulary rather than grammar, perhaps because vocabulary is seen as
more helpful for the successful performance of a task than grammar. Newton (2001)
suggests three ways in which teachers can target unfamiliar vocabulary in the pre-task
phase; predicting (i.e. asking learners to brainstorm a list of words related to the task
title or topic), cooperative dictionary search (i.e. allocating different learners words to
look up in their dictionary), and words and definitions (i.e. learners match a list of
words to their definitions). Newton argues that such activities will 'prevent the
struggle with new words overtaking other important goals such as fluency or content-
learning' when learners perform the task. However, there is always the danger that
pre-teaching vocabulary will result in learners treating the task as an opportunity to
practise pre-selected words. In the case of task-supported teaching this can be seen as
desirable but in the case of task-based teaching it can threaten the integrity of the task.
Strategic planning
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 18
Finally, learners can be given time to plan how they will perform the task. This
involves 'strategic planning' and contrasts with the 'online planning' that can occur
during the performance of the task. It can be distinguished from other pre-task options
in that it does not involve students in a trial performance of the task or in observing a
model. However, it may involve the provision of linguistic forms/strategies for
performing the task but a distinction can still be drawn between the non-task
preparation procedures described above and strategic planning, as the former occur
without the students having access to the task they will be asked to perform while
strategic planning involves the students considering the forms they will need to
execute the task workplan they have been given.
There are a number of methodological options available to teachers who opt for
strategic planning. The first concerns whether the students are simply given the task
workplan and left to decide for themselves what to plan, which typically results in
priority being given to content over form, or whether they are given guidance in what
to plan. In the case of the latter option, the guidance may focus learners' attention on
form or content or, as in Sangarun's (2001) study, form and content together. Skehan
(1996) suggests that learners need to be made explicitly aware of where they are
focusing their attention - whether on fluency, complexity or accuracy. These planning
options are illustrated in Figure 2. Here the context is a task involving a balloon
debate (i.e. deciding who should be ejected from a balloon to keep it afloat). The
guidance can also be 'detailed' or 'undetailed' (Foster and Skehan 1996). The examples
in Figure 2 are of the undetailed kind. Skehan (1998) gives an example of detailed
planning for a personal task involving asking someone to go to your house to turn off
the oven that you have left on. This involved instructions relating to planning content
(e.g. 'think about what problems your listener could have and how you might help
her') and language (e.g. 'think what grammar you need to do the task'). These options
do not just provide for variety in planning activities; they also enable the teacher to
channel the learners' attention onto different aspects of language use. For example,
Foster and Skehan (1996) found that when students were given detailed guidance they
tended to prioritise content with resulting gains in complexity when they performed
the task.
Strategic planning options Description
1. No planning The students were introduced to the idea of a balloon debate, assigned
roles and then asked to debate who should be sacrificed.
2. Guided planning - language focus The students were introduced to the idea of a
balloon debate and then shown how to use modal verbs and conditionals in the
reasons a doctor might give for not being thrown out of the balloon (e.g. 'I take care of
many sick people - If you throw me out, many people might die.'
3. Guided planning - content focus The students were introduced the idea of a balloon
debate. The teacher presents ideas that each character might use to defend his or her
right to stay in the balloon and students were encouraged to add ideas of their own.
Another option concerns the amount of time students are given to carry out the pre-
task planning. Most of the research studies that have investigated this kind of planning
have allocated between 1 and 10 minutes. An effect on fluency was evident with very
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 19
short periods of planning in some studies but longer was needed for an effect on
complexity (Skehan 1998 suggests 10 minutes is optimal). Finally, planning can be
carried out individually, in groups, or with the teacher.
Summary and final comment
In these four ways, teachers can help to create conditions that will make tasks work
for acquisition. As Skehan (1998) points out, they serve to introduce new language
that the learners can use while performing the task, to mobilize existing linguistic
resources, to ease processing load and to push learners to interpret tasks in more
demanding ways. However, it is not yet possible to 'fine tune' learners' performance of
a task through selecting specific pre-task options. At best, all that the research to date
has demonstrated is the likely effects of some of the procedures referred to above.
Important questions remain unanswered. For example, we do not know whether task
preparation that involves an actual performance of the task is more or less effective
than preparation that involves just observation. Nor is it clear to what extent linguistic
priming subverts the 'naturalness' of a task resulting in teaching of the present-
practice-produce (PPP) kind. Only in the case of strategic planning do we have some
idea of how the different options affect task performance.
The during-task phase
The methodological options available to the teacher in the during-task phase are of
two basic kinds. First, there are various options relating to how the task is to be
undertaken that can be selected prior to the actual performance of the task and thus
planned for by the teacher. These will be called 'task-performance options'. Second,
there are a number of 'process options' that involve the teacher and students in on-line
decision making about how to perform the task as it is being completed.
Task performance options
We will consider three task performance options that have figured in the research to
date. The first of these options concerns whether to require the students to perform the
task under time pressure. The teacher can elect to allow students to complete the task
in their own time or can set a time limit. Lee (2000) strongly recommends that
teachers set strict time limits. This option is important because it can influence the
nature of the language that students' produce. Yuan and Ellis (2002) found that giving
students unlimited time to perform a narrative task resulted in language that was both
more complex and more accurate in comparison to a control group that was asked to
perform the same task under time pressure. The students used the time at their
disposal to monitor and reformulate their utterances. Interestingly, the opportunity to
plan on-line produced a different effect from the opportunity to engage in strategic
planning, which led to greater fluency and complexity of language. It seems, then,
that if teachers want to emphasize accuracy in a task performance, they need to ensure
that the students can complete the task in their own time. However, if they want to
encourage fluency they need to set a time limit.
The second task performance option involves deciding whether to allow the students
access to the input data while they perform a task. In some tasks access to the input
data is built into the design of a task (e.g. in Spot the Difference, Describe and Draw,
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 20
or many information gap tasks). However, in other tasks it is optional. For example, in
a story retelling/recall task the students can be permitted to keep the pictures/ text or
be asked to put them on one side as they narrate the story. This can influence the
complexity of the task, as tasks that are supported by pictures and texts are easier than
tasks that are not. Joe (1998) reports a study that compared learners' acquisition of a
set of target words (which they did not know prior to performing the task) in a
narrative recall task under two conditions - with and without access to the text. She
found that the learners who could see the text used the target words more frequently,
although the difference was evident only in verbatim use of the words not generated
use (i.e. they did not use the target words in original sentences). Joe's study raises an
important question. Does borrowing from the input data assist acquisition? The term
'borrowing' in this context comes from Prabhu (1987).
He defines it as 'taking over an available verbal formulation in order to express some
self-initiated meaning content, instead of generating the formulation from one's own
competence' (p. 60). Prabhu distinguishes borrowing from 'reproduction' where the
decision to 'take over' a sample of a language is not made by the learner but by some
external authority (i.e. the teacher of the text book). Borrowing is compatible with
task-based teaching but reproduction is not. Prabhu sees definite value in borrowing
for maintaining a task-based activity and also probable value in promoting acquisition.
Certainly, from the perspective of sociocultural theory, where learning occurs through
'participation', borrowing can be seen as contributing directly to acquisition.
The third task performance option consists of introducing some surprise element into
the task. Skehan and Foster (1997) illustrate this option. They asked students to
complete a decision-making task that required them to decide what punishment
should be given to four criminals who had committed different crimes. At the
beginning of the task they were given information about each criminal and the crime
he/she had committed. Half way through the task the students were given further
information of a surprising nature about each criminal. For example, the initial
information provided about one of the criminals was as follows:
The accused is a doctor. He gave an overdose (a very high quantity of a painkilling
drug) to an 85-year-old woman because she was dying painfully of cancer. The doctor
says that the woman had asked for an overdose. The woman's family accuse the
doctor of murder. After talking for five minutes, the students were given the following
additional information: Later, it was discovered that seven other old people in the
same hospital had died in a similar way, through overdoses. The doctor refuses to say
if he was involved.
However, this study failed to find that introducing such a surprise had any effect on
the fluency, complexity or accuracy of the learners' language. This does not mean that
this option is of no pedagogic value, as requiring learners to cope with a surprise
serves as an obvious way of extending the time learners spend on a task and thus
increases the amount of talk. It may also help to enhance students' intrinsic interest in
a task.
Process options
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 21
Process options differ from task performance options in that they concern the way in
which the discourse arising from the task is enacted rather than pedagogical decisions
about the way the task is to be handled. Whereas performance options can be selected
in advance of the actual performance of the task, process options must be taken in
flight while the task is being performed.
The teacher's on-line decision about how to conduct the discourse of a task reflect
his/her 'theory-in-use' (Schon 1983) and 'practical knowledge' (Eraut 1994). On the
learners' part, they reflect the language learning beliefs (Horwitz 1987) they bring to
the classroom and, more particularly, to a specific task. How teachers and learners
conduct a task will be influenced, to a large extent, by their prior experiences of
teaching and learning and their personal definitions of the particular teaching-learning
situation. Thus, the options described below are primarily descriptive, reflecting an
internal rather than external perspective (Ellis 1998) on the methodology of task-
based teaching.
A common assumption of task-based teaching is that the texts, the discursive practices
and the social practices of the classroom (Breen 1998) that are constructed by and
through a task resemble those found in non-pedagogic discourse. To achieve this,
however, is no mean feat, especially if the teacher is directly involved in the
performance of the task. As Breen points out, the 'texts' of lessons (i.e. the actual
language produced by the participants) are typically teacher-centred with learners 'not
actually required to do much overt or explicit discursive work' (p. 123), while the
'discursive practices' (i.e. the means by which the text are produced) 'construct
learners as primarily responsive and seemingly fairly passive participants in the
discourse' (p. 124) and the 'social practices' (i.e. the organisational and institutional
circumstances that shape the texts and discursive practices) are directed at the
avoidance of 'social trouble'. Task-based teaching, however, seeks the converse - texts
that are learner-centred, discursive practices that encourage the learner to actively
engage in shaping and controlling the discourse, and social practices that are centred
on allowing and resolving social trouble. This poses a problem, which teachers need
to address.
Two questions arise. The first concerns what the participants in a task need to do to
ensure that the interactions they engage in manifest the processes. Implicit in this
question is an acknowledgement of the importance of these processes for task-based
instruction. The second question, however, challenges this assumption by asking
whether in fact these processes are criterial of task-based pedagogy and whether,
minimally, they need to be complemented by processes from column A.
It has often been pointed out (see, for example, Nunan 1987) that the processes
described in column B are a rarity even in classrooms where the teacher claims to be
teaching communicatively. The main reason for this lies in the difficulty teachers and
students have in achieving the required orientation. As Goffman (1981) has pointed
out, classrooms are governed by an 'educational imperative' which dictates the kind of
discourse that arises. It is for this reason that teachers and students find it difficult to
consistently orient to language as a tool and to adopt the role of language users when
they both know that the raison-d'etre for their being together is to teach and learn the
language. In effect, task-based teaching calls for the classroom participants to forget
where they are and why they are there and to act in the belief that they can learn the
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 22
language indirectly through communicating in it rather than directly through studying
it. This is asking a lot of them, especially if the social practices the participants bring
to the classroom belong to a pedagogy of transmission rather than of interpretation
(Barnes 1976). It is probably easier to achieve when students are interacting among
themselves, without the teacher being present, as the greater symmetry of social roles
this affords leads naturally to the kinds of risk-taking behaviour required of a task-
based pedagogy (Pica 1987). This is one reason why pair and group work are seen as
central to task-based teaching.
However, even when the participants in a task are oriented to treat language as a tool
and to function as language users, the text of the task may disappoint, manifesting few
of the characteristics facilitative of acquisition. Seedhouse (1999) has pointed out that
the characteristics of task-based interaction do not always match those described in
Figure 3. He illustrates how in some tasks the turn-taking system is conspicuously
constrained, there is a tendency for students to rely on topic-comment constructions
where verbal elements are omitted (a feature also noted in pidgins) and to produce
highly indexicalised utterances. An even greater limitation in task-based interaction,
according to Seedhouse, is the minimalization that characterizes some task-based
interactions. This is illustrated in the extract below where the students were required
to complete and label a geometric figure:
L1: What?
L2: Stop.
L3: Dot?
L4: Dot?
L5: Point?
L6: Dot?
LL: Point, point, yeh.
L1: Point?
L5: Small point.
L3: Dot
(From Lynch 1989, p. 124; cited in Seedhouse 1999).
Here all the utterances but one consist of a single word. Clearly, such interactions do
not help the 'stretch' learners' interlanguages, one of the stated goals of task-based
pedagogy (Nunan 1989). Seedhouse suggests that such limited interactions arise
because 'learners appear to be so concentrated on completing the task that linguistic
forms are treated as a vehicle of minor importance' (p. 154). In other words, the very
nature of a task (i.e. the fact it is directed at accomplishing a specified outcome) may
result in a restricted variety of communication.
Seedhouse overstates this limitation of tasks. First, it is possible to argue that the
restricted nature of the talk shown in the extract above is well suited to the students'
purpose. Second, the nature of the interaction depends crucially on the design
characteristics of tasks and procedures for implementing them. Thus, richer varieties
of communication characterized by more complex language use, are achievable if, for
example, students are asked to perform open tasks with divergent goals and are given
the opportunity to plan their performance before hand. Nevertheless, Seedhouse's
critique needs to be addressed. Clearly, teachers need to monitor their students'
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 23
performance of a task carefully, examining to what extent the processes described in
Figure 3 arise and, crucially, whether the interactions manifest the minimalized and
pidgin-like uses of language Seedhouse illustrates. The information obtained from
such monitoring can be used to inform decisions about what tasks and procedures to
use in subsequent tasks. In this way, teachers can build up a fund of experience of the
task characteristics and methods of implementation that will ensure the kinds of
interactions hypothesized to promote acquisition. Thus, the solution, to the problem
Seedhouse identifies lies not in attempting to manipulate process options directly,
which may well be impossible without imperilling the 'taskness' of the task, but
through careful selection from the pre-task options and the performance options
described above.
Where Seedhouse questions whether the kinds of behaviours shown in Figure 3 are
achievable in task-based teaching, others have challenged whether they constitute
appropriate goals for interaction in a classroom. Cullen (1998) has pointed out that the
classroom context constitutes a communicative environment in its own right that is
distinct from the communicative contexts of the world outside and on these grounds
has challenged the basis for assessing the communicativeness of classroom discourse.
In effect, then, Cullen disputes the assumption that underlies task-bask pedagogy -
that classrooms need to replicate the kind of communicative behaviour found outside
the classroom. He illustrates how 'what appears to be non-communicative teacher talk
is not necessarily so in the classroom context' (p. 183) with an extract from an English
lesson in Egypt. This interaction is teacher-led, is full of display questions, includes
feedback that is form-focused and contains a lot of echoing - all processes associated
with a traditional form-focused pedagogy. However, Cullen argues that in the context
of the classroom, the interaction can be considered 'communicative' in that the entire
sequence manifests a focus on message content, the teacher's questions are carefully
structured, the feedback is clear and the use of echoing serves to ensure that the
students' attention is not lost. He claims that the discourse is pedagogically effective
because the teacher has successfully combined the role of 'instructor' and 'interlocutor'.
Arguably, this is what a task-based pedagogy needs to strive for. How might it be
achieved?
One way is by incorporating a focus on form into the performance of the task. Ellis,
Basturkmen and Loewen (2001) report this can be achieved in either responding
focus-on-form episodes, where one of the participants, usually the teacher, responds
to a student utterance containing an error, or in initiating episodes, where either the
teacher or a student elects to take time out from the exchange of message content to
attend briefly to form, usually by means of a direct query about a specific form. Such
attention to form differs from that arising in lessons of the traditional, focus-on-forms
kind because, for, as Wilberg (1987) notes, 'the content is dictated by the student, the
form only by the teacher' (p. 27). It also differs in another way. As Prabhu (1987)
points out, correction during a task is 'incidental' rather than 'systematic' in nature. In
incidental correction, only 'tokens' are addressed (i.e. there is no attempt to generalize
the type of error), it is seen by the participants as 'a part of getting on with the activity
in hand, not as a separate objective' (p. 63) and, crucially, it is transitory. Prabhu
excludes preventive or pre-emptive attention to form but, as Ellis, Basturkmen and
Loewen's study shows this too can be 'incidental'.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 24
Teachers can employ both implicit and explicit techniques to achieve this focus on
form. These techniques can be used when some kind of communication problem
arises (as occurs in the negotiation of meaning) or they can be used when the teacher
chooses to abandon his/her role as a language user momentarily in order to function as
an instructor (i.e. to negotiate form rather than meaning). Teachers can play a very
direct role by initiating this negotiation but they can also intervene to support a
process that students have started for themselves, a technique that involves 'nudging'
the learners towards a solution . Teachers can also allow or even encourage students
to use the same techniques themselves - for example, by accepting and responding to
students' queries about form.
To sum up, it is clear that process options cannot be prescribed. Nevertheless, it is
possible to identify, in broad terms, the kinds of processes that the participants in a
task performance need to strive for. These are:
1. Discourse that is essentially 'conversational' in nature (i.e. as described in column B
of Figure 3). Such discourse can include 'instructional conversations'.
2. Discourse that encourages the explicit formulation of messages.
3. Opportunities for students to take linguistic risks.
4. Occasions where the task participants focus implicitly and/or explicitly on specific
linguistic forms.
5. Shared goals for the task.
6. Effective scaffolding of the participants' efforts to communicate in the L2.
The post-task phase
The post-task phase affords a number of options. These have three major pedagogic
goals; (1) to provide an opportunity for a repeat performance of the task, (2) to
encourage reflection on how the task was performed, and (3) to encourage attention to
form, in particular to those forms that proved problematic to the learners when they
performed the task.
Repeat performance
Several studies (e.g. Bygate 1996 and 2001; Lynch and Maclean 2000) indicate that
when learners repeat a task their production improves in a number of ways (e.g.
complexity increases, propositions are expressed more clearly, and they become more
fluent). A repeat performance can be carried out under the same conditions as the first
performance (i.e. in small groups or individually) or the conditions can be changed.
One interesting possibility examined by Skehan and Foster (1997) is that of requiring
students to carry out the second performance publicly. As their study examined the
'threat' of such a requirement on learners' initial performance of the task, it technically
constituted a during-task option. However, if students are not told to repeat the task
publicly until after they have completed the first performance, it becomes a post-task
option. There has been no research comparing the learner production that results from
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 25
a second performance carried out under 'private' conditions, as in the initial
performance, and publicly. Clearly, performing a task in front of the class increases
the communicative stress (Candlin 1987) placed on the learner and thus can be
predicted to lead to a reduction in fluency and complexity. However, it is not without
value if students need experience in using English in front of an audience, as, for
example, might be the case with foreign academics training to give oral presentations
in the L2. Public performance is likely to encourage the use of a more formal style
and thus may push learners to use the grammaticalised resources associated with this
style.
Reflecting on the task
Willis (1996) recommends asking students to present a report on how they did the
task and on what they decided or discovered. She considers this 'the natural
conclusion of the task cycle' (p. 58). The teacher's role is to act as a chairperson and to
encourage the students. The reports can be oral or written. Willis' examples make it
clear that the reports should primarily focus on summarising the outcome of the task.
However, it would also be possible to ask students to reflect on and evaluate their own
performance of the task. For example, they could be invited to comment on which
aspect of language use (fluency, complexity or accuracy) they gave primacy to and
why, how they dealt with communication problems, both their own and others, and
even what language they learned from the task (i.e. to report what Allwright (1984)
has called 'uptake' [1]). Students could also be invited to consider how they might
improve their performance of the task. Encouraging students to reflect on their
performance in these ways may contribute to the development of the metacognitive
strategies of planning, monitoring and evaluating, which are seen as important for
language learning (O'Malley and Chamot 1990).
There is also a case for asking students to evaluate the task itself. Such information
will help the teacher to decide whether to use similar tasks in the future or look for a
different type. I have suggested that student-based evaluations of tasks can be carried
out quickly and effectively using simple questionnaires (see Ellis 1997a for an
example).
Focussing on forms
Once the task is completed, students can be invited to focus on forms, with no danger
that in so doing they will subvert the 'taskness' of the task. It is for this reason that
some methodologists recommend reserving attention to form to the post-task phase of
the lesson. Willis (1996), for example, sees the primary goal of the 'task component'
as that of developing fluency and promoting the use of communication strategies. The
post-task stage is needed to counter the danger that students will develop fluency at
the expense of accuracy. In part, this is met by asking students to report on their
performance of the task, as discussed above, but it can also be achieved by a direct
focus on forms. It should be noted, however, that this is the not the position taken in
this paper. I have emphasised that a focus on form constitutes a valuable during-task
option and that it is quite compatible with a primary focus on message content, which
is the hallmark of a task. Furthermore, in some tasks (e.g. consciousness raising tasks)
a linguistic feature is made the topic of the task. Attention to form, in one way or
another, can occur in any (or indeed all) of the phases of a task-based lesson. In the
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 26
pre-task and post-task phases the focus will be on forms while in the during-task
phase it will be on form, to invoke Long's (1991) distinction .
Two obvious methodological questions arise regarding attention to form in the post-
task phase. The first concerns which forms should be attended to. The answer is fairly
obvious; teachers should select forms that the students used incorrectly while
performing the task or 'useful' or 'natural' forms (Loshcky and Bley Vroman 1993)
that they failed to use at all. In other words, teachers should seek to address errors or
gaps in the students' L2 knowledge. Consideration also needs to be given to how
many such forms a teacher should seek to address. Should the focus be placed on a
single form that is treated intensively or a number of forms that are treated
extensively? Both approaches are warranted and are reflected in the various options
described below.
The second question concerns how the target forms should be dealt with. There is a
whole range of options available to the teacher. It should be noted however that in
many cases the effectiveness of these options has not been investigated.
1. Review of learner errors
While the students are performing a task in groups, teachers can move from group to
group to listen in and note down some of the conspicuous errors the students make
together with actual examples. In the post-task phase, the teacher can address these
errors with the whole class. A sentence illustrating the error can be written on the
board, students can be invited to correct it, the corrected version is written up, and a
brief explanation provided. Lynch (2001) offers an interesting way of conducting a
post-task analysis, which he calls 'proof-listening'. This involves three cycles based on
repeated playing of a recording of the task. First, the students who did the task review
and edit their own performance. Second, the recording is replayed and other students
are invited to comment, correct or ask questions. Finally, the teacher comments on
any points that have been missed.
2. Consciousness-raising tasks
CR-tasks constitute tasks in their own right and, therefore, can be used as the main
task in a lesson. But they can also be used as follow-up tasks to direct students to
attend explicitly to a specific form that they used incorrectly or failed to use at all in
the main task. Willis and Willis (1996) and Ellis (1997b) offer descriptions of the
various options that are available for the design and implementation of CR tasks.
When used as follow-up tasks, CR tasks can profitably take their data from recordings
of the students' performance of the task. For example, students might be presented
with a number of their own utterances all illustrating the same error and asked to
identify the error, correct the sentences and work out an explanation.
3. Production practice activities
An alternative or addition to CR tasks is to provide more traditional practice of
selected forms. Traditional exercise types include repetition, substitution, gapped
sentences, jumbled sentences, transformation drills, and dialogues. Willis (1996; pp.
110) offers a number of more novel ideas. The value of such production practice
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 27
activities has been called into question (see, for example, VanPatten 1996) on the
grounds that they have no direct effect on learners' interlanguage systems. However,
they may help learners to automatize forms that they have begun to use on their own
accord but have not yet gained full control over.
4. Noticing activities
A number of suggestions have been made for developing noticing activities as a
follow-up to a task performance. Fotos (1994) used dictation exercises that had been
enriched with the target structures that students had tackled initially in CR tasks to
examine whether the subjects in her study subsequently attended to the structures. She
found that they did so quite consistently. Lynch (2001) recommends getting students
to make transcripts of an extract (90-120 seconds) from their task performance as a
method for inducing noticing. After transcribing, they are required to make any
editing changes they wish. The teacher then takes away the word-processed
transcripts and reformulates them. The next day the students are asked to compare
their own edited transcript with the teacher's reformulated version. In a study that
investigated this procedure, Lynch found that students cooperated effectively in
transcribing, made a number of changes (most of which resulted in accurate
corrections of linguistic forms), and engaged in both self- and other-correction. Lynch
also analysed the types of changes the students made, noting that the majority
involved grammatical corrections, 'editing' slips (i.e. removal of redundancies, literal
repetitions and dysfluencies) and 'reformulation' (i.e. changes directed at more precise
expressions). Finally, Lynch comments that there was plenty left for the teacher to do
after the students had made their changes.
Using the framework for designing a lesson
What constitutes the main activity of a lesson is largely a matter of perception and
therefore, to some extent at least, arbitrary. For example, Prabhu (1987) talks of a
'pre-task' and a 'task'. The former is carried out between the teacher and the whole
class. The latter is performed by the students working individually. But, such a
sequence of activities could easily be described in terms of 'task' and 'post-task'.
Indeed, Prabhu's 'pre-task' involves the type of activity that most task-based
methodologists would consider to belong to the during-task phase of a lesson.
Similarly, a sequence of activities consisting of 'task' and 'post-task' where the latter
involves the kind of transcribing activity advocated by Lynch could also be described
in terms of 'pre-task' and 'task', if the transcribing activity is viewed as the main
activity.
However, this caveat does not detract from the usefulness of the design framework
described above as a basis for planning task-based lessons. Teachers need to decide
first on the basic format of the lesson. Minimally, it will consist of the during-task
phase but it can also include either or both of a pre-task and post-task phase. Once the
basic structure of the lesson has been decided, the specific option(s) to be included in
each phase of the lesson can be considered. The description of the process options for
implementing the during-task phase of the lesson also provides a guide for the
navigation of the actual task and for the teacher's ongoing monitoring of the task
performance.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 28
Notes:
1. Allwright's (1984) use of 'uptake' differs from that of researchers who have
investigated corrective sequences in classroom discourse. Allwright uses the term to
refer to what learners are able to explicitly report having learned as a result of
participating in a lesson.
References
Allwright, D. 1984. Why don't learners learn what teachers teach? The interaction
hypothesis. In D. Singleton and D. Little (eds.). Language Learning in Formal and
Informal Contexts (pp. 3-18). Dublin: IRAL.
Aston, G. 1982. Interact. Oxford: Modern English Publications.
Barnes, D. 1976. From Communication to Curriculum. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Breen, M. 1998. Navigating the discourse: On what is learned in the language
classroom. In W. Renandya and G. Jacobs (eds). Learners and Language Learning.
Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Bygate, M. 1996. Effects of task repetition: Appraising the development of second
language learners. In J. Willis and D. Willis (eds). Challenge and Change in Language
Teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.
Bygate, M. 2001. Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral
language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan and M. Swain (eds). (pp. 23-48).
Bygate, M., P. Skehan, and M. Swain. (eds). 2001. Researching Pedagogic Tasks,
Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Harlow: Longman.
Candlin, C. 1987. Towards task-based language learning. In C. Candlin and D.
Murphy (eds.). Language Learning Tasks. Englewood Cliffs N.J.: Prentice Hall
International.
Candlin, C. and D. Murphy. 1987. Language Learning Tasks. Englewood Cliffs N.J.:
Prentice Hall International.
Cullen, R. 1998. Teacher-talk and the classroom context. ELT Journal 52: 179-187.
Dornyei, Z. 2001. Motivational Strategies in the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ellis, R. 1997a. SLA Research and Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Ellis, R. 1997b. Explicit knowledge and second language pedagogy. In L. Van Lier
and D. Corson (eds.). Encyclopedia of Language and Education Vol 6: Knowledge
about Language. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 29
Ellis, R. 1998. Discourse control and the acquisition-rich classroom. In W. Renandya
and G. Jacobs (eds). Learners and Language Learning (pp. 145-171). Singapore:
SEAMEO.
Ellis, R. 2001. Focussing on form: Towards a research agenda. In W. Renandya and N.
Sunga (eds). Language Curriculum and Instruction in Multicultural Societies (pp.
123-144). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Ellis, R., H. Basturkmen and S. Loewen. 2001. Learner uptake in communicative ESL
lessons. Language Learning 51: 281-318.
Eraut, M. 1994. Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. London:
Falmer.
Estaire, S. and J. Zanon. 1994. Planning Classwork: A Task Based Approach. Oxford:
Heinemann.
Foster, P. and P. Skehan. 1996. The influence of planning and task type on second
language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 299-323.
Foster, P. and P. Skehan. 1999. The influence of planning and focus of planning on
task-based performance. Language Teaching Research 3: 215-247.
Fotos, S. 1994. Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use
through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly 28: 323-351.
Goffman, E. 1981. Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Horwtitz, E. 1987. Surveying student beliefs about language learning. In Wenden, A.
and Rubin, J. (eds). Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Joe, A. 1998. What effects do text-based tasks promoting generation have on
incidental vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics 19:357-77.
Lee, J. 2000. Tasks and Communicating in Language Classrooms. Boston: McGraw-
Hill.
Long, M. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology.
In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, and C. Kramsch (eds.). Foreign Language Research in
Cross-Cultural Perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Loscky, L. and R. Bley-Vroman. 1993. Grammar and task-based methodology. In
Crookes, G. and Gass, S. (eds.) Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating Theory
and Practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Lynch, T. 1989.Researching teachers: Behaviour and belief. In C. Brumfit and R.
Micthell (eds). Research in the Language Classroom. London: Modern English
Publications and the British Council.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 30
Lynch, T. 2001. Seeing what they meant: Transcribing as a route to noticing. ELT
Journal 55: 124-32.
Lynch, T. and J. Maclean. 2000. Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recyling
for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research 4: 221- 250
Lynch, T. and J. Maclean. 2001. Effects of immediate task repetition on learners'
performance. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan and M. Swain (eds). (pp. 99-118).
Newton, J. 2001. Options for vocabulary learning through communication tasks. ELT
Journal 55: 30-37.
Numrich, C. 1996. On becoming a language teacher; Insights from diary studies.
TESOL Quarterly 30: 131-153.
Nunan, D. 1987. Communicative language teaching: Making it work. ELT Journal 41:
136-45.
Nunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom.
Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
O'Malley, J. and A. Chamot. 1990. Learning Strategies in Second Language
Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pica, T. 1987. Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom.
Applied Linguistics
Prabhu, N.S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richards, J. 1996. Teachers' maxims in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 30: 281-
296.
Sangarun, J. 2001. The effects of pre-task planning on foreign language performance.
Doctoral thesis, University of Toronto, Canada.
Schon, D. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Seedhouse, P. 1999. Task-based interaction. ELT Journal 53: 149-156. Oxford
University Press.
Skehan, P. 1996a. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction.
Applied Linguistics 17: 38-62.
Skehan, P. 1998a. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Skehan, P. and P. Foster. 1997. Task type and task processing conditions as influences
on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research 1: 185-211
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 31
Wilberg, T. 1987. One-to-One. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Willis, D. and J. Willis. 1996. Consciousness-raising activities in the language
classroom. In J. Willis and D. Willis (ed). A Framework for Task-Based Learning.
Harlow: Longman.
Willis, J. 1996. A Framework for Task-Based Learning. Harlow: Longman.
Willis, J. and D. Willis. (eds.). 1996. Challenge and Change in Language Teaching.
Oxford: Heinemann.
Yuan, F. and Ellis, R. 2002. The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on
fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 32
Article Title
Educational Settings and Second Language Learning
Author
Rod Ellis
University of Auckland
Dr. Ellis is on the Advisory Board of the Asian EFL Journal
Introduction A general distinction can be drawn between ‘natural’ and ‘educational’ settings. The
former arise in the course of the learners’ contact with other speakers of the L2 in a
variety of situations—in the workplace, at home, through the media, at international
conferences, in business meetings, etc. The latter are traditionally found in institutions
such as schools and universities but, increasingly, in computer-mediated
environments. There will be some learners who experience the L2 entirely in natural
settings and others whose only contact with it is in educational settings. Many learners
will experience the L2 in both natural and educational settings. The focus of this
article is educational settings.
In considering the relationship between setting and language learning, it is important
to clarify what is meant by ‘setting’. In this respect, Coupland’s (2001) distinction
between two types of sociolinguistics is helpful. Type 1 sociolinguistics adopts the
perspective of sociolinguistic realism, according to which social life is viewed as ‘a
structured set of social categories which, to some extent, control our social
characteristics and opportunities’ (p. 2). Type 2 sociolinguistics assumes that ‘social
life and our entire experience of society is best seen as structured through local
actions and practices’ (p. 2).
Accordingly, we can view educational settings as both determining how successful
learners are in learning an L2 and/or as constructed by the participants (the teacher
and the learners) through the social actions that they perform in a particular setting. In
the discussion of the different settings that follows both perspectives will be drawn on.
Types of educational settings
Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) distinguished a number of different types of educational
settings, which she divides into ‘non-forms’ (i.e. types that do not use two languages
of the learner as the media of teaching and learning), ‘weak forms’ (i.e. types that
have monolingualism, strong dominance of one language or limited bilingualism as
their aim) and ‘strong forms’ (i.e. types that aim to promote high levels of bi- or
multilingualism and multiliteracy for all participants). Table 1 summarizes the
different types that Skuttnab-Kangas lists under these headings. However, for reasons
of space, I will only consider the main ones in detail.
The language classroom setting
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 33
‘The language classroom’ is defined here as a setting where the target language is
taught as a subject only and is not commonly used as a medium of communication
outside the classroom. In this sense it includes both ‘foreign’ language classrooms
(for example, Japanese classes in the United States or English classes in China) and
‘second’ language classrooms where the learners have no or minimal contact with the
target language outside the language classroom (for example, ‘ESL’ classes in a
francophone area of Canada).
Whereas the second language classroom has been the subject of a number of
sociolinguistic studies (see, for example, Miller, 2004 and Poole, 1992), the foreign
language classroom has been largely neglected by sociolinguists. Rampton (2006)
offered a number of reasons for this neglect. First, in accordance with Type 1
sociolinguistics, the social significance of the target language has been deemed
minimal because its speakers are remote from the learners. Second, sociolinguistic
enquiry has focused on the interface between the home language and the language of
the nation-state (i.e. with language use in majority language settings) and such an
interface does not arise in foreign language classrooms. Third, the overarching
concern with ‘competence’ and with the tacit acquisition of language has led
sociolinguists to view the ‘specialized languages’ of the foreign language classroom
as of no real interest.
However, the distinction between Type 1 and Type 2 sociolinguistics affords a way of
examining the language classroom setting from a social perspective. I will first adopt
a Type 1 perspective by considering the differences between the foreign-language and
second-language classroom in terms of choice of target, the different roles that
teachers and students adopt, and parental support for language learning and the impact
that these factors have on what and how well a learner learns. I will then draw on
Rampton’s (2006) interesting study of how learners of German as a foreign language
in an urban school in London appropriated ‘Deutsch’ for their own purposes as a way
of exploring a Type 2 approach to the language classroom.
Foreign-language classroom contexts can be distinguished from second language
classroom contexts in that native-like cultural and pragmatic competence is not a high
priority in the former (Nayar, 1997). To make it so would constitute a threat to the
learners’ own ethnic identities and also might not be favourably received by native
speakers. Janicki (1985) commented:
It has been noticed that non-natives are likely to face social consequences when their
linguistic behaviour complies with sociolinguistic rules saved (by some norm) for the
natives. Examples are the usage of obscenities, slang expressions, or very formal
pronunciation. It seems that there exists a set of as yet unidentified norms which
proscribe the use of some forms on the part of the non-native speaker.
Preston (1981) suggests that an appropriate model for the L2 learner is that of
‘competent bilingual’ rather than a native-speaker model. This may well be the
implicit model of many learners in foreign-language settings.
The role relationships between teacher and student influence learning in a classroom.
In the case of traditional approaches to language teaching, where the target language
is perceived primarily as an ‘object’ to be mastered by learning about its formal
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 34
properties, the teacher typically acts as a ‘knower/informer’ and the learner as an
‘information seeker’ (Corder, 1977). In the case of innovative approaches (for
example, communicative language teaching) where the emphasis is on the use of the
target language in ‘social behaviour’ a number of different role relationships are
possible, depending on whether the participants are ‘playing at talk’, as in role-play
activities, or have a real-life purpose for communicating, as in information gap
activities; the teacher can be ‘producer’ or ‘referee’ and the learner ‘actor’ or ‘player’.
However, Corder noted that even ‘informal learning’ inside the classroom may differ
from that found in natural settings.1 As noted earlier, classroom learners often fail to
develop much functional language ability, which may reflect the predominance of the
knower/information seeker role set in classrooms.
Parents may play an active role by monitoring their children’s curricular activities.
They may also play a more indirect role by modelling attitudes conducive to
successful language learning. A number of studies have found a positive relationship
between parental encouragement and achievement in L2 classroom learning (for
example, Burstall, 1975; Gardner and Smythe, 1975). Gardner (1985) argues that
parents’ influence on proficiency is mediated through the students’ motivation.
I will turn now to examine a Type 2 approach to examining language classroom
settings. Rampton (2006), drawing on the techniques of interactional sociolinguistics,
documented how foreign language learners of German in a London school used
‘Deutsch’ (i.e. their spontaneous improvizations of German) outside their German
classes—in break time, in corridors, and in other subject lessons. Rampton found that
the boys he studied made much greater use of Deutsch than the girls but put this down
to differences in their interactional dispositions rather than their sex (i.e. the boys used
it to show off).
Rampton suggested that the use of German words and phrases served as a resource for
the ‘voluntary “performance” of exhuberant students intent on embellishing the
curriculum discourse in whatever ways they could’ (p. 163), for making ‘music’ out
of their linguistic resources and for ritual purposes (for example, thanking and
apologizing). Rampton also noted that German did not belong to anyone and therefore
served as a racially-neutral language that was ‘safe’ for linguistically heterogeneous
students. Rampton noted however, that the use of Deutsch was a ‘passing fad’. In an
interview some 18 months after the last classroom recording, the students who had
been shown to use Deutsch said they no longer used it and expressed a dislike of their
German classes. Thus, whereas Rampton’s study sheds light on how students can
appropriate elements of a foreign language to enact their social lives in and out of the
classroom, it also suggests that such use may not contribute much to their actual
proficiency in the foreign language.
Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) noted that foreign language classroom settings are
characterized by very varying degrees of success. In countries where the learners’ L1
does not function as a lingua franca the teachers are well-qualified and the language
curricula are well designed (for example, the Nordic countries and the Netherlands)
high levels of proficiency are often achieved. In such countries, learners may also
have exposure to some exposure to the target language outside the classroom (for
example, through TV). In other countries (for example, the UK, France, Japan, and
the USA) the results are less impressive. Ultimately, success in learning a language in
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 35
a foreign language classroom may depend on to what extent the learners see the
language playing a role in whatever identity they wish to construct for themselves.
Submersion Skuttnab-Kangas (1988) defined a submersion programme as:
a programme where linguistic minority children with a low-status mother tongue are
forced to accept instruction through the medium of a foreign majority language with
high status, in classes where some children are native speakers of the language of the
instruction, where the teacher does not understand the mother tongue of the minority
children, and where the majority language constitutes a threat to their mother
tongue—a subtractive language learning situation. (p. 40)
Submersion is common in Britain and the United States, where ethnic minority
children are educated in mainstream classrooms. Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) also noted
that deaf children also experience submersion education as there are very few schools
in the world teaching deaf children through the medium of sign languages.
The characteristics of submersion settings are discussed by Cohen and Swain (1979)
and Baker (2006). Right from the beginning, L2 learners are taught with native
speakers. This can create communication problems and insecurity in the learners. If
L1 support is provided, it is of the ‘pull-out’ kind, which stigmatizes the L2 child and
also deprives learners of the opportunity to progress in content subjects. The language
teachers are typically monolingual and thus unable to communicate with the learners
in their L1. In some cases, the learners are actively discouraged from speaking in their
L1. The students’ low academic performance may reflect the low expectations that
teachers often have of the students, particularly those from certain ethnic groups (for
example, Mexican American students in the United States). Reading material and
subject-matter instruction in the L1 are not available, resulting in increased insecurity
in the learners. Parental involvement in the school programme is usually limited.
There are often problems with the learner’ social and emotional adjustment to school.
For many learners, the disjunction between L1 use in the home and L2 use at school
constitutes a painful experience, as Rodriguez’ (1982) autobiography illustrates.
Rodriguez was the son of a Mexican immigrant who settled in a mainly white locality
of California. At school he was required to use English exclusively. At home Spanish
was spoken, until his parents accepted the advice of the Catholic nun teachers at his
school to speak English. Gradually, Rodriguez lost the ability to communicate in
Spanish, signalling his rejection of his Spanish-Mexican identity. Although Rodriguez
was ultimately successful in developing a high level of L2 proficiency, this was
achieved at considerable personal and social cost. Rodriguez himself, however, while
acknowledging the discomfort he experienced at both school and home, did not
question the subtractive model of bilingualism to which he was exposed. In contrast,
other learners, do question it and refuse to assimilate (for example, Skuttnab-Kangas
(2000) mentioned two case studies of members of the Sami group in Nordic countries
in Europe who made strenuous efforts to maintain their L1 and develop literacy skills
in it).
Although submersion settings do not invariably result in lack of success in learning an
L2 (as the Rodriguez example demonstrates), in general they do not facilitate it and
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 36
they can lead to L1 attrition. Cummins (1988) identified three characteristics that are
important for L2 acquisition; (1) a bilingual teacher who can understand students
when they speak in their L1, (2) input that has been modified to make it
comprehensible, and (3) effective promotion of L1 literacy skills. Submersion
contexts have none of these. Baker (2006) argued that the basic assumption of
submersion is assimilation, commenting that ‘the school has become a melting pot to
help create common social, political and economic ideals’ (p. 196).
Segregation Segregation occurs where the L2 learner is educated separately from the majority or a
politically powerful minority, who speak the target language as their mother tongue.
As Baker (2006) put it, it ‘forces a monolingual policy on the relative powerless’ (p.
198). Immigrants or migrant workers who are educated in special schools, centres, or
units designed to cater for their language needs constitute an example of segregation
in a majority setting. ‘Bantu education’ in Namibia prior to independence is an
example of segregation in a setting where a powerful minority spoke the official
language (Afrikaans) as a mother tongue.
Skuttnab-Kangas (1988) claimed that segregation settings produce poor results. She
argued that the overall aim of education in these settings is the development of a
limited L2 proficiency—sufficient to meet the needs of the majority or powerful
minority and to ensure their continued political and economic control. Although some
support for L1 development is provided, this is also usually limited. Negative L2-
related factors identified by Skuttnab-Kangas include the poor quality of L2
instruction and the lack of opportunity to practise the L2 in peer-group contexts.
However, the case against segregation is not as clear-cut as Skuttnab-Kangas makes
out. In certain situations, the provision of separate educational facilities may have
beneficial effects. For example, short-term programmes for refugee populations newly
arrived in the United States or European countries can help them adjust socially,
affectively, and linguistically to the demands of their new country. It can also be
argued that the maintenance of minority languages requires at least some segregation.
Magnet (1990), for example, drew on the Canadian experience to argue that a
minority language will only be viable if its speakers enjoy a ‘degree of autonomy and
segregation in order to develop in their own way’ (1990, p. 295). The advantages of
segregation are also recognized by minority communities themselves, as illustrated by
their attempts to set up separate schools for their children. In a later discussion of
segregation, Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) acknowledged that it has ‘a somewhat better
record than submersion’ (p. 592).
Segregation also has some advantages where L2 learning is concerned. In particular,
because the learners are likely to be at the same level of development, it is possible to
tailor input to their level. Where the learners have different L1s, the L2 is likely to
serve as a language of classroom communication and not just as a learning target.
This is likely to broaden the functions that it typically serves. For these reasons,
segregation may facilitate the development of ‘survival skills’ in the L2. However, as
Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) pointed out, it has a number of disadvantages, such as the
failure to develop high levels of bilingualism and, in some contexts, negative societal
consequences. She argued that, in contrast to mother tongue maintenance settings it is
distinctly inferior.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 37
Mother tongue maintenance
Skuttnab-Kangas pointed out that mother tongue maintenance can take two forms. In
the weaker form, pupils are given classes in their mother tongue, directed at
developing formal language skills, including full literacy. In the stronger form, pupils
are educated through the medium of their mother tongue. Examples of the former are
the programmes for Panjabi established in Bradford, UK (Fitzpatrick 1987) and the
Heritage Language Program established in Ontario, Canada (Cummins, 1992). These
programmes were all funded by government or regional agencies. However, there is
often reluctance on the part of such agencies to pay for community language
programmes. Saravanan (1995), for example, reports that it took several years of
lobbying to persuade the Singaporean government to support community run
classrooms in Hindi, Panjabi, Bengali, and Urdu. In the USA, Chinese heritage
community language schools are funded through tuition and private fund-raising
(Wang 1996). Examples of programmes where learners are educated through the
medium of their mother tongue can be found in the Finnish-medium classes for
Finnish migrant workers in Sweden (Skuttnab-Kangas, 1988). Summing up national
policies and practices regarding minority language maintenance in Western countries,
Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) commented: ‘Despite the small recent improvements, it
seems clear that Western countries have so far not respected what should be basic
linguistic human rights, especially in education, and that the world so far does little to
prevent linguistic and cultural genocide’ (p. 563).
Mother tongue maintenance programmes are based on enrichment theory, according
to which high levels of bilingualism are seen as a cognitive and social advantage. This
contrasts with deficit theory, which views bilingualism as a burden and as likely to
result in cognitive disadvantage. The results of research strongly suggest that additive
bilingualism (the goal of mother tongue maintenance) confers linguistic, perceptual,
and intellectual advantages. (See Swain and Cummins, 1979 for a review.)
There is also evidence that mother tongue maintenance settings, particularly those of
the strong kind, result in considerable educational success (Skuttnab-Kangas, 1988).
They are characterized by positive organizational factors (for example, appropriate
cultural content in teaching materials), positive affective factors (for example, low
anxiety, high internal motivation, self-confidence in the learners), success in
developing full control of the L1, metacultural awareness, and a high level of
proficiency in the L2.
Mother tongue maintenance provides support for L2 learning in two main ways. First,
it ensures that the L2 is an additional rather than a replacement language and thus
results in learners developing a positive self-identity. As Spolsky noted, learning an
L2 is intimately tied up with one’s personality and being forced to learn an L2 as a
replacement for the L1 is a ‘direct assault on identity’ (1986, p. 188). Mother tongue
maintenance, then, is more likely to result in the positive attitudes needed for
successful L2 development.
The second way involves a consideration of Cummins’ interdependency principle
(Cummins 1981). This claims that whereas basic interpersonal communication skills
(BICS) develop separately in the L1 and L2, cognitive academic language proficiency
(CALP) is common across languages.2 Cummins noted that whereas L2
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 38
communicative skills are typically mastered by immigrant learners in about two years,
it can take from five to seven years for the same learners to approach grade norms for
L2 academic skills. The interdependency principle has been demonstrated in a number
of studies. Studies of the Portuguese-Canadian community in Toronto (Cummins et
al., 1990), of Japanese immigrant children in Canada (Cummins and Nakajima, 1987),
and of Turkish immigrant children in Holland (Verhoeven, 1991) support the
importance of L1 academic skills as a basis for successful development of L2 CALP.
Swain and Lapkin (1991) also showed that literacy in a community language benefits
the learning of a second L2 (in this case, French) as a result of the transfer of
knowledge and learning processes. The notion of interdependency is an important one
because it suggests that the development of full L1 proficiency confers not only
cognitive and social advantages attendant on mother tongue use but also benefits the
acquisition of L2 proficiency.
Immersion Immersion programmes began with the St. Lambert Experiment (Lambert and Tucker,
1972), a French immersion programme for English-speaking children living in
Quebec, Canada. Similar programmes were then started in other parts of Canada.
Subsequently, immersion programmes sprang up in many different parts of the world,
for example in Hungary (Duff 1997), Finland (Bjorklund, 1997), and Catalonia
(Artigal, 1997).
The term ‘immersion’ has come to refer to a number of different contexts, which need
to be clearly distinguished.
Initially, in the context of the Canadian French immersion programmes, it referred to
programmes where members of a majority group (native speakers of English) were
educated through the medium of French, the language of a minority group. There are
a number of variants of these programmes, depending on whether the programme
begins early (for example, in kindergarten) or late (for example, in Grades 4 or 7), and
whether it is full (more or less all instruction is conducted in the L2) or partial (only
part of the curriculum is taught through the L2). However, as Cummins (1988)
pointed out, the term ‘immersion’ is used to refer to a variety of programmes for
minority students. He distinguishes ‘L2 monolingual immersion programs for
minority students’ which provide English-only instruction directed at classes
consisting entirely of L2 learners; ‘L1 bilingual immersion programs for minority
students’, which begin with L1-medium instruction, introducing L2-medium
instruction some time later; and ‘L2 bilingual immersion programs for minority
students’, which emphasize instruction in and on the L2 but which also promote L1
skills. He also noted that, misleadingly, even submersion programmes have been
referred to as ‘immersion’. Skuttnab-Kangas (2000) took the view that the term
‘immersion’ should be reserved for programmes where learners with a high-status L1
are taught through the medium of a low-status L2.
In an attempt to resolve definitional problems, Johnson and Swain (1997) identify a
number of core features of immersion programmes. These are:
1. The L2 is the medium of instruction.
2. The immersion curriculum parallels the local L2 curriculum.
3. Overt support for the L1 exists.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 39
4. The programme aims for additive bilingualism (a feature that Skuttnab-
Kangas considers pivotal).
5. Exposure to the L2 is largely confined to the classroom.
6. Students enter with similar (and limited) levels of proficiency.
7. The teachers are bilingual.
8. The classroom culture is that of the local L1 community.
Swain and Lapkin (2005) reviewed these features in the light of the dramatic increase
in ethnic diversity in Canada’s urban centres, which make feature (8) problematic.
They also revised their views about restricting the learners’ use of the L1,
acknowledging that ‘judicious use’ may be warranted.
The Canadian French immersion programmes have met with considerable success.
Genesee (1987) and Swain and Lapkin (1982) reviewed the various programmes,
reaching similar conclusions. English-speaking immersion students acquire normal
English language proficiency and show the same or better level of general academic
development. Furthermore, they tend to have less rigid ethnolinguistic stereotypes of
the target-language community, and place greater value on the importance of inter-
ethnic contact. These advantages are evident in ‘disadvantaged’ as well as
‘advantaged’ children.
Evaluation of the different kinds of programmes shows that in general, total
immersion produces better results than partial immersion, and also that early
immersion does better than late. The Canadian French immersion settings also lead to
a high level of L2 French proficiency, particularly with regard to discourse and
strategic competence, where learners achieve near-native-speaker levels (Swain,
1985). However, such levels are not usually reached in grammatical proficiency and,
as Hammerley (1987) pointed out, in some cases a kind of ‘classroom pidgin’ can
develop.3 Also, in comparison to younger immersion students (i.e. second graders),
older immersion learners (i.e. fifth and sixth graders) have been observed to rely more
on their L1 when interacting with each other. Tarone and Swain (1995) suggested that
this is because, whereas change from above occurs in early immersion (i.e. learners
are predominantly influenced by the superordinate style, represented in this case by
L2 French), older learners experience increasing pressure for change from below to
perform important interpersonal functions such as play, competition and positioning
within their peer group and resort to L1 English because they do not have access to a
vernacular style French. Swain and Tarone’s argument is supported by Caldas and
Caron-Caldas’ (2002) study, which reported that two adolescent children in a French
immersion programme in Louisiana resisted using French when speaking outside
class with their peers.
Overall, however, immersion programmes are very successful in promoting L2
acquisition. There are many reasons for this. One undoubtedly has to do with the fact
that immersion settings ensure a plentiful supply of input that has been tailored to the
learners’ level and is therefore comprehensible. There are also social reasons. The
learners’ L1 and their ethnic identity are not threatened, so it is easy for the learners to
adjust to the immersion setting. Furthermore, the immersion programmes are optional
and, therefore, are well-supported by those parents who elect to send their children to
them.
Dual language
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 40
Dual language programmes are often referred to as ‘bilingual minority immersion
programmes’. They are common in the United States, where they have been
controversial. There has been considerable opposition to bilingual programmes for
linguistic minorities, as reflected in the Official English Movement—the attempt to
have English designated as the official language of the United States and to ensure
that educational resources are directed towards teaching English rather than some
other language—see Bingaman 1990.
Cummins (1988) pointed out that the debate has centred on two arguments, both of
which are mistaken. Supporters of minority bilingual programmes have advanced the
‘linguistic-mismatch’ argument, according to which minority children will be retarded
academically if they are required to learn exclusively through the L2. This is mistaken
because the French Canadian immersion programmes have shown conclusively that
early instruction through the medium of the L2 has no negative effects. Critics of
bilingual immersion programmes have also advanced the ‘maximum exposure’
argument, according to which bilingual education is detrimental because it deprives
learners of the exposure to the L2 necessary for successful acquisition. This is refuted
by programmes which show that minority children who spend less time on English
while they are developing L1 literacy skills ultimately do just as well in L2 academic
skills as those who are educated exclusively through the L2. Cummins argued that
minority programmes that are designed in such a way that they reflect the
interdependency principle and the comprehensible input hypothesis have been shown
to be successful. Genesee, however, suggested that the success of minority immersion
programmes also depends on ‘changing the sociocultural fabric of the school’ (1987:
168–9). He noted that ways are needed to upgrade the status and power attached to the
minority language and to teachers and support personnel who speak it as an L1.
Genesee’s comment points to the need to consider social as well as organizational
factors in immersion education.
Conclusion In this article, I have considered the relationship between different educational
settings and L2 learning. The aim has been to identify the potential learning outcomes
associated with different types of settings, defined in very broad terms. It is important
to note that there will be considerable variance in learning outcomes within settings as
well as between settings. Research to date (with the exception of that investigating the
immersion programmes) has focused more or less exclusively on identifying the
actual or potential ‘learning opportunities’ that arise in the different settings rather
than investigating ‘learning outcomes’.
It is possible to identify a set of general principles that underlie likely language
learning success in educational settings. The following is a list of such principles.
1.L1 maintenance—ensuring that learners achieve a high level of both oracy and
literacy in their L1 will promote learning of the L2.
2. Perceptions of L1—learning is enhanced when the setting confers status on both
their L1 and the L2.
3. Social need—learners learn best when they have a clear social need for the L2. This
social need is highly varied, however. (For example, it can derive from the desire for
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 41
power and status, from the use of the L2 as a medium of instruction, from the
importance learners attach to achieving social cohesion, or from the ‘gaming’ that
takes place in peer groups.)
4.Target norms—success in L2 learning cannot always be measured in terms of a set
of norms based on a standard form of the language. Learners may be targeted on a
nativized variety of the language or on a local dialect. There may a conflict between
the norms the students are targeted on and the norms the educational setting promotes.
5. Initial learning—initial L2 learning is more successful if learners have the
opportunity to learn within an L1 speaking group (as opposed to a context where they
are immersed in a group of native speakers).
Notes
1. This discussion of roles focuses on the interactional roles adopted by teachers and
learners in the classroom. Such roles reflect the status of the participants as teachers
and students. They reflect the positions which educational institutions expect them to
adopt. These are socially and culturally determined. This may be why teachers in
some African and Asian countries seem to find it especially difficult to abandon the
traditional role of ‘knower’.
2. Contrary to Cummins’ claim, there is also some evidence that BICS is
interdependent. Verhoeven (1991) showed that children’s ability to produce context-
embedded language in an L2 matches their ability to do so in their L1.
3. Hammerley’s attack on the Canadian French immersion programmes has come in
for considerable criticism. Collier (1992, p. 87), for example, characterizes his 1989
book as an ‘emotional, polemical, one-sided account of his personal views … with
scant research evidence cited to undergird his opinions’.
References Artigal, J. (1997). The Catalan immersion program. In R. Johnson and M. Swain
(Eds.), Immersion Education: International Perspectives (pp. 133-150). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Bingaman, J. (1990). On the English proficiency act. In K. Adams and D. Brinks
(Eds.), Perspectives on official English: The campaign for English as the official
language of the USA. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bjorklund, S. (1997). Immersion in Finland in the 1990s: A state of development and
expansion. In R. Johnson and M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion Education: International
Perspectives (pp. 85-102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burstall, C. (1975). Factors affecting foreign-language learning: a consideration of
some relevant research findings. Language Teaching and Linguistics Abstracts, 8,
105-125.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 42
Caldas, S. and Caron-Caldas, S. (2002). A sociolinguistic analysis of the language
preferences of adolescent bilinguals: Shifting allegiances and developing identities.
Applied Linguistics, 23, 490-514.
Cohen, A. and Swain, M. (1979). Bilingual education: The 'immersion' model in the
North American context. In J. Pride (Ed.), Sociolinguistic aspects of language
learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corder, S. P. (1977). Language teaching and learning: A social encounter. In H.
Brown, C. Yorio, and R. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL '77. Washington D.C.: TESOL.
Coupland, N. (2001). ‘Introduction: Sociolinguistic theory and social theory.’ in N.
Coupland, S. Sarangi and C. Candlin (Eds.), Sociolinguistic and social theory (pp. 1-
26). Harlow: Pearson Education.
Cummins, J. (1981). Bilingualism and minority children. Ontario: Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education.
Cummins, J. (1988). Second language acquisition within bilingual education
programs. In L. Beebe (Ed.), Issues in second language acquisition: multiple
perspectives (pp. 145-166). New York: Newbury House.
Cummins, J. (1992). Heritage language teaching in Canadian schools. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 24, 281-6.
Cummins, J., Harley, B., Swain, M. and Allen, P. (1990). Social and individual
factors in the development of bilingual proficiency. In Harley et al. (Eds.), The
development of second language proficiency (pp. 119-133). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cummins, J. and Nakajima, K. (1987). Age of arrival, length of residence, and
interdependence of literacy skills among Japanese immigrant students. In B. Harley, P.
Allen, J. Cummins and M. Swain (Eds.). The development of bilingual proficiency:
Final report. Volume III: Social context and age. Toronto: Modern Language Centre,
O.I.S.E.
Duff, P. (1997). Immersion in Hungary: An EFL experiment. In R. Johnson and M.
Swain (Eds.), Immersion Education: International Perspectives (pp. 19-43).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fitzpatrick, F. (1987). The open door: The Bradford bilingual project. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of
attitude and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. and Smythe, P. (1975). Second language acquisition: A social
psychological approach. Research Bulletin 332. Department of Psychology,
University of Western Ontario. Cited in Gardner 1985.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 43
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and
bilingual education. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
Hammerley, H. (1987). The immersion approach: Litmus test of second language
acquisition through classroom communication. Modern Language Journal, 71,
395-401.
Janicki, K. (1985). The foreigner's language: A sociolinguistic perspective. Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
Johnson, R. and Swain, M. (Eds.) (1997). Immersion education: International
perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lambert, W. and Tucker, G. (1972). The bilingual education of children: The St.
Lambert experiment. Rowley, MA.: Newbury House.
Magnet, J. (1990). Canadian perspectives on official English. In K. Adams and D.
Brink (Eds.), Perspectives on official English: the campaign for English as the official
language of the USA. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Miller, J. (2004). Identity and language use: The politics of speaking ESL in schools.
In A. Pavlenko and A. Blackledge, I. Piller, and M. Teutsch-Dwyer (Eds.),
Multilingualism, Second Language Learning, and Gender (pp. 290-315). Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Poole, D. (1992). Language socialization in the second language classroom. Language
Learning, 42, 593-616.
Preston, D. (1981). The ethnography of TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 15, 105-16.
Preston, D. (1989). Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Rampton, B. (2006). Language in later modernity: Interaction in an urban school.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Rodriguez, R. (1982). Hunger of memory: The education of Richard Rodriguez.
Boston: David R. Godine.
Saravanan, V. (1995). Linguistic and cultural maintenance through education for
minority groups in Singapore. In M. Tickoo (Ed.), Language and culture in
multilingual societies (pp. 139-151). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Skuttnab-Kangas, T. (1988). Multilingualism and the education of minority children.
In T. Skuttnab-Kangas and J. Cummins (Eds.), Minority education (pp. 9-44)..
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Skuttnab-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education – or worldwide
diversity in human rights? Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 44
Spolsky, B. (1986). Overcoming language barriers to education in a multilingual
world. In B. Spolsky (Ed.), Language and education in multilingual settings.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input
and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass and C. Madden (Eds.),
Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-256) Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Swain, M. and Cummins, J. (1979). Bilingualism, cognitive functioning and education.
Language Teaching and Abstracts, 4-18. Reprinted in V. Kinsella (Ed.), 1982.
Surveys 1: Eight state-of-the-art articles on key areas in language teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (1982). Evaluating bilingual education: A Canadian case
study. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (1991). Heritage language children in an English-French
bilingual program. Canadian Modern Language Review, 47, 635-41.
Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (2005). The evolving socio-political context of immersion
education in Canada: some implications for program development. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 169-186.
Tarone, E. and Swain, M. (1995). A sociolinguistic perspective on second-language
use in immersion classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 79, 166-178.
Tosi, A. (1984). Immigration and bilingual education. Oxford: Pergamon.
Verhoeven, L. (1991). Predicting minority children's bilingual proficiency: child,
family and institutional factors. Language Learning, 41, 205-233.
Wang, X. (Ed.). (1996). A view from within: A case study of Chinese heritage
community language schools in the United States. Washington, DC: National Foreign
Language Center.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 45
Article Title
Effective Reading
Author
Ngan Phan
Introduction Reading is not merely a receptive process of picking up information from the page in
a word-by-word manner (Grabe, 1991). Rather, it is a selective process and
characterized as an active process of comprehending. Therefore, non-English-
speaking readers find it important to employ reading strategies to read English texts
more effectively. According to Grabe, effective reading is rapid, purposeful,
comprehending, flexible and gradually developing. So, reading is a very complex
process, and this is what drives many researchers to attempt to understand and explain
its process.
Reading strategies
According to Oxford and Crookall (1989), strategies can be operationalized as
learning techniques, behaviors, and problem-solving or study skills that enhance
learning more effectively and efficiently. In the light of second language learning,
however, it is crucial to see the difference between strategies that enhance learning
and strategies that improve comprehension. For this study, reading comprehension
strategies are the main focus and are seen as comprehension processes that enable
readers to construct meaning from the printed page most effectively. In other words,
those strategies show how readers tackle a reading task, how they interpret their
reading and what they do when they do not comprehend. Brantmeier summarizes
these strategies as follows:
“The strategies may involve skimming, scanning, guessing, recognizing cognates and
word families, reading for meaning, predicting, activating general knowledge, making
inferences, following references, and separating main ideas from supporting ideas”
(2002, p.1).
Furthermore, the reading strategies can consist of evaluating content, such as agreeing
or disagreeing, making an association with prior knowledge or experience, asking and
answering questions, looking at the key words, using sentence structure analysis such
as determining the subject, verb or object of the sentence, skipping and rereading
(Almasi, 2003; Sugirin, 1999). Clearly, not all strategies are of equal effectiveness
due to the different types of reading texts and tasks, and reading strategy use by each
reader.
A number of studies have been conducted on the use of reading strategies by second
language readers. In a qualitative study, Hosenfeld (1977) examined successful and
unsuccessful readers to find out what types of cognitive operations they used to
process written texts. In an oral interview, the participants were asked to read a text
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 46
and do think-aloud reports, i.e. they were directed to say in their first language
whatever came to their minds while processing each sentence in the text. By doing so,
the researcher could identify relationships between certain types of reading strategies
and successful or unsuccessful second language readers. Specifically, the good
readers tended to maintain the meaning of the text in mind, read in large phrases,
ignore unimportant vocabulary and had a positive self-concept as a reader. However,
inexperienced readers failed to extract the main idea from the sentences, worked in
short phrases, rarely skipped any unimportant words and had a negative self-concept.
Think-aloud procedures were also used by Block (1986) to find the effect of using
strategies on reading comprehension. Block compared the reading comprehension
strategies used by native English speakers and English as a Second Language (ESL)
students who were enrolled in a remedial reading course at the university level, and
she connected these behaviors to comprehension. Having failed a college reading
proficiency test before the study, the subjects were designated as non-proficient
readers. They were asked to read two expository passages and do a think-aloud while
reading (they reported all the thoughts that occurred to them after each sentence).
After finishing reading and retelling each passage, they were instructed to answer
twenty multiple-choice comprehension questions. Results showed that the
participants’ first language background (Chinese, Spanish and/or English) did not
account for the use of particular strategies. The results showed that readers with
higher comprehension scores on the retellings and the multiple-choice questions
integrated new information in the text with old information, extracted main ideas from
details, referred to their background, and focused on textual meanings as a whole that
are all classified as top-down strategies. Readers with low comprehension scores, on
the other hand, seldom did so.
In a later study and using the same protocol, Block (1992) investigated the
comprehension-monitoring process used by proficient and non-proficient ESL readers.
The results indicated that when being confronted with a vocabulary problem,
proficient ESL readers used their background knowledge, decided on whether the
word was the key to the overall meaning of the passage, reread the sentence and
worked out the meaning of the word by using syntactic clues. These strategies are
categorized as top-down behaviors. Meanwhile, less-proficient ESL readers
concentrated on identifying lexical problems and did not make an effort to figure out
the meaning of words and, therefore, failed to recognize the key words from the
reading text.
Sugirin (1999) used a multi-method study to explore the comprehension strategies
of EFL readers. He collected data by using think-aloud protocol analysis, retellings, a
reading comprehension test, in-depth interviews and casual observations. There were
fifteen participants in the study, but only the profiles of the two participants rated as
above-average readers were displayed. The two participants did the think-aloud
activity in their native language, Indonesian. The analysis showed that employing the
think-aloud protocols alone might not have effectively revealed some of the strategies
and phenomena in the study. Others, such as in-depth interviews, were helpful in
discovering strategies. The results indicated that there were noticeable gaps among the
participants in the degree of comprehension and the strategies used. Moreover, the
subjects were found to share characteristics of both poor and good readers. In the
think-aloud activity, they skimmed the whole text at the beginning although they were
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 47
instructed to read it sentence by sentence, which indicates that their strategies follow
top-down processing, considered a characteristic of good readers’ strategies.
Interestingly, the reading text seemed to be easy for one participant whose strategy
pattern included the three elements of inferring, association with prior knowledge, and
evaluation followed by paraphrasing. The other participant focused attention on
questioning the meaning of a word or words before trying to paraphrase the sentence
and making an inference, which is deemed to be bottom-up processing, characteristic
of poor or less proficient readers’ strategies.
Ahmad Asraf (2004) did a research study on the underlying strategies used by second
language learners in responding to English texts. This case study investigated how the
learners made an effort to comprehend the texts by selecting, understanding and
integrating information in the context of eight reading comprehension sub-skills in the
form of comprehension questions, such as word meaning, words in context, literal
comprehension, drawing inferences from single strings, etc. The main goal of this
study was to test the hypothesis: “there is a difference between good and average
readers in their response to the various question types within the framework of the
eight sub-skills” (p. 34). In this study, average readers were selected by their class
teachers, the school supervisors, the head teacher, their language teachers, and their
mid-year language test scores, which were from 50-70 out of a possible 100. In
addition, the monthly test scores for English were counted, and their verbal
communication ability was good. Likewise, the same selection criteria were applied
for good readers whose mid-year language test scores were from 80-100 and oral and
written abilities were very good. The results suggested that the same comprehension
answering strategies were used by the good and average readers. However, the good
readers were more consistently focused on each question type than the average ones;
they articulated their comprehension answering strategies more often on each question
type than the average readers. This, therefore, shows the importance of cognitive
contextual awareness in obtaining reading comprehension.
Metacognitive awareness
Together with cognitive strategies, metacognitive awareness plays an essential part in
achieving comprehension. Metacognitive awareness in reading processes deals with
the knowledge about ourselves as readers, the reading tasks that we confront, and the
reading strategies that we apply so as to solve the tasks (Baker & Brown, (1984) as
cited in Singhal, 2001). Several studies have been carried out to seek the relationship
between metacognitive awareness and reading comprehension. Devine’s (1983) (as
cited in Shinghal, 2001) conducted a study on L2 readers’ conceptualizations of their
L2 reading processes through interviews. The results showed that older and more
proficient readers tended to focus on reading as a meaning-making process rather than
a decoding process. Meanwhile, the younger and less proficient readers appeared to
do the opposite. In addition, conducting a study of L2 reading with 278 French
language students, Barnett (1988) pointed out that proficient ESL readers displayed
more awareness of their use of strategies in reading English than less proficient ESL
readers. Carrell’s (1989) study (as cited in Chern, 1994) also found support for
positive relationships between readers’ metacognitive awareness of strategy use and
their reading capacity in both L1 and L2. More recently, Sheorey and Mokhtari
(2001) (as cited in Mokhtari, K. & Sheorey, R. (2002)) discovered the relation
between students’ reading capacity and strategy use while reading. In both ESL and
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 48
U.S college student groups, high-ability readers showed a higher level of awareness
and strategy use than low-ability ones.
The above research findings on reading strategies indicate that there are, indeed,
differences between proficient readers and non-proficient readers in terms of strategy
use. There is also a strong relationship between reading strategies and proficiency
level. Overall, good readers appear to use a wider range of strategies with higher
frequency than poor readers do. As a result, detecting reading strategies used by
readers when reading plays an essential part in this domain. It is anticipated that the
more reading strategies readers employed while reading, the better the comprehension.
Conclusion Although much literature has been devoted to reading, there is still little known about
the reading process of ESL learners. Block (1986) stated the significance of widening
the knowledge about the process of reading, not just the product of reading, so as to
design reading programs that truly meet the needs of students. Grabe (1991)
emphasized the need to conduct more second language reading research. Furthermore,
with an overview of the research on L2 learners and reading strategies, Singhal (2001)
called for more studies, such as studies of reading strategies and metacognitive factors
in L2 reading, because “many questions about reading comprehension and the reading
process still remain” (p. 8). Similarly, after Brantmeier (2002) carried out her second
language reading strategy research at the secondary and university levels, she stressed
that there remains important research to be done in this area, especially similar studies
to obtain consistent results before generalizing to the whole population. Indeed, past
investigations have focused mainly on the question of comparing effective readers
with less effective readers in terms of reading strategies. What is apparent is that not
many studies have specifically examined which reading strategies are selected and
employed by non-English-speaking students while coping with a reading text in
English. Consequently, discovering reading strategies used by non-English students
when interacting with an English reading text in an academic context is the goal of
this study. Another goal is to deepen the understanding of the process of their
employing reading comprehension strategies.
References Ahmad, I. S. & Asraf, R. M (2004, April). Making sense of text: Strategies used by
good and average readers. Reading Matrix, 26-37. Retrieved March 10th, 2005, from:
http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/asraf_ahmad/article.pdf
Ahmad, I.S. & Asraf, R. M (2004, April). Making sense of text: strategies used by
good and average readers. Reading Matrix, 26-37. Retrieved March 10th, 2005, from:
http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/asraf_ahmad/article.pdf
Almasi, J.F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Benhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language: Theoretical,
empirical, and classroom perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL
Quarterly, 26(2), 319-341.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 49
Brantmeier, C. (2002, September). Second language reading strategies research at the
secondary and university levels: Variations, disparities and generalizability. Reading
Matrix, 1-14. Retrieved March 10th, 2005, from:
http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/brantmeier/article.pdf
Chiou-lan, Chern (1994). Chinese readers’ metacognitive awareness in reading
Chinese and English. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED 386 060, FL 023 225).
Dechant, E. (1991). Understanding and teaching reading: An interactive model.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence
from an empirical study of ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 13, 431-469.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL
Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow:
Pearson Education Longman.
Hosenfeld, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of
successful and unsuccessful second language learners. System, 5, 11-123.
Levine, A & Reves, T. (1998). Data-collecting on reading-writing strategies: a
comparison of instruments: A case study. Retrieved October 9th, 2005, from:
http://writing.berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ/ej11/a1.html
Maria, K. & Hathaway, K. (1993). Using think alouds with teachers to develop
awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Reading, 37(1), 0022-4102.
Nuttal, C. (1982). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann.
Oxford, R. & Crookall, D. (1989). Research on language learning strategies: Methods,
findings, and instructional issues. Modern Language Journal, 73, 404-419.
Rosenberg, V. M. (1989). Reading, writing, thinking: Critical connections. New
York: Random House.
Pica, T. (1994). Questions from the classroom: research perspectives. TESOL
Quarterly, 28, 49-79
Singhal, Meena (2001, April). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive
awareness and L2 readers. Reading Matrix, 1-9. Retrieved March 10th, 2005, from:
http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/singhal/
Sugirin (1999). Exploring the comprehension strategies of EFL readers: A multi-
method study. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED 428 548, FL 025 735).
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 50
Sugirin (1999). Studying the academic reading comprehension process: responding to
methodological concerns. Retrieved October 2nd, 2005, from:
http://www.herdsa.org.au/branches/vic/Cornerstones/pdf/Sugirin.PDF
Swaffar, J.K., Arens, M.K., & Byrnes, H. (1991). Reading for meaning: An
integrated approach to language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 51
Article Title
The Importance of Teaching Pronunciation to Adult Learners
Authors
Tim Thompson & Matt Gaddes
Abstract
If the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) is valid, what can be gained from attempting
to teach pronunciation at the college level? According to Vitanova and Miller (2002),
students were excited about their improvement in segmentals, supra-segmentals, self-
monitoring and self-correction. Improvement is important and attainable even though
native speaker like pronunciation may be impossible after a certain age. So while
younger learners may have the advantage of being able to achieve such pronunciation
proficiency, adult learners are able to use their cognitive abilities to improve through
self-monitoring and self-correction.
Introduction Those of us who teach English as a second language to adults might be tempted to
avoid teaching pronunciation since the Critical Period Hypothesis suggests that adults
won't be able to achieve native-like fluency. This is reinforced by the current language
learning methodology, namely Communicative Language Teaching, failing to know
what to do with the teaching of pronunciation (Krashen and Terrell, 1983, pp. 89-91;
Terrell, 1989, p. 197) What, then, is to be gained by pursuing pronunciation
instruction in our adult classes? The answer is quite a lot.
While adult students may never be able to pass as native-speakers, improving
pronunciation can improve learners' confidence and motivation. Adults stand to
improve their fluency and comprehension levels in both the segmental and supra-
segmental areas of pronunciation as well as learn to self-monitor and self-correct.
After all, one of the major advantages adult students possess is the ability to self
examine how they learn. Hammond (1995) notes that we must also take into account
the importance of handling both sound and meaning in the pursuit of the linguistic
goals of our students (p.294). To do any less is to short -change our learners.
The paper will begin with an overview of the Critical Period Hypothesis. Segmental
and supra-segmental aspects of pronunciation will be discussed and it will be shown
that adults, specifically Koreans, can improve in these areas. Finally, self-monitoring
and self-correction will be examined as tools for adults to improve their pronunciation
skills. Korean language learners will be used as examples.
The Critical Period Hypothesis
The Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) posits that after a certain period of time our
language learning abilities decrease significantly. Scientists say that as we get older
and our brains begin to mature, lateralization occurs as certain functions are assigned
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 52
to either the left or right side of the brain. Children's brains, which have not lateralized
yet, are able to use both hemispheres for language learning. But once lateralization is
complete, research suggests that we rely solely on our left hemisphere for language
skills. Therefore, we have a critical period of time before we lose this ability to use
both hemispheres simultaneously for language learning (Brown 2000).
There is a solid body of evidence supporting the CPH. Jayeon Lim (2003) cites
Johnson & Newport (1991) who connect L2 proficiency with the age of exposure.
Proficiency goes down as the age increases (Lim, p.1). Gina La Porta (2000) cites
Patkosky's (1980) point which "found that learners under the age of fifteen achieved
higher syntactic proficiency than those who were over the age of fifteen at the onset
of exposure" (p.1). The concept of a Language Acquisition Device (LAD) also adds
weight to the Critical Period Hypothesis because if the LAD does exist inside us,
could it not shut off and cause a diminished ability to acquire languages?
Thomas Scovel (1969), cited in Brown (2000), spoke out strongly against the CPH.
He pointed out that adults are superior learners in areas such as literacy, vocabulary
and syntax. Accent was the only advantage that children possessed as language
learners (Brown, 2000). Therefore, we can no longer expect our adult students to
improve to what Guiora, Beit-Hallami, Brannon, Dull and Scovel (1972), cited in
(Brown, 2000), called "authentic" pronunciation (p. 55). Teachers should help
students improve in their weakest areas as well as areas that might hinder them from
being understood.
Belief in the CPH -especially the wholesale kind- can cause an adult language teacher
to lose heart. Why are we bothering to teach a second language to people who have
lost the ability to learn the language well? However, if we take a closer look at the
CPH, we see that it doesn't state that adults can't learn an L2. It doesn't even say that
adults can't improve their pronunciation. What it states is that after lateralization
occurs at a certain age (i.e. puberty) learners' accents are directly effected (Lenneberg,
1967, p.9), and thus their pronunciation. Having said that, the inference is that adults
aren't able to acquire a perfect accent and pronunciation while acquiring a language.
While that may be true, there is still a great deal that they can learn and work towards
in their language acquisition goals.
Segmentals Hansen (1995) notes that segmental techniques, like drilling minimal pairs, have lost
favor in the current pedagogical climes of CLT (p. 289). As often happens older
methodologies and approaches that offer students something worthwhile are discarded
in favor of more ideologically appropriate methodologies.
Yet one area where adult learners can improve rapidly is the pronunciation of
segmentals. Segmentals are the individual sounds that can be broken down in a
language and focused on individually. Hammond (1995) notes that adults learning a
second language are capable of "perceiving and articulating subtle" differences.
However, the inference is that these must be made explicit (p.300). Segmentals don't
need to be taught technically, although a background in phonetics would be useful.
Tricks such as telling students to make a rabbit face to correctly produce an /f/ sound
can help them to remember longer.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 53
Korean students can be taught to identify the differences between the sounds that
aren't present in the Korean Hangul alphabet. Learning to distinguish differences
aurally can help students recognize individual, distinct sounds so they are better able
to focus on producing them. Fraser (1999) points out that there can be a sizeable gap
between "what people think they are saying, a phonetic description of the sounds they
are actually producing, and how someone from a different language background
describes their speech" (p.2). Students may not realize that they sound different from
the teacher or an audio tape. Dalton (1997) suggests that students will convert unclear
input into a similar sound in their own language. Since the Korean alphabet doesn't
have an /f/ sound, Koreans will substitute /p/ or even /hw/. Through the use of
contrastive analysis students can develop a better understanding of the differences
between their L1 and English.
Improvement with segmentals can lead to a feeling of accomplishment and increased
motivation. Vitanova and Miller (2002) cite a student who wrote:
"I changed my wrong consonant sounds likes F, P, B, V and RL sounds into correct
enunciation. I was very happy to hear that my American friends told me, 'Your
pronunciation is getting better'" (Vitanova & Miller, p.2). Conversely, segmental
pronunciation mistakes can also lead to embarrassing misunderstandings such as
asking for a cap but receiving a cup.
Supra-segmentals The supra-segmental aspects of pronunciation can also be improved by adult learners.
Supra-segmentals are comprised of language stress, rhythm, intonation, pitch,
duration and loudness. Students whose first language is syllable timed, like Korean,
will inevitably find mastering a stress timed language, such as English, a very
daunting task (Bell, 1996). By placing more or less stress on certain words the
speaker's context can change completely. Therefore, the differences in supra-
segmentals between Korean students' L1 and English are topics that our students
should not only be aware of but should make a conscious effort to study and focus on.
Fortunately, intonation can be learned as a set of rules similar to grammar
(Wennerstrom, 1999). Cognitive learning, such as this, is generally easier for adult
learners.
In order to help students improve what could be considered the musical aspect of
pronunciation, teachers must start with the basics. Can your students identify the
number of syllables in words? Many students aren't aware that most dictionaries show
syllabic divisions. The ways that words are broken down vary between languages.
The Korean language, for example, requires that a vowel sound be present between
consonants. Therefore, one syllable words such as 'stress' or 'school' become 'suh-tuh-
re-suh' and 'suh-kool'. Students can practice counting syllables with clapping or
underlining drills. Teachers should keep in mind that, as with segmentals, "the
learners actually hear speech very differently than the teachers themselves do" (Fraser,
1999, p. 4). Therefore, what might sound like one syllable to a native speaker might
sound like two or even three syllables to a student and be reproduced incorrectly.
After students have mastered English syllables, teachers should discuss word stress.
Students should be aware that by stressing certain words in a sentence the context will
change. Let's consider a sentence like: He is driving to the beach. By stressing the
word "He" we are ruling out other people. By stressing the word "driving" we are
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 54
ruling out other forms of transportation. By stressing the word "beach" we are ruling
out other locations for him to go to.
Vitanova and Miller (2002) mention a student who achieved positive results by
focusing on suprasegmentals. The student wrote:
Before I took this course, my speech tone was very flat. The most important thing is I
didn't realize it, but now, I know a lot of how to divide thought groups, and where I
should make an emphasis when I read sentences. I really think I made a big progress
on it (p. 3).
Self-Monitoring and Self-Correction
Research has shown (Vitanova & Miller, 2002) that adults can see improvement in
both segmental and supra-segmental areas of pronunciation. However, once students
have mastered the basic sounds of English and identified some of the supra-segmental
differences between their L1 and English, it is time to help them learn some strategies
so that they can study more effectively on their own. The advantage of advanced
cognitive awareness is something that adults possess but children do not. Self-
monitoring is the conscious action of listening to one's own speech in order to find
errors. Self-correction is the process of fixing one's errors after they have occurred by
repeating the word or phrase correctly. By teaching our adult students to self-monitor
and self-correct, we enable them to make their learning more personal and hopefully
more meaningful.
Some strategies for helping students improve self-monitoring and self-correction
include: critical listening, compiling learning portfolios, utilizing CALL resources and
studying in pronunciation-specific classes. Critical listening can be very useful for
enabling students to recognize and correct their own errors (Fraser, 1999). Once
students recognize that a long /i/ sound requires that the mouth be stretched widely,
they can feel the difference when they speak or watch others speak. Watching others
serves to reinforce the forms that they have been taught.
Effective self-monitoring requires that students take control of their learning. Students
can become more autonomous learners by compiling pronunciation portfolios and
keeping records of their progress (Thompson, Taylor & Gray, 2001). Pronunciation
portfolios could contain tongue twisters, diagrams of mouth and tongue positions or
any activity that pertains to pronunciation. Students can also keep learning journals,
which outline their feelings or concerns while improving their pronunciation. This
allows them to go back and think about their mistakes as well as monitor their own
progress.
CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) can also be an important tool when
attempting to help students become more autonomous by allowing them to hear their
own mistakes and see both segmental and supra-segmental graphic representations.
CALL benefits students by letting them study at their own pace in a semi-private
environment as well as allowing them to build profiles which enable teachers to
monitor their improvement (Nari, Cucchiarni & Strik, 2001). Molholt, Lane, Tanner
and Fischer (1988) point out that when students see and hear similar words they are
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 55
more able to differentiate both segmental and supra-segmental aspects of the language
and thus self-correct their own pronunciation difficulties.
Pronunciation classes can also be an effective way for students to improve self-
assessment skills. Rajadurai (2001) writes about Malaysian students who took
pronunciation classes saying, "… students felt that pronunciation classes had helped
make them more conscious of their own pronunciation and aware of ways in which
their pronunciation differed from the model offered (p. 14)."
Helping our students take more control of their learning is an important "next step" in
the learning process. We, however, must remember that students need a solid
understanding of phonetics and phonology before they can be expected to monitor
their own speech or utilize self-evaluation effectively (Vitanova & Miller, 2002).
Research by Jones, Rusmin and Evans, (1994) cited in Jones (1997), showed that by
teaching phonological rules, we can help students become better equipped to listen to
their own speech and catch their own mistakes.
Conclusion Adult ESL and EFL learners may never sound like native speaks. Therefore many
language teachers read to reevaluate their teachers' goals in respect to pronunciation.
Educators must focus on helping students improve their pronunciation and their
ability to monitor and correct their own pronunciation. Robertson (2003) quotes
Morley (1991) in saying that "intelligible pronunciation is an essential component of
communicative competence" (p. 4). Hammond (1995) suggests that this can be done
in a CLT environment, but the best method is to provide explicit classroom
pronunciation instruction.
Language teachers can improve their students' pronunciation markedly drilling
minimal pairs in order to help them improve their intelligibility (Hansen, 1995). By
raising our students' awareness of supra-segmental aspects such as connected speech
and word stress and helping them to become more autonomous learners, we can take
advantage of the positive aspects of teaching adults instead of simply assuming that's
it's too late to improve their pronunciation. We need to change our goals from
expecting our students to speak like native speakers to having them make strides in
different areas of pronunciation and helping them to identify, understand, and
overcome their weaknesses.
References
Bell, M. (1996). Teaching pronunciation and intonation to E.F.L. learners in Korea.
Retrieved on 14 October, 2004, from
http:// www.geocities.com/Athens/ Acropolis/9583/PRONUN.html
Brown, H. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Pearson
Education.
Dalton, D. (1997). Some techniques for teaching pronunciation. The Internet TESOL
Journal, Vol. III, No. 1, January. Retrieved on 14 October, 2004, from
http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Dalton-Pronunciation.html
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 56
Fraser, H. (1999). ESL pronunciation teaching: Could it be more effective?
Australian Language Matters, 7 (4). Retrieved on 14 October, 2004, from http://www-
personal.une.edu.au/~hfraser/docs/HFLanguageMatters.pdf
Hammond, R. M. (1995). Foreign accent and phonetic interference: The application
of linguistic research to the teaching of second language pronunciation. Ed. Eckman,
P. Second Language Acquisition: Theory and Pedagogy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Hansen, D. (1995). A study of the effect of the acculturation model on second
language acquisition. Ed. Eckman, P. Second Language Acquisition: Theory and
Pedagogy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jones, R. (1997). Beyond 'listen and repeat': Pronunciation teaching materials and
theories of second language acquisition. System, 25:1, 103-112. Retrieved
on 28, 14 October, 2004, from
http://personal.cityu.edu.hk/~enrodney/Research/system.html
Krashen, S. & Terrell, T. (1983). The Natural Approach. Hayward, CA. Alemany.
Lenneberg, Eric H. (1967) Biological Foundations of Language. John Wiley and Sons
Inc.
La Porta, G. (2000). A critical look at the critical period hypothesis. Retrieved
on 14 October, 2004, from
http://www.tc.columbia.edu/academic
/tesol/Han/GinaLaporta.htm
Lim, J. (2003). A new look at the critical period hypothesis. The Applied Linguistics
Association of Korea, 10. Retrieved on 14 October, 2004,
from www.alak.or.kr/2_public/2003oct/
document/200310_feature_article.pdf
Molholt, G., Lane, L., Tanner, J. & Fischer, L. (1988). Computer graphics in the
language lab. T H E Journal. Vol. 15 No. 3.
Nari, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2001). Effective feedback on L2 pronunciation
in ARS-based CALL. Paper presented at the workshop of the Computer Assisted
Language Learning, Artificial Intelligence in Education conference, San Antonio, TX.
Rajadurai, J. (2001). An investigation of the effectiveness of teaching pronunciation
to Malaysian TESL students. Forum, Vol 39 No 3, July - September. Retrieved on 14
October, 2004, from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol39/no3/p10.htm
Robertson, P. (2003). Teaching English pronunciation skills to the Asian learner. A
cultural complexity or subsumed piece of cake? Asian EFL Journal, June.
Retrieved on 14 October, 2004, from
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/june2003subpr.php
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 57
Thompson, S., Taylor K., & Gray, H. (2001). Pronunciation with an Eye on Multiple
Intelligences. WATESOL Convention Fall 2001. Retrieved on 14 October, 2004,
from http://www.soundsofenglish.org/Presentations/WATESOL2001/
multipleintelligencesactivities.htm
Terrell, T. (1989). Teaching Spanish pronunciation in a Communicative Approach.
American Spanish Pronunciation - Theoretical and Applied Perspectives, ed.
Bjarkman, P. and Hammond, R. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Vitanova, G. & Miller, A. (2002). Reflective practice in pronunciation learning. The
Internet TESOL Journal, Vol. VIII, No. 1, January. Retrieved 14 October, 2004, from
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Vitanova-Pronunciation.html.
Wennerstrom, A. (1999). Why suprasegmentals? TESOL Matters, Vol. 9, No. 5.
Retrieved on 14 October, 2004, from
http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/sec_document.asp?
TrackID=&SID=1&DID=580&CID=196&VID=2&RTID
=0&CIDQS=&Taxonomy=False&specialSearch=False
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 58
Title
Learning Vocabulary Through Games.
Author
Nguyen Thi Thanh Huyen
Khuat Thi Thu Nga
Vietnamese students usually feel bored in vocabulary lessons because they have not
changed their learning habits, such as writing words on paper, trying to learn by heart
or learning passively through the teacher's explanations. To help students find
language classes, especially vocabulary lessons more interesting, and to achieve more
from games, we conducted action research to find the answer to the question, "Do
games help students learn vocabulary effectively, and if so, how?" Most academic
reviews start from an assumption that games, bundled with other aspects of learning,
e.g., CALL, are beneficial. However we singled out the component of games to study
that in isolation. After reviewing academic opinions on this specifically focused
matter, of which there are relatively few, we began action research which included
applying games in our own classes, observing other teachers' classes, and
interviewing both teachers and learners so as to elicit students' reactions, feelings and
the effectiveness of games in vocabulary learning. The research shows they are
effective in helping students to improve their vocabulary building skills.
1.0 Introduction
Problem In learning a foreign language, vocabulary plays an important role. It is one element
that links the four skills of speaking, listening, reading and writing all together. In
order to communicate well in a foreign language, students should acquire an adequate
number of words and should know how to use them accurately.
Even though students realize the importance of vocabulary when learning language,
most Vietnamese students learn vocabulary passively due to several factors. First,
they consider the teacher's explanation for meaning or definition, pronunciation,
spelling and grammatical functions boring. In this case scenario, language learners
have nothing to do in a vocabulary learning section but to listen to their teacher.
Second, students only think of vocabulary learning as knowing the primary meaning
of new words.
Therefore, they ignore all other functions of the words. Third, students usually only
acquire new vocabulary through new words in their textbooks or when given by
teachers during classroom lessons. For example, learners find many new words in a
text and then ask the teacher to explain the meanings and usage's. Forth, many
Vietnamese learners do not want to take risks in applying what they have learnt.
Students may recognize a word in a written or spoken form and think that they
already "know the word", but they may not be able to use that word properly in
different contexts or pronounce it correctly.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 59
In recent years, communicative language teaching (CLT) has been applied in Vietnam
and from our own experience, it has shown its effectiveness in teaching and learning
language. CLT is an approach that helps students be more active in real life situations
through the means of individual, pair and group work activities. It encourages
students to practice the language they learn in meaningful ways. In a CLT classroom,
playing vocabulary games is one of the activities which requires students to actively
communicate with their classmates, using their own language. Thus the question we
began to examine is, "Do games help students learn vocabulary effectively and if so,
how?"
Literature review
Learners of English have to deal with unfamiliar vocabulary during their language
acquisition. In order to learn and retain new words, learners should participate in
different task-based activities in their classroom whether it is a guessing task, a
describing exercise or conversation making. Such activities also include vocabulary
games which especially focus on helping learners develop and use words in different
contexts by making the lessons enjoyable. Therefore, it is necessary to explore
whether students learn vocabulary effectively through games and how they learn it.
Traditionally, vocabulary has not been a particular subject for students to learn, but
has been taught within lessons of speaking, listening, reading and writing. During the
lesson, students use their own vocabulary and are introduced to new words provided
by the teacher and classmates which they apply to classroom activities. For many
learners of English, whenever they think of vocabulary, they think of learning a list of
new words with meanings in their native language without any real context practice.
A number of learners may share the same experience of looking up words in a
bilingual dictionary to find their meanings or definitions when they encounter new
words. They may even write down lines of new words without any idea of the real use
of them in context. Working this way, after a short period of time, many learners may
find out that learning vocabulary in lists does not satisfy themselves, and they think
the cause for it is just their bad memorization, Gnoinska (1998:12). Research and
publications have shown that this is not a very effective way to study. Decarrico
(2001) states that words should not be learnt separately or by memorization without
understanding. Moreover, "learning new words is a cumulative process, with words
enriched and established as they are met again", Nation (2000, p.6). Therefore, the
"look and remember" way of vocabulary learning seems to be not very effective for
learners of the English language.
Furthermore, some other students may require teachers to give meaning and
grammatical function for words that they are not familiar. Learners just wait for
teachers who control the lesson to provide new forms of words then they write those
words in their notebooks or complete their exercises. They may use words they learn
in the exact formats as the original patterns in which those words appeared. This kind
of rote verbal memorization is good to a certain extent since it helps learners learn and
use the correct form of words. However, according to Decarrico (2001), the
vocabulary used in such context is rather simple because grammatical and phonologic
aspects are emphasized; and as a result, the lexical aspect is neglected. In other words,
learners just know how to use the vocabulary in an exact form, but they do not know
how to use it with different shades of meanings in real life communication.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 60
Unlike the traditional method of learning and teaching, in a communicative language
teaching (CLT) approach, learners are required to take part in a number of meaningful
activities with different tasks. This is to improve learners' communicative competence
by encouraging them to be a part of the lessons themselves. Newton (2001) refers to
this approach as a way that can enable learners to manage their vocabulary meaning
and develop their communicative skills at the same time. Many experts of language
teaching methodology also agree that playing games is a good way to learn
vocabulary, especially in CLT class. With the use of games, the teacher can create
various contexts in which students have to use the language to communicate,
exchange information and express their own opinions (Wright, Betteridge and Buckby,
1984). Huang (1996: 1) comes to a conclusion that "learning through games could
encourage the operation of certain psychological and intellectual factors which could
facilitate communication heightened self-esteem, motivation and spontaneity,
reinforcing learning, improving intonation and building confidence."
Some experts have also figured out characteristics of games that make vocabulary
learning more effectively. Lee (1995:35) lists several main advantages when games
are used in the classroom, including "a welcome break from the usual routine of the
language class", "motivating and challenging" "effort of learning", and "language
practice in the various skills." Ersoz (2000) holds that games are highly appreciated
thanks to their amusement and interest. Teachers can use games to help their students
practice more their skills of communication. In addition, Uberman (1998) also affirms
the helpful role of games in vocabulary teaching after quoting and analyzing different
opinions of experts. From her own teaching experiences, Uberman observed the
enthusiasm of her students in learning through games. She considers games a way to
help students not only enjoy and entertain with the language they learn, but also
practice it incidentally.
In summary, games are useful and effective tools that should be applied in vocabulary
classes. The use of vocabulary is a way to make the lessons more interesting,
enjoyable and effective.
Method To assess the effectiveness of learning vocabulary through games in the classroom,
we want to know how students' experiences help with their learning and what
progress they gain. Specifically, can we apply games as an effective means to make
students feel more comfortable and interested in learning the subject of vocabulary,
which, in Vietnam, is usually believed to be boring rather than enjoyable?
To achieve our goal, we focused on the perception and attitudes of our students as
well as what students gained through their learning with vocabulary games. The plan
involved conducting different kinds of games in our lessons so that we could see how
students reacted to this method of learning vocabulary. We also wanted to find if there
were any problems that occurred during the process of teaching. In addition, in line
with research methodology and principles (Robertson, 2002) it was necessary to
enrich our perspectives by observing some experienced teachers' classes at HUFS,
reviewing other teachers' lesson plans for games and interviewing some teachers and
students as well.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 61
Over a period of two weeks we tried to apply as many games as possible in our
classes at the Distance Education Center (DEC) to learn from learners' reactions
whether they liked games or not and if games could help improve their existing
vocabulary. Another way for us to gather data was to interview our learners at DEC
orally so that we were able to better understand their expectations, problems and
progress in their process of learning vocabulary. In addition, we observed the classes
of CLT teachers at HUFS, and reflected back in our journals. We also conducted a
small post-class survey to elicit student's feelings and their own experiences in
learning vocabulary. A simple questionnaire was designed beforehand to help
students understand clearly the purpose of the survey. Furthermore, experienced
teachers also helped us work out different ways of conducting effective vocabulary
games by their lesson plans, handouts for games and their helpful advice. Further
triangulation involved interviewing a student who had conducted similar research one
year prior.
Results After collecting data by observing CLT teachers' classes, interviewing teachers and
students, and from our reflections of applying games in the classes we are teaching,
we have come to some findings that will be helpful for teaching and learning
vocabulary. The results will be displayed in three subsections, (i) students'
expectations and attitudes, (ii) students' progress and iii) unanticipated problems.
i. Students' expectations and attitudes
When being asked about the way of learning English vocabulary, most students in our
classes at the Distance Education Center said they just copied new words provided by
teachers or looked up words in the dictionary. Many of them marked or underlined
words they did not know in their textbooks and noted the meaning in Vietnamese.
Some students noted the time they had to copy lines and lines of new words in their
notebooks which were forgotten soon. "It was so boring. I hated learning new words
that way!". Sometimes, students asked many questions regarding learning vocabulary
like "Teacher, how can I remember words and their meanings quickly and for a long
time?", "How can I use words properly in different contexts?", "Can you tell me an
easy and simple way to retain the vocabulary that I have learnt?" etc. (Khuat,
Teaching journal, March, 2003). All of the learners expressed their wish to learn
vocabulary effectively in more interesting ways than the traditional ways that they
knew. What we wanted to know was whether vocabulary games worked or not.
Most of the learners (17 out of 20) were willing to join our games in groups and they
tried their best to be the winners. The students especially liked such games as
"Hangman" (guessing words that belong to the topic of jobs), animal squares (words
puzzle) and advertisement poster competition (making an advertisement for a travel
tour). Students collaborated quite actively in games that required group work, even
the quiet students. They said that they liked the relaxed atmosphere, the
competitiveness and the motivation that games brought to the classroom. This is
because students have a chance to "use their imagination and creativity" during
activities like games in the classroom; therefore they are motivated to learn, Domke
(1991).
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 62
However, there were usually one or two students who seemed to isolate themselves
from the activities. When asked to join their classmates, some students were reluctant
to move from their seats to play games with their groups, some others just said they
simply did not like to play the games. Nevertheless, 17 among 20 students expressed
their satisfaction after the games and many of them wanted to play more as they said
those games were fun and they found games helpful for their learning. In general, it
was encouraging for us to know that most of our students showed pleasant feelings
and positive attitudes towards learning vocabulary through games.
Moreover, we observed four lessons which applied games in providing and retaining
students' vocabulary by two CLT teachers at HUFS. In two different classes, we
watched the game-like activity called "Selling and Buying Things (in which 10
students were shopkeepers selling fruits and food to the rest of the class. The
shopkeepers had to sell all food they had and the shoppers had to buy all food they
needed in the shortest time) in two different classes, and we observed the same
students' reaction in both classes. Before the game started, the teachers tried to explain
the game' rules to students and gave some examples. Once students understood the
rules, they quickly rearranged their seats and grouped as instructed. The classes
became as noisy as a real market. Students tried to use as many phrases and words
they had learnt as possible. Thus, through this kind of activity students may be able to
remember their vocabulary better.
We had a second opportunity to observe a class again. This time, the teacher used a
game called "Snakes and Ladders". Students worked in groups of five and everyone
went from the start and tried to reach the finish as soon as possible by answering
correctly to questions which were prepared by the teacher. After observing the game,
we gave a small survey to 20 students with some questions about their feelings toward
the game like; "Do you think this game is useful for you to remember words you have
learnt?" and, "How can your classmates help you learn through the game?”... From
this survey, we learnt that all 20 students agreed that games help them a lot in
vocabulary learning. Among them, 12 students said that said that they could answer
well two-thirds of questions in the game; and only one student could always respond
to all questions.
ii. Students' progress
Although our games were short activities and were applied to create a relaxed,
pleasant learning atmosphere in the classrooms, we wanted games to be more than
just fun. Games should also promote learning and teach students vocabulary as well.
Therefore, it was important to know if our students made any progress in learning
vocabulary through games. However, the action research was conducted in a limited
time of two weeks, and it was hard to assess what our students had achieved because
vocabulary learning is a cumulative process.
However, students in our classes are gradually progressing in English vocabulary and
games help them to learn new words and phrases that appear in the games and to
recall their existing vocabulary at the same time. Generally, teachers can use the first
part of a lesson, warm-up activity, for checking what students remember about the
previous lesson or how many words of the topic they have. For example, a CLT
teacher at HUFS, conducted the game "Simon Says" to examine students' vocabulary
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 63
of parts of body. In the same way, we chose the game "Hangman" with the topic of
jobs to check students' memory of the vocabulary introduced in previous lessons. Our
students got eleven correct answers out of twelve job cards which were passed out.
Many students were really quick at answering and their answers were all accurate;
others could not guess, but they could learn from their friends' answers. Another
example is the advertisement poster game. This is a game to check the students'
understanding of the reading exercise about holiday tours in the U.S.A. and to see if
students can use similar vocabulary and structures to create a short piece of
advertising for an interesting place. Students worked in four groups and all groups in
the class produced quite nice, funny posters with short sentences using vocabulary of
tourism and advertising. The classroom atmosphere was exciting as students
discussed and chose the best poster of the class. In addition, our students revealed that
games were very useful for them to enrich their vocabulary because they could learn
from their classmates.
Regarding the effectiveness of games, interviewed teachers reported that their
students seemed to learn new vocabulary more quickly and retain it better when it was
applied in a relaxed and comfortable environment such as while playing games. In the
same way, Giang, a junior student at HUFS that we interviewed also shared that she
could remember new words more quickly and also for a long time when she learnt
them through games.
Through our post-game survey of one teacher's class, all students confirmed that their
classmates helped them to remember words for the games. 16 out of 20 students said
they could learn lots of new words from their classmates. Also, 18 questioned
students said that games are one of the most effective ways of learning vocabulary.
Most students agreed that their use of vocabulary was becoming better since they
actively joined games.
iii. Unanticipated problems
At first, we hypothesized that if vocabulary learning became more active with
activities like games, students would not face any difficulties. However, journal
reflections from our own experience, observations of other teachers' classes and
interviews reveal that sometimes games create problems for both students and
teachers.
Games cannot be successful if the teacher does not explain the tasks and roles of
students clearly in playing games. An American teacher working at HUFS once told
us that sometimes she failed to make her students understand the games' rules. Her
students felt embarrassed because they did not know how the games went and what
procedures they had to follow. Fortunately, some of her students were able to find out
what they had to do in the games and re-explained to their classmates. Since then, the
games went smoothly.
Using games in the classroom sometimes fails due to the lack of cooperation among
members of the class. Games require all students' involvement and they promote
friendly competition, therefore, it is very important that students have a cooperative
attitude. One attempt to conduct the game "Marvelous Cone Hat" (the Vietnamese
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 64
television version of the American "Wheel of Fortune") in a class at the Distance
Education Center was not successful. "I divided my students into three groups, each
group was a team. While members of two groups were enthusiastic to join with others
to win the game, members of the third group did not cooperate with each other. As a
result, the third group lost the game." (Nguyen, Teaching journal, November, 2002)
Another issue related to using games for language teaching is while playing games,
students usually speak in their mother tongue to discuss instead of the language they
are learning. From our own experience and HUFS teachers' comments, it is hard to
control the use of first language (L1) in classrooms when we use games as a tool to
have students practice more their communicative skills in a foreign language. One
unavoidable thing in utilizing games in English classrooms is that students, especially
those who speak the same language, prefer using their first language to English. Even
advanced students in our classes at the Distance Education Center still discussed with
each other in L1. Note Dash (2002) suggests this approach must be allowed.
Conclusion In Vietnam, learning vocabulary has been considered a boring subject for a long time
and the traditional way of learning vocabulary by mere copying and remembering has
shown to be less than effective. Meanwhile, games are also seen as a time-filling
activity in most English classrooms. It is believed that games are just for fun and they
have very little effect in teaching and learning. However, our research reveals that
games contribute to vocabulary learning if they give students a chance to learn,
practice and to review the English language in a pleasant atmosphere. From the
research, we found that students are demanding a new way of teaching vocabulary,
and they themselves are in search of a new way of learning this subject as well.
Under such circumstances, games have been shown to have advantages and
effectiveness in learning vocabulary in various ways. First, games bring in relaxation
and fun for students, thus help them learn and retain new words more easily. Second,
games usually involve friendly competition and they keep learners interested. These
create the motivation for learners of English to get involved and participate actively in
the learning activities. Third, vocabulary games bring real world context into the
classroom, and enhance students' use of English in a flexible, communicative way.
Therefore, the role of games in teaching and learning vocabulary cannot be denied.
However, in order to achieve the most from vocabulary games, it is essential that
suitable games are chosen. Whenever a game is to be conducted, the number of
students, proficiency level, cultural context, timing, learning topic, and the classroom
settings are factors that should be taken into account.
In conclusion, learning vocabulary through games is one effective and interesting way
that can be applied in any classrooms. The results of this research suggest that games
are used not only for mere fun, but more importantly, for the useful practice and
review of language lessons, thus leading toward the goal of improving learners'
communicative competence.
1. DEC, established by HUFs, is a center of English for learners who can either go to
a class or learn from a distance. Students are admitted to take the DECs course,
beginning at elementary level if they pass the entrance exam.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 65
Article Title
Teaching English Pronunciation Skills to the Asian Learner.
Author
Paul Robertson
Introduction:
For the last two decades academics and publishers have propounded theories on
pronunciation acquisition and on pronunciation training. For the greater part, they
have paid lip service to the critical issue underlying both the aforementioned, namely
the culture behind the target of the pronunciation theory. With a broad sweep, all L2
learners were grouped as though there were no differences that could possibly affect
the learner. Politzer and McGroarty's 1985 survey, fleetingly cited by Ellis (1996:559)
notes the early suggestion that cultural differences are important. Carmichael (2001)
identifies the issues that immediately precede the role of pronunciation teaching,
whilst Robertson (2002a, 2002b) examines the Korean learner's characteristics and the
impact of Confucianism on the Korean learners learning style. Otlowski (1998) leads
the future in Asian pronunciation teaching by arguing for pronunciation programs to
be included in all L2 students training, and further believes there is optimism for
success in the outcomes of such programs.
Yet Dash (2002) researched and analyzed the Korean classroom and found that an
English Only policy was seriously flawed. Thus we have a chasm between what some
believe is the academically ideal way to proceed in any pronunciation program, and
those who consider clearly identifying cultural peculiarities within the target (Asian
learning zone) leads to identification of alternate approaches in delivery of
pronunciation programs in Asia. However, despite propounding the inclusion of
pronunciation programs, (Otlowski, 1998, Kenworthy, 1996) the method of delivery
is thrown into doubt by Dash's (2002) findings. This paper will submit, {i} based
upon the evidence to date, that pronunciation programs in Asia must and can be
delivered successfully by native speakers of English irrespective of their varying
levels of educational background. This view is supported by Kenworthy (1996:69)
whilst Fromkin and Rodman (1998:349) extend the category to those with near native
speech. Secondly, {ii} that the mode of delivery of a pronunciation program must
relate to that particular countries culture so as to complement, and not offend, cultural
complexities.
Otlowski (2001) notes the oft cited view that little relationship exists between
teaching pronunciation in the classroom and attained proficiency in pronunciation,
which was supported by research done by Suter (1976, 233) and Suter & Purcell
(1980, 286). They concluded that pronunciation practice in class had little effect on
the learner's pronunciation skills and moreover, 'that the attainment of accurate
pronunciation in a second language is a matter substantially beyond the control of the
educators,' Suter & Purcell (1980, 286). The findings were subject to the caveat (as
also noted throughout literature in numerous places) that variables of formal training
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 66
and the quality of training in pronunciation could affect the results, especially see
Carmichael, (2001) for analysis of this issue.
This seems, a fiori, obvious, but definitely worthy of further research. However
Pennington (1989, 203) noted that there was no 'firm basis for asserting categorically
that pronunciation is not teachable or that it is not worth spending time on…" (1989,
220) and Pennington and Richards (1986) suggest that there is little or no evidence to
support pronunciation training, but that view must now be seen as out dated, and
lacking credibility in the area of Intercultural L2 training issues. Between these
divergent views, Stern (1992, 112) says, "There is no convincing empirical evidence
which could help us sort out the various positions on the merits of pronunciation
training." Yet one decade later that evidence is slowly being manufactured. (This is
not to ignore the critical age hypothesis ramifications as discussed in Ellis (1996:492)
and Robertson (2001) proposing a 'window of opportunity' theory, but that is for
another paper.)
In highly specific research (compliant with the caveats of Saville-Troike (1989) of
research in another culture, and Robertson (2002a)) conducted in a language
laboratory in Korea in 2003, on 300 students aged 12-14 (Korean age) and 60 adults
aged 24-55, results showed that those in both groups who undertook six hours of
pronunciation training recorded noticeably higher computer analyzed results of
pronunciation than those whose training omitted the pronunciation program.
Instructors were native English speakers, qualified and unqualified in EFL teaching.
However, the software and language laboratory are something not generally available
to the greater majority of educators. But the results supported the view that
pronunciation training does help the student in his L2 mastery, and is an effective tool
in the teacher's repertoire. This supports and advances the view of Pennington (1989.)
Pronunciation Teaching & Presentation.
But, nevertheless, as the above views represent the split in opinion on the teaching of
pronunciation, what can the teacher do to improve their students' pronunciation, that is
if we accept the position that the momentum begun by Otlowski (1998) is clearly
worthy of advancement and we decide on the basis of the evidence before us that
improvement in student's pronunciation can be obtained? The time has come to find
further substantial empirical evidence and assuming that we educators determine that
pronunciation training is effective, for we also know the end users want it, indeed
demand it, as well, "...the teaching of pronunciation is so crucial to our students",
(Goodwin, 2001:117) then how do we teach and present it?
(1) Include it in government school curriculums?
(2) Include it in private school courses?
(3) Train and certify teachers in pronunciation teaching?
(4) Carefully monitor results?
(5) Draft new teaching programs?
(6) Devise a new culturally considerate methodology?
(7) Devise a culturally acceptable approach?
(8) Draft new comprehensive books?
(9) Teach the teachers about the target culture?
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 67
The options, not limited to the above, are numerous and in need of action. Publishing
companies on the whole seem to avoid their responsibility in this area for it is said to
be not a lucrative area to invest in, (Jones & Evans, 1995). According to Jones &
Evans (1995:224) "most materials still have a long way to go in presenting
pronunciation in a truly communicative and holistic manner." Examination of
education department books in Korea and China shows scant attention paid to the
subject, yet whilst graduate teachers note comprehensive L2 pronunciation training at
university level, this does not translate into classroom presentation. However, it is
clear that whilst the questions posed above are easy to formulate, until those persons
whose native tongue is not English and who dictate the terms of curriculum processes,
begin to admit and accept that native English speakers are well qualified to give
opinions about L2 issues in Korea (in this case) then change will be piecemeal, ad hoc
and relatively ineffective.
More recent research (University of Aizu, 1999) suggests that researchers are at least
looking for ways that may help the educator in the quest to teach pronunciation in a
meaningful way. After 7 years of observing Korean English teachers in the classroom,
it is obvious that Korean school teachers are well aware of the student's shortcomings
and pay attention to the problems, but usually long after they occur. Research carried
by Dash (2002) clearly shows that students in governments schools receive almost no
opportunity to speak in the L2 in classes that are still teacher centered. In one month
the student may get to speak for one minute only if lucky. Thus teacher centered
classes are the norm, and whilst this is the wrong approach, it is easy to see why
attention is not given to pronunciation issues so as to minimize the need for
subsequent corrections. Again one merely glances through the poorly and ill-designed
text books to see where the fault lies. However, even if the approach changed and
students were to receive more opportunities to speak, the native Korean speaker is
subject to the overriding silent yet powerful issue of Confucianism (Robertson,
2002b) and may be hesitant/scared to speak in the L2.
Generally speaking, changes in language learning and teaching have influenced a
move from teacher centered to learner-centered classrooms. Chamot (L&R 92) says,
"To develop classroom speaking skills, children need opportunities to participate in
small group discussion, to present oral reports, and to respond adequately to teacher
questioning…" No doubt the first aspect is easily arranged, but clearly the second
element depends upon numerous factors not elicited in the phrase, namely the
student's level of linguistic competency, inter alia.. The third aspect, whilst being an
ideal, is no more for overriding rules of Confucianism dictate that silence is the norm.
And whilst teachers talk of a shift towards student centered learning, this is more in
lip service than practice, for it is not an aspect of classroom management widely
understood.
Morley (1991,48) notes there has a shift from specific linguistic competencies to
broader communicative competencies as goals for teachers and students. In particular,
the Korean education system is focussing much attention on student centered classes,
with classrooms specifically designed for language teaching, whereby students
occasionally work in groups in a well equipped and spacious rooms, sometimes
stocked with reasonable reference materials for student use. However, Korean
teaching staff on the whole are reluctant to speak in English and have little or no
training in the appropriate methods of pronunciation teaching. Action research carries
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 68
out by numerous EPIK (1) instructors clearly shows the Korean teacher not willing to
speak English in his or her L2 lesson. And whilst Morley (1991) states the need for
the integration of pronunciation exercises with oral communication, a shift from
segmental to supra-segmentals, increased emphasis on individual learner needs,
meaningful task based practices, development of new teacher strategies for the
teaching and introduction of peer correction and group interaction, (also Castillo,
1977, 71) , the fundamental issues that underpin this theory have been ignored. In
other words, the cart is well before the horse in Asian English teaching programs.
As well, the 'individual learner needs' must often be ignored when dealing with a large
class size, with 35 - 45 students, though as noted by experienced NNS educators in
Korea, class size should not be a valid reason to avoid individual student attention.
The main factor identified and noted by numerous educators is that classes are 'test
driven' and not not 'learning driven.' This is also noted in Poole's (2003) expose' of the
Japanese education system and Lee's (2001) expose of the Korean education system.
Cohen (1977, 71) argues that teaching of pronunciation goes far beyond the teaching
of phonemes, thus with the emphasis on meaningful communication and Morley's
premise (1991, 488) that, "Intelligible pronunciation is an essential component of
communication competence,…" teachers should ideally include components of
pronunciation in their courses, and according to Otlowski (2001) "…expect students
to do well..." However if we consider the Asian classroom with its Confucian
influence, (Robertson, 2002b ) this 'expectation' should be qualified by first assessing
what inhibitors are at work in the group before such claim can be made. However, it is
undeniable, as Otlowski (2001) notes, that pronunciation training must be included in
the students' learning.
It is also said that that without adequate pronunciation skills the learner's ability to
communicate is severely limited. Morley (1991) believes that not attending to a
student's pronunciation needs, '…is an abrogation of professional responsibility'
(Morley, 1991, 489.) Unfortunately this requirement overlooks a list of criteria such
as, curriculum needs, student's motivation or the countries educational demands, to
mention but a few items of relevance. Other research gives support to Morley's (1991)
belief in the need for 'professional responsibility' when the results show that '…a
threshold level of pronunciation in English such that if a given non-native speaker's
pronunciation falls below this level, he or she will not be able to communicate orally
no matter how good his or her control of English grammar and vocabulary might be.'
This seems logical, however, it can be argued that there are numerous factors at play
if the student fails to communicate, and pronunciation is but one of many possibilities,
and it is submitted, not the only factor.
Good or bad pronunciation: The test?
Of course this makes one thing crystal clear. Bad pronunciation is a communication
that cannot be understood by the listener. What it does not do is add to the definition
of what is 'good or understandable pronunciation,' (Celce- Murcia 1987, 5). For
example, if a student utters a sentence in English which lacks all the 'function words,'
but the 'content words' make it clear what is being said, can we say this is good
pronunciation, or is there some unseen mix of 'understandability level' to be added?
Seemingly the utterance would pass the 'pronunciation threshold test' as being
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 69
understandable, yet fail the fluency and syntactic tests. This then adds up to the
exemplified conclusion that the term 'pronunciation' includes meanings not strictly
limited to the definition supplied. However I do note the arguments associated with
'konglish' (Kim, (2002)) and in an e-mail communication on 12 May 2003, Mr. P.
Dash pointed out that Chinese English 'chinglish,' often not understood by him, is
readily understood between Chinese speakers using English.
Gilbert (1995, 1) believes the skills of listening comprehension and pronunciation are
interdependent.” If they can not hear well, they are cut off from language. If they
cannot be understood easily, they are cut off from conversation with native speakers."
Nooteboom (1983, 183) also has suggested that speech production is affected by
speech perception; the hearer has become an important factor in communicative
discourse and suggests that body language (which varies between cultures) needs to
be taught. Does this not add a new dimension to pronunciation? Should the listener
now be faced with some 'test' to determine if what 'he hears/ sees' is of a satisfactory
level to qualify him as a commentator on the pronunciation, or does the speaker have
the added duty to determine that his utterance was understood as he wished?
This though, illustrates the need to integrate pronunciation with communicative
activities, to give the students situations to 'develop' their pronunciation by listening
and speaking. This begs the question, namely, what does 'develop' mean? The current
research and the current trend reversal in the thinking of pronunciation teaching
shows there is a consensus that a learner's pronunciation in a foreign language needs
to be taught in conjunction with communicative practices for the learner to be able to
communicate effectively with native speakers. Unfortunately, there is a significant
difference in 'the thinking of what makes good pronunciation' and the applying of the
thinking.
Pronunciation and Communicative Teaching.
Morely (1991, 496) submits that students can be expected to do well in the
pronunciation of English if the pronunciation class is taken out of a 'meaningless
isolation' and becomes an 'integral part of the oral communication class.' Of course
that predisposes that 'communication' is part of the curriculum. Further, just what
'communication class' means is open to interpretation. Is it a teacher centered class
where substance is first taught, as in the Czech Republic, then a student centered
approach takes over for the second part of the communication class, or is it totally
student centered with minimal teacher time apart from guidance? Or is it teacher
centered as in Greece, complemented by learner centered when students enter the
native English speaker's communication class?
It is argued by Morely (1991: 500) that the goal of teaching understandable
pronunciation should be changed from the attainment of 'perfect' pronunciation, to the
more realistic goals, but this imprecise term 'perfect pronunciation' is, at best, a
slippery slope, for who can say what perfect pronunciation is? What is the test, and
who are the testers? In a world of numerous different accented native English teachers
with localized dialects, one cannot begin to postulate even an image of 'perfect
pronunciation' without meeting a barrage of questions, most of which will succumb to
a different answer by a different nationality teacher. Kenworthy (1996:3) prefers to
see the terminology reduced to a goal of a 'comfortably intelligible' pronunciation, but
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 70
even this begs many questions when considered alongside a Chinese, Japanese or
Korean speaker. Secondly, Morely's goal can surely only apply to an ESL situation,
and have no relevance to an EFL situation such as exists in Japan, Korea and China
where English usage outside the four walls of the English classroom is non existent.
The teacher also has a specific role to play in the communicative learning program, a
role that Morley describes as one of 'speech coach' or 'pronunciation coach' (Morley,
1991, 507) and supported by Otlowski (1998). Rather than just correcting the learner's
mistakes, the speech coach supplies information, gives models, offers cues,
suggestions and constructive feedback about the performance, sets high standards,
provides a wide variety of practice opportunities, and overall supports and encourages
the learner (Morley, 1991, 507.) It is also submitted that whilst the majority of
teachers in Asia are not teachers in the normal sense of the word, they still have the
local cultural knowledge and skills required to effectively carry out the speech coach
program. Without an understanding of the student's culture, the application of
Morely's premise per se' is meaningless and may even transcend culturally
impermissible boundaries.
The Speech Coach.
Taking Morley's (1991) proposal one step further to reality, what is it that a speech
coach should know and do? Furthermore, who can be the speech coach must be
considered. And what differences must be applied to adult second language teaching
as opposed to adolescent second language teaching? The teacher can be a native
English speaker or can be a qualified teacher of that country. This is the 'ideal world'
scenario. In practice it will not apply but will be tempered with a concoction of good
professional teachers, bad professional teachers, good nonprofessional teachers and
bad nonprofessional teachers in some ratio. Whoever has the task allotted to them
must give attention to their role. Teachers must know their limitations, and not supply
advice when they are no more than giving an uneducated guess. Like a football coach
who has dozens of individual items to take his charges through, the speech coach is
but part of the teacher's overall function.
Rein (1995) reports on a study carried out in Israeli high schools wherein teacher's
perceptions for effective coaching of mixed ability classes were measured. Although
the term 'coach' has wider connotations than just 'speech coach' and includes all
teacher functions, the results showed that the teachers considered the coach's
personality to be the critical factor in the coaching process. Mutual understanding,
trust and respect were the prerequisite to the teachers' acceptance by students. The
teachers were mostly interested in practical guidance and ideas directly applicable to
their specific teaching situation, whilst staff development was also seen as a vital
component to teaching. It is submitted this study emphasizes that greater importance
and more useful training must be given by School boards and School directors to the
teachers and their particular roles if students are to receive the best second language
acquisition.
One consideration the speech coach must give is to error correction. At the outset it
should be decided in consultation with students (if age is sufficient to accept) that
error correction is both a team effort and the coaches overall responsibility. Madden,
Matt, Moore and Zena (1997) surveyed a group of university students to determine an
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 71
opinion about error correction in Pronunciation. Overall, students valued
pronunciation as an important part of their instruction, and wanted more correction
both within and outside the classroom, and demanding more emphasis be placed on
the pronunciation component within the course. (One wonders how a teacher can find
a solution to student error correction outside the classroom?) But those students in
their elementary years will find it hard to accept this principle, let alone understand it,
so the coach will be more dominant in his/her role in the early years.
Of course most teachers encounter a class well after they (the students) have begun
their training, that is they have been trained by one or more second language teachers
in the past. This can cause problems, as style will differ in coaching. The teacher as
coach must be aware then that his/her style and teaching philosophy will probably
differ from the previous coach, thus it must be made clear to the students what his/her
philosophy is and how they as a team can work together to obtain the new coaches
standards. Student centered approaches will lower the inhibiting factors
aforementioned. In particular, pronunciation teaching should be implemented, at least
to some degree, in pairs or groups. Crookes and Chaudron (1991, 46) note, "Contrary
to a popular negative view of the outcomes of learner dominated activities, classroom
centered research has demonstrated that at the same time that students have many
more opportunities to employ the target language, they manage to perform equally
successfully in terms of grammatical accuracy as when the teacher is leading the
discussion." In Japan and Korea, research has shown that some students who actively
communicate in a teacher centered class, will become passive in group work, and vice
versa. This is for the teacher/coach to observe and utilize to the pronunciation
program's benefit.
Whilst Do, (2001) seems to suggest a form of hopelessness in teaching Korean
students, "Although EFL learners in Korea are silent and inactive in terms of English
use, they do nor want to feel like, as they say, ""an imitation, a copy, a stuffed figure,
or a puppet with a talking mouth."" Their sense of being manipulated merely as
objects of teaching has often left them psychologically self-defeating and self-
alienated, which results in their poor self-image as English users...," is rather broad,
vague and unsupported by research, yet does indicate that the teacher/coach must be
acutely culturally sensitive to his students.
The speech coach will be able to do the following:
a) irrespective of curriculum demands, he/she will design and implement a program to
draw students' attention to their pronunciation, both strong and weak points. This
program will complement the curriculum.
b) Practice those areas that are identifiably causing problem.
c) Be aware of the problems that adult students 'may' face if the fundamental concept
of critical age period is accepted.
d) Monitor at the outset the student's L2 speech production and regularly assess their
progress and provide constructive feedback.
e) Feedback. By providing effective feedback the teacher is giving attention to 'one of
the most important aspects in pronunciation instruction…" (Celce-Murcia, 1991,
147.) Of course the underlying question is just what aspects of the student's
pronunciation must the speech coach correct, and more importantly, how to correct it
effectively? It is widely agreed that self-correcting is the most effective form of
learning, but arriving at the 'how' does not present a unified answer, and it does
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 72
depend upon the resources available to the speech coach, ranging from a well
equipped and easy to manage language laboratory, to the more common and widely
used classroom.
f) Consider introducing lessons related to body language in various cultures.
A Suggested Teachers' Guide to Pronunciation Monitoring.
(i) Consider the student's rate of speech. Fast speech may increase the
mispronunciation of syllables and change good English to poor English. This test is
subjective, but the teacher must be aware of the factor. It does no harm to slow the
rate of speech down of all speakers until their word pronunciation becomes clear.
Examples of fast speech pronunciation are too innumerable to cite, but a professional
teacher needs no list to know what spoken words are sounding 'bad' as opposed to
what spoken words are sounding 'very nice.' Educators who hold that speech should
be at a 'native rate' namely reasonably fast, miss the point completely when it comes
to professional speech coach training.
(ii) Asian students need practice with identifiable areas of speech, namely country
specific complex sounds, cluster problems, th' words, and linking words and sounds.
(iii) Students should be exposed to as wide a range of pronunciations as possible. This
must include careful slow speech to normal North American speed speaking.
Supplying a transcript of the words at first is suggested, with later playing putting
more emphasis on the student's word perception. The teacher can design any one of a
number of testing models.
(iv) As the 'listener understanding' plays an important role in pronunciation, strategies
for listening, evaluating, calculating and responding meaningfully become part of the
pronunciation program.
The L2 Educator's Speech Rate.
Learners of English, either juvenile or adult frequently say the hardest thing about
learning English is understanding the native English speaker. The vast majority of
Asian students lament that they cannot understand U.S. English, and have a clear
preference for Canadian English. The rate of U.S. speech is, for them, too fast.
Obviously it is the ultimate goal of proficiency to master the varied speech rates of the
various English speaking countries, but that is at the end of the line, not in the
formative stages. Thus the speech coach, if he/she is to teach pronunciation and to
teach it successfully, will be critically aware of his/her rate of normal speech. A
number of studies have been carried out which suggest that a slower rate of speech
aids comprehension, however, according to Ellis (1996) "… in many cases the speech
rate was investigated alongside other variables, making it difficult to assess the effect
of speech rate per se."
Various speech rate tests, ranging from speeds of 450 words per minute to 196 words
per minute were carried out by Conrad cited in Ellis (1996.) The subjects were native
speakers, high-level non-native speakers and low-level non-native speakers. The test
showed (as for the non-native speakers) that both groups displayed "…considerable
difficulty … even after the fifth reading." Griffiths (1990) tested varying speech rate,
using rates of (a) 94-107 words per minute (b) 143-156 w.p.m. and (c) 191-206 w.p.m.
The test required answers to true and false questions. The results note considerable
difficulty with the fast rate, whilst the medium and slow rate showed no difference in
comprehension.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 73
According to Ellis (1996) "The studies suggest that there may be a threshold level -
around 200 words per minute - below which intermediate and advanced learners
experience little difficulty in comprehending and above which they might." However
it seems various caveats must be placed on such a broad formulation. Despite
Griffiths (1990) testing lower intermediate level English learners, the criteria for who
falls in this group needs clarification. Similarly, the active vocabulary of the subject
needs careful assessment. However, if we accept Ellis's premise (1996) that "…there
is mixed evidence regarding the value of linguistically simplified input for promoting
comprehension…whereas speech rate does have a clear effect, grammatical
modifications do not always result in improved comprehension…" then the following
should be applicable to the teacher in Korea, namely, materials that supply spoken
input should be carefully assessed for speech rate according to both level, age and
advancement of their learner. But it is nigh on impossible to imagine any publisher
will pay so much attention to what is clearly required. Further, the teacher himself
must be aware of his/her speech rate, (easily ascertained) and determine which speed
he/she desires to pursue for that level. It is suggested that the speech rate for Koreans
who (in Korea) are classified as low to medium level language ability learners, would
sit around the 120 words per minute rate. This would ideally be termed "foreigner talk
with explicit teaching function" (Naro, 1983.)
Conclusion.
The TEFL teacher as speech coach or pronunciation coach has a vital role to play. For
the speech coach to be effective he first must have the unfettered support of his
employer (Board of Education) to embark upon the coaching program. The
coach/teacher will then assess his students in relation to multiple criteria (ascertained
by the coach, for each class may need different assessment criteria,) and finally
prepare his/her program followed by the monitoring mode. And like any coach,
monitoring may result in changes back and forth until an 'ideal' is found. The teacher
will then implement a program inside of the cultural complexities to be found in that
country, and should be acutely aware of the boundaries of cultural acceptability, even
if that means a poorer pronunciation is the resultant. Loss of face is of far greater
harm than poor pronunciation is to an Asian speaker of English. Though Douglas-
Brown (1994:187) says language and culture are inextricably intertwined, it is
submitted that view, albeit 9 years old, is subject to critical review, and that well
fashioned research will untie the previously considered complexity.
What is clear from this paper and others, is that the teaching of pronunciation
programs must be included in the students' training, yet that training must be country
specific, and materials and research must now stop focusing on the 'general' and start
considering the 'specific'. I note that Dash (2003) in support of Mangubhai, (2002)
may well have taken the opposite view as to the extent culture plays in SLA. (It
remains to be seen if the two views might be reconciled in so far as pronunciation
teaching goes, to which this paper only addresses.) But as Otlowski (1998) notes,
pronunciation must be seen as "...a crucial part of communication." Yet what is
deemed an ideal pronunciation program for a Korean learner is unlikely to be the
program that should be applied to Japanese learner or Chinese learner. This statement
clearly leads to one conclusion,- that the field of EFL research must intensify and be
country culture specific, and materials that portray to cover the field of EFL/TEFL
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 74
training must be seen as inherently flawed if they suggest a particular program is good
for one and all.
(1) EPIK. English Program in Korea. A Korean government initiative to bring native
English speakers to help train Korean teachers and assist in the Korean L2 classes.
However, surveys show generally few EPIK teachers are qualified to do either role,
yet should be utilized far more effectively in light of the above analysis.
Index.
Ahn. Soo Wong, Park Mae Ran, & Ono S. 1986. A comparative study of the EPIK
and JET program. In English Teaching. Vol. 53 No 3. 241-267.
Castillo, L. 1990. L2 pronunciation pedagogy: Where have we been? Where are we
headed? The Language Teacher, Vol. xiv No' 10. 3-7.
Celce-Murcia, M. 1991. 'Teaching pronunciation' in Celce-Murcia ed, Teaching
English, Heinle & Heinle, p136-153.
Carmichael, S. 2001 (accessed March 2003), 'An Expose of 'What Is An English
Teacher', The Asian EFL Journal, (Online), http://www.asian-efl-
journal.com/arch3.htm
Chamot, A. 1981, 'Applications of second language acquisition', In Methodology in
TESOL, Long & Richards, eds, OUP, Oxf.
Cohen, A. 1977. Redundancy as a tool in listening comprehension, TESOL Quarterly,
16/1 pp. 71-77.
Crookes, G. & Chaudron, C. 'Guidelines for classroom language teaching.' in
Teaching English, M. Celce-Murcia (Ed) , Heinle & Heinle, NY, pp. 46-66.
Dalton, C. & Seidlhofe, B, 1994. Pronunciation. OUP.
Dash, P. 2002 (accessed March 2003), 'English Only in the Classroom. Time For a
Reality Check', The Asian EFL Journal, (Online), http://www.asian-efl-
journal.com/decart2002b.htm
Dash, P. 2003 (accessed April 2003), 'Culture as an Individual Difference in the SLA
Process: Significant, separate and appropriate?' The Asian EFL Journal, (Online),
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/june2003.subpd.htm
Do, Seon Eur. 2001. A Psychoanalytic Approach to Teaching English as a Foreign
Language [1]. Journal for the Psychoanalysis of Culture & Society, v6 i2 p209.
Douglas-Brown, H. 1994. Principles of Language Learning And Teaching. Prentice
Hall, New Jersey.
Ellis, R. 1996, The Study of Second Language Acquisition, OUP. London.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 75
Fromkin, V. & Rodman, R. 199,. An Introduction to Language, Harcourt Brace, Ft.
Worth.
Futatsuya, K. & Chick, J. 1996, Developing and implementing your own
pronunciation assessment program, The Language Teacher, 20 (8), pp.15-20.
Gilbert, J. 1995, Pronunciation practices as an aid to listening comprehension. in, A
Guide for the Teaching of Second Language Learning, D.J.Mendelson and J. Rubin
eds, San Diego. Dominic Press, pp.97-11.
Goodwin, J. 2001, Teaching Pronunciation, in Celce-Murcia ed, Teaching English as
a Second or Foreign Language, 3rd edn,, Heinle & Heinle, p117-138.
Griffiths, R 1990, Speech rate and NSS comprehension. Language Learning 40.
pp.311-336.
Higgins, M, Higgins, M. & Shima, Y. 1995, Basic training in pronunciation and
phonics: A sound approach. The Language Teacher, 19(4), 4-8.
Hite, S. 2000, 'Teaching Pronunciation Online', Training, 2000 v37 i7 p30.
Jones, R.H. & Evans, S. 1995, "Teaching Pronunciation Through Voice Quality",
ELT Journal, 49:3, pp. 244-251
Kenworthy, J. 1996, Teaching English Pronunciation, Longman, London.
Kenworthy, J. 2000, The Pronunciation of English: A Workbook, Arnold London.
Kim, P. 2002, (accessed February 2003) 'Korea. A cross cultural communication
analyzed', The Asian EFL Journal, (Online), http://www.asian-efl-
journal.com/june2002art3.htm
Lee, J. 2002, Korean Higher Education. A Confucian Perspective, Jimoondang
Publishing, Seoul.
Luh, J. 1999, Non-English Speakers Get Help From Plug-in.(Sentius' RichLink
software enhances Web pages to facilitate language comprehension) Internet World,
March 8, v5 i9 p21.
Madden. J, Matt. J. Moore. R & Zena. M. 1997, ESL students opinions about
instruction in Pronunciation. ERIC database, ED416716.
Makarova, V. & Ryan, S. 2000, 'Language teaching attitudes from learners'
perspectives: a cross-cultural approach', Speech Communication Education, Vol 23,
pp.135-165.
Mangubhai F. 1997, "Primary socialization and cultural factors in second language
learning: Wending our way through unchartered territory”, Australian Review of
Applied Linguistics, Series S, pp.23-54.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 76
Milroy, J. 2001, Received Pronunciation: who "receives" it and how long will it be
"received"? Studia Anglica Posnaniensia: International Review of English Studies,
Annual 2001 p15 (18).
Morley. J. 1991, The pronunciation component in teaching English to speakers of
other languages. TESOL Quarterly, 25/1 pp. 51-74.
Morley. J. 1999, New developments in Speech Pronunciation Instruction, As We
Speak, Newsletter of the TESOL. Speech Pronunciation Interest Section 2(1) pp.1-5.
Naro, A. 1983, Comments on simplified input and second language acquisition. In
Anderson ed. 1983
Noteboom, S. 1983, 'Is speech production controlled by speech perception'? In Sound
Structure, van den Broecke et al eds, Dordrecht:Foris, pp183-194
Nunan, D. 1998, Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers,
Prentice Hall, New York
Otlowski, M. 1998, (accessed November 2002), 'Pronunciation: What are the
expectations'? The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 1, January 1998, (Online)
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Otlowski-Pronunciation.html
Pennington, M. 1989, Teaching pronunciation from the top down. RELC Journal,
20/1 pp. 21-38
Pennington, M & Richards, J. 1986,"Pronunciation Revisited," TESOL Quarterly,
20:2 pps. 207-225.
Poole, G. 2003, (accessed January 2003) Assessing Japan's Institutional Entrance
Requirements, The Asian EFL Journal, (Online), http://www.asian-efl-
journal.com/march03.sub5a.htm
Purcell, E. & Suter, R. 1980, Predictors of Pronunciation Accuracy: A
Reexaminatio,Language Learning, 30/2, pp.271-287.
Rein, M. 1995, (accessed November 2002), Teachers perceptions of effective
coaching for mixed class ability. Unpublished Ma dissertation, (Online), Surrey
University. U.K. www.surrey.ac.uk
Robertson, P. 2002a, (accessed March 2003), 'Asian EFL Research Protocols', The
Asian EFL Journal, (Online), http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/decart2002a.htm
Robertson, P. 2002, (accessed February 2003), 'Confucius and Mencius: Their
Influence in Modern Day EFL', The Asian EFL Journal, (Online), http://www.asian-
efl-journal.com/june2002.conf.htm
Saville-Troike, M. 1989, 'The Analysis of Communicative Events', in The
Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction, 2nd edn, Basil Blackwell, Oxford,
pp. 107-180.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 77
Stapp, Y. 199,. Neural Plasticity and the issue of Mimicry tasks in L2 pronunciation
studies. University of Tsukuba. Japan, TESL-EJ, vol. 3 No. 4.
Stern, H. 1992, Issues and Options in Language Teaching, Oxford, Oxford University
Press.
Suter, H. 1976, Predictors of Pronunciation Accuracy in Second language learning,
Language Learning, 26. p.p233-253
University of Aizu, 1999, Using Electronic Visual Feedback to Teach
Suprasegmentals, System 20:1, pp.51-62.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 78
Article Title
The critical age hypothesis. A critique of research methodology.
Author
Paul Robertson
A1. Introduction:
A couple of years ago a rare opportunity in EFL/ESL education annals occurred in
Korea. The English curriculum, which hitherto had begun teaching English in Middle
schools to students at the age of 14 changed to a situation where students in
Elementary schools would begin to learn English. So for one year we had two groups,
namely 8 year olds and 14 year olds beginning to learn English for the first time. This
presented a unique opportunity to survey students whose age coincided with the
critical period hypotheses debate. The schools are all part of the Korean government
education system. The question at the heart of the research was whether young
Korean learners found learning and the speaking of English easier than older students
and adults, and secondly, if teaching English pronunciation to 8 year olds had
educational development merit.
A2. Initial research:
The material the subject of this critique is annexed at page 12, (Abstract) page 14
(Literary review), and pages 23-46, (Survey questions and analysis). This is in the
original form as prepared in 2000 and 2001.
A3. Overview:
Influencing this research is the issue of Confucianism and how it impacts on the
Korean students. J.K. Lee (2002:45-61), arguing for the Confucionist survival notes
that contemporary Korean education policy is influenced by an intricate combination
of factors, dominated by Confucianism. The policy translates to practice and W. Lee
(1996) states "…Asian students are not only diligent, but they also have high
achievement motivation" but these factors may have less to do with Confucianism
than other factors, such as, according to Ko, (2002) being "…educational zealots." W.
Lee's view (1996), finds support from J. Lee (2002:58) who talks in terms of the
"…educational enthusiasm of Korean people…" Ellinger and Beckham, (1997), note,
"South Koreans view education as they view the rest of life: a process of winning and
losing. They have no concept of a game played well for its own sake. The family
emphasis on educational achievement is so strong that it has been dubbed "education
mania.""
Whichever view one subscribes to, Confucianism with its attendant rules of filial
piety, or educational enthusiasm or educational zealots, or a combination of both, it is
clear that the issues, to some degree or other, impact the subject of this research.
It became arguably clear that qualitative research, "...the systematic collection,
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 79
organization, and interpretation of textual material derived from talk or observation"
Malterud (2001:483), was applicable. Against this was the consideration of ethno-
methodology research, described by Cohen, Manion and Morrison, (2001:24) as
"…the mechanisms by which participants achieve and sustain interaction in a social
encounter - the assumptions they make, the conventions they utilize, and the practices
they adopt." The key words in this definition being, 'the conventions they utilize, and
the practices they adopt.'
As culture, Confucianism, and an arguably different attitude on education exist in
Korea, then a survey employing the caveat of Saville-Troike (1989:110), viz, "the
need for an extensive background study of the community is critical, and a variety of
field methods must be employed..." formed the basis of the underpinning research
methodology. It is clear that the research needed close attention to issues of validity,
as opposed to reliability, for the applicability of this to other scenarios is restricted
given the uniqueness and unrepeatability of such a survey. That is not to deny
reliability per se, but that the same set of circumstances will be rare to find again, but
micro situations could be assessed for similar results. Thus only general conclusions
going to reliability can be drawn from this survey research, for it is Korean and
Confucian specific. However, this research, being in a field of intense debate, will be
attacked over issues of validity, hence the attempt to limit the attack and to argue that
any attack must be seen in light of ethnographically considered features the subject of
this fieldwork.
B1. Critique of Abstract.
Whilst the abstract discussed the issues surrounding the critical period hypothesis
debate, and the research at hand, one issue overlooked that may have been addressed
was the differences, if any, between an EFL and ESL country. Kroll (2001) addresses
the differences that result in different style of teachings, as does Matsuda (1998),
however, it seems a deeper consideration of 'culture' and 'EFL' needed elaboration.
B2. Critique of Literature Review.
The question at hand is one that generates much debate, research criticism, and
voluminous journal and book writings. As well, the area is developing in a different
direction as proponents of MRI scans produce new data from their research. The
literature review states all positions from a definite existence to there being no such
thing as a critical period for language learning, to the mid point that that says both yes
and no. However, once the topic was decided upon, namely do Korean students
perceptions align with the proponents of the debate, then it became necessary to
"…become familiar with the information available on the topic..." (Christensen,
2001:109). However, it seems that a simplified review would have sufficed, for the
debate is well known.
B3. Questionnaire. Given that the research question centered on perceptions of English learning, and to
"…provide an answer to the research question…" (Christensen, 1997:64) then
question 6 and question 16, which being general in nature, should have been removed
from the survey.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 80
The questionnaire used closed questions with a proscribed range of answers from
which the respondents could choose. This was decided upon as an open question
requiring writing would have produced high level of stress in students whose L2
written level was low. This could have been altered for the adult teacher respondents,
however, again it was feared the response would be muted, as the teachers may have
perceived the answers as testing their English skills.
As Cohen, Manion and Morison, (201:249) note, "…ambiguity in words is
intractable: at best it can be minimized rather than eliminated." This presented a
critical problem with the survey, namely, the skills of the Korean English teachers in
explaining the questions, and secondly, whether the questionnaire should have been in
Korean or English. At the time, it was decided to use English only, as it immediately
sensitized the students to the questions at hand. Had the survey been done again, I
would have opted to write the question in English, followed by a Korean translation,
with the responses being in English only but orally explained by a bi-lingual teacher.
C. Critique of - Validity and Reliability of the Research
i. Descriptive validity
Descriptive validity refers to accuracy in the reporting of descriptive information.
(Burke-Johnson, 1997:283). It is suggested this definition extends to the explaining of
certain things, in this case, the questionnaire. 5 Korean English teachers and myself
attended at 6 schools and collected the data. Whilst it is clear field investigators need
training, this survey involved the explanation via bi-lingual speakers of the questions
the subject of the questionnaire. It is submitted that each field worker was a form of
corroboration for the others, except in the case of my field work, for my bi-lingual
explanations did not reach the same level as fluent bi-lingual speakers, nevertheless,
corroboration comes from a variety of field methods, (Saville-Troike, 1989:11).
ii) Interpretive validity
Interpretive validity is defined as "…the degree to which the research participants'
viewpoints, thoughts, feelings, intentions, and experiences are accurately understood
by the qualitative researcher." (Burke-Johnson, 1997:284). Only in the case of adult
participants (Korean teachers) was feedback sought. Their views were obtained
pursuant to ethnographical criteria (a long time within the community and using pre-
testing samplings and feedback) (Saville-Troike, 1989), and such that critical cultural
norms would not be breached. Pre testing member checking ensured the questions
posed were non-offensive and did not breach the standards of a Confucionist society.
iii) Theoretical validity
One of the precepts of the survey involved 4 years in-situ in Korea learning and
observing Confucian customs. The questions thus considered issues locale' specific
and were peer reviewed prior to the survey commencement. However, peer review
during data collection may have highlighted issues needing corroboration or
clarification.
iv) Internal validity
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 81
"Internal validity refers to the degree to which a researcher is justified in concluding
that an observed relationship is causal" (Cook and Campbell, 1979). Whilst Burke-
Johnson (1997:288) notes the importance of listing questions that show rival
explanations or rival hypothesis, having identified a causal relationship, Fox
(2000:22) notes the critical importance of asking the right questions to obtain the best
data possible. The relationship has long been shown as the younger the L2 learner, the
greater the L2 output proficiency. Rival causal explanations form the basis of the
debate. In this survey, a variety of external influences were noted and built into the
testing. If the survey were to be repeated then clearly researchers would be needed to
consider a variety of issues that would take time and money to research, arguably
centering upon the effect of Confucianism as an internal or external factor influencing
the causal connection.
v) External validity - reliability
Could the results of this research be applied to other groups? As results confirmed the
literature review that pronunciation programs are best initiated with the young L2
learner, then the results, considering the issues raised in this 'perceptions study' could
definitely be applied, however, as mentioned above, issues of EFL/ESL/Confucianism
need further consideration, which was not done in this survey, however would have
provided greater reliability.
vi) Reflexivity
Biases that go to the validity of the research are "…the characteristics of the
interviewers, the characteristic of the respondent, and the substantive content of the
questions", Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2001:121). Not only do the words of the
questions asked orally become important but also so do the words of written
questionnaires, (discussed above).
Clearly the research required greater transparency about the author's background
(substantiating ethnographic considerations) and greater transparency about the
Korean English teachers who assisted in the research. However, as observation did
not play a part of this research, but was substantially questionnaire based, then issues
pertaining to culture in society needed further elicitation, for it was a contention of
this research that hitherto research had done too little when considering the beliefs
and feelings of the research subjects, as opposed to the research that had simply
looked at differences between a young learner and an old learner. Thus biases about
culture are definitely a possibility and need careful elicitation.
D 1. Other General Issues if the Research Were to be Repeated.
(a) One of the dilemmas associated with the research related to ethical issues. There
were three levels of dilemma. First involved carrying out the research in a government
school. School principles unanimously agreed to the research. The second level of
dilemma was involving the senior Korean English teacher in each school to
participate. All teachers agreed to participate, however the sheer size of the survey
meant that that teacher lost the majority of one lesson.
The final level dilemma was the students themselves. Students were presented with
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 82
the questionnaire as a fait accompli, and were simply asked to complete the questions.
No parental permission was sought. However, anonymity was guaranteed;
"...information provided by the students should in no way reveal their identity",
(Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2001:61). Whilst the students undoubtedly found the
break from the monotonous lesson routine to be enjoyable, and arguably ethnographic
considerations were carefully covered, the sheer amount of questions probably
angered some teachers immediate post survey who assisted in data collection. One
thing not done, that should have been done, was feed back to the teachers who
assisted in the research as to the results, plus a small thank you note.
As opposed to the students who had no information supplied before the questionnaire
was filled in, Korean teacher respondents to the survey were free to undertake or not
undertake the survey, and were fully informed pre-survey as to the reasons and uses
the data would be put to. It was noted that some teachers did not proceed with the
survey.
(b) The amount of questions, whilst raising some interesting issues, were clearly too
many. Despite peer review pre-survey, which suggested about 8 questions should be
asked, a total of 16 were asked. However, according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison
(2001:259), what should have been done was to have broken the question sequencing
down, to give the appearance of simplicity and manageability.
(c) Data analysis.
Data was collected from 6 schools across the metropolitan area. It was assimilated
into one batch and results were aggregated. If the research were to be repeated, I
would change this process so as to (i) analyze individual school results (ii) compare
the schools to each other for consistency or inconsistency (iii) then aggregate the data
to compare an aggregate against the individual school data.
However, it should be noted that this was in a manner similar to the post-survey
survey of 50 students, some 3 months later, with students chosen for one school (not
one of the original) whereby the results were significantly similar to the original
survey.
(d) School selection.
Whereas the schools chosen for the Yates (1999) research survey were split between
metropolitan and rural zones, the schools the subject of my research were all
metropolitan schools based in a city of nearly five million people. The locations of the
schools did represent different socioeconomic zones and were schools that were
classified as A, B, or C class schools. However, the addition of a rural school would
have been a useful comparison.
(e) Statistical comment
After each question percentage data comes an analysis. The views need further in
depth analysis, and more analytical consideration in light of the ethnographic
concerns expressed above.
(f) Statistical analysis
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 83
Whilst data was presented in simple %s, as no appropriate software was available, a
further consideration could present the data somewhat differently, as bar graphs to
highlight similarities and or differences.
E. Conclusion:
The size and expectations of the survey were quite both large yet realistic. The results
were not meant to add to the debate that considers traditional views versus the neuro-
linguistic developments, rather than present data that may assist the debate by
considering ethnographic, psychological and place specific cultural criteria. Indeed,
the results, taken at a humanistic level, did show a different perspective on the critical
period hypothesis from an individual's view. The survey also statistically showed that
the widely held view that pronunciation is one area that should be taught to young L2
learners is arguably correct and with sound basis.
The initial questions asked what could have been differently done had the research
been repeated. Some issues were presented above, each having its own weight of
importance. Given that the uniqueness of the situation that occurred will never happen
in this country again, it waits to be seen if something similar occurs in another ESL
country. Finally, to reinforce the caveat of Saville-Troike, (1989:110), a greater
variety of field methods would have been a tool going to greater survey validity.
Appendix 1.
Abstract: Korean classrooms, until the beginning of the 7th Curriculum, 2002, had traditionally
taught English via rote learning contrary to Confucionist principles that dominate
Korean education. Little or no attempt was made to place the element of English
speaking pronunciation in any perspective. The literature and previous research on
pronunciation programs is conflicting, and depending upon which approach or
methodology the curriculum follows, either ignores it per se, or leaves it to implicit
assumptions about how to teach an acceptable level of pronunciation to Korean school
students.
One thousand six hundred Korean students and one hundred and two Korean teachers
of English were surveyed on their perceptions and beliefs about the English language
and learning good pronunciation in Korean schools, this being an EFL country.
Secondly, a rare global opportunity existed for testing the critical age hypothesis in
that Korean learners' of English started at two different ages. The lower age fell
within the limits of the lower end of the critical age hypothesis (8) and the second
group of new English language learners fell within the upper limits (14) of age for
that hypothesis.
This research suggests that, in the case of the Korean government school classroom
learner, that students' perceptions about learning a good English speaking
pronunciation fall well within the critical age hypothesis debate on the side of the
proponents affirming its existence, yet does suggests that the time frame for learning
good English pronunciation, as opposed to supporting directly the debate, suggests
that a window of opportunity exists within which to compile successful
pronunciations programs for the Korea learner.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 84
The research also suggests that as Korea is an ESL country, a new Approach or
Methodology specifically for an Asian country practicing Confucionist principles is
needed, and that traditional methods and approaches are not applicable for specific
EFL countries with specific cultural differences. English pronunciation programs for
Korean students need specific tailoring, taking into account the window of
opportunity for learning good English pronunciation, and teachers who can teach
English pronunciation.
Appendix 2.
Literature Review: Critical period hypothesis.
The critical period hypotheses propounded by Lenneberg (1967) suggests that primary
language acquisition occurs during a critical period which ends at about the age of
puberty and must occur before cerebral lateralization is complete, and the follow up
implication being that second language acquisition will be relatively fast, successful
and qualitatively similar to first language only if it occurs before the age of puberty.
The classic argument for this proposition is that there is a critical point for second
language acquisition and that this point is around puberty. "… beyond which people
seem relatively incapable of acquiring a native like accent of the second language." (H
Douglas Brown, 1994, 93) This theory has led some people to assume that once past
the age of 12 or 13 you are incapable of successful second language learning. Brown
(1994, 56) goes on to say, "Some adults have been known to acquire an authentic
accent in a second language after the age of puberty, but individuals are few and far
between."
However he fails to explain what is an "authentic accent" in this multi-cultural
English-speaking world. Bickerton (1967) and Lennenberg (1981, 53) argue for the
critical age hypothesis. O'Grady and Dobrovolsky (1996, 464) say in relation to first
language acquisition based on research studies, "It is now widely believed that the
ability to acquire a first language in an effortless and ultimately successful way begins
to decline from age six and is severely compromised by the onset of puberty." They
go on to conclude that the answer to whether there is a critical age period is answered
by both 'yes' and 'no.' (O'Grady & Dobrovolsky, 1996, 491) Their conclusion also
indicates that there is nothing biological that prevents adults from acquiring
proficiency in a second language, whereas H. Douglas Brown (1994) indicates that
research on the critical age theory, shows brain lateralization affects second language
acquisition, thus opposing the view of O'Grady and Dobrovolsky (1996). Scovel
(1988) in his research suggests that "…plasticity of the brain prior to puberty enables
children to acquire not only their first language but also a second language and that
possibly it is the very accomplishment of lateralization that makes it difficult for
people to ever again easily acquire fluent control of a second language…"
Walsh and Diller (1981:18) found that different aspects of language are learnt at
different ages. "Lower order processes such as pronunciation are dependant on early
maturing and less macro neural circuits which make foreign accents difficult to
overcome after childhood…" Thus this research gives support for the critical age
thesis in so far as certain areas of language (pronunciation) come inside its parameters.
However they left open the conclusion that obtaining a fluent foreign accent is not
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 85
possible after puberty. Klein (1995:24) seems to temper the argument by saying,
"…cases of adults acquiring a second language without any accent are very rare. This
alone does not provide sufficient evidence that second language learners are in
principle unable (for biological reasons for example) to attain a native pronunciation."
This supports the Walsh and Diller line of argument. Neufield (1978) suggests that it
is possible for adults to obtain native like levels of language proficiency. Ellis (1996)
makes a broad proposition by saying most L2 learners fail to achieve native speaker
level ability. Later he appears to contradict himself by saying only "…child learners
are capable of acquiring a native accent…" but qualifies this to informal settings.
Singleton (1989) concludes that massive amounts of exposure are necessary for a
child to achieve native like proficiency, yet Ellis (1996) concludes even massive
amounts of exposure still results in children failing to achieve a good level of
proficiency. The reason, he concludes, is their desire to maintain an active use of their
mother tongue. However this seems to overlook the issues of inhibitors.
According to Seliger (1978) there may be both 'critical periods' and 'sensitive periods'
for language acquisition. Generally the view favored is that pronunciation and native
like proficiency precedes the period for grammar acquisition. But according to
Thompson (1991) starting early is not a guarantee of achieving native like proficiency,
no matter how favorable the teaching system is. McLaughlan (1992) argues that the
younger the learner the more skilled he becomes in that language is a myth and
disputes the findings of Krashen, Long & Scarcella, (1992), yet concedes that,
"Pronunciation is one aspect of language learning where the younger is better
hypothesis may have validity;" Asher & Garcia (1969) concluded that the younger the
learner the more native like accent that student develops. McLaughlan (1992)
suggests (following the line of Scovel 1982) this is because "…pronunciation involves
motor patterns that have been fossilized in the first language and are difficult to alter
after a certain age because of the nature of the neurophysiological mechanisms
involved."
To further his theory over the uncertainty of the whole debate, he suggests that it may
be that educators simply do not know how to teach phonology in a second language,
impliedly suggesting that teachers of a second language need further and updated
specific skills. This 'radical' proposition may in fact be closer to the 'ugly' truth that
would see the critical period debate thrown out wholus bolus on the basis that the true
answer lays in the professionalism of the educators and nothing more! Should this
theory gain hold, the EFL profession would see a radical change in its criteria for
teaching methodologies and teacher credentials.
What McLaughlan (1992) also suggests is that because children have to learn shorter
and simpler structures in their early acquisition days, there is an 'illusion' that children
learn a second language more easily and quickly than adults, yet testings have shown
the exact opposite to be the case.
Studies of age differences in the acquisition of second language pronunciation have
produced conflicting results. Snow and Hoefnagel-Hohle (1977) found better
pronunciation in older students, whereas Fatham (1975) found a negative effect
occurred with age. Seliger however makes reference to scattered cases of adult
learners acquiring accent less pronunciation in their second language, and conversely
some children who had maintained foreign accents. Professor Stapp of the University
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 86
of Tsukuba, Japan provides further valuable insight with research of 28 monolingual
Japanese students repeating lists containing the letters /r/ and /l./
Her research noted, "The ability of young children to achieve native like proficiency
in a foreign language in a rather short time is a reflection of a type of neural plasticity,
and it appears to be related to the distinct characteristics of the young brain."
Her research sets out to establish whether young learners are better at 'mimicry' than
the adult learner based on neural plasticity properties. Early studies by Tahta, Wood
and Lowenthal (1981) suggested that superior performance of children's mimicry was
due to neural plasticity that "…promotes native like L2 pronunciation in early
acquisition." Long (1990: 266) supported this line of argument, viz; "The sharp drop
in imitation abilities …after age 6 can be accounted for by positing that maturation
constraints begin to set in as early as 6 for supra-segmental phonology in some
learners and soon after that for segmental phonology…Phonological attainment is
strongly conditioned by learner age."
But as Stapp notes; "An assumed relationship between neural plasticity and the ability
to mimic raises two important problems. First, not all young children are good
mimics: but statistically, young children do outperform older children and adults in
L2 production over the long run. Second, some adolescents and adults are good
mimics. However, since the type of neural plasticity that accounts for superior L2
pronunciation in early childhood actually declines with age, it is unlikely that such
plasticity is responsible for the outstanding mimicry skill exhibited by relatively few
mature individuals."
Medical research has shown that first language, including simultaneous bilingualism,
is densely represented in the language areas of the left-brain hemisphere, a second
language acquired later is typically more distributed in the brain. (Ojeman and
Whitaker 1978) Further investigations by Kim, Relkin, Lee and Hirsch (1997)
confirm that second languages acquired in very early childhood are spatially close to
first language in the frontal lobe, while languages acquired later are well separated in
this region. This research is still in its infancy as to definitive conclusions.
Flege (1987) rejects the notion of critical periods, and argues that neural plasticity
affecting second language acquisition is not subject to time constraints, but full L2
acquisition is possible at any time. Jacobs (1988) furthers this line of argument with
more persuasive arguments.
Neufeld (1978:1979) agrees. His research demonstrated the permanence of neural
plasticity, thus eliminating the critical age. He says that a 'sensitive period' is a false
notion. Klein (1986:10) takes the issue into the social sphere; "The biological
explanation for difficulty in L2 acquisition after puberty can be replaced or
supplemented, by arguments of a social nature. …ideal second language acquisition is
biologically feasible even after the age of puberty." This is furthered by Lowenthal
and Bull (1984) who suggest that language proficiency is boosted significantly by an
encouraging environment.
Stapp concludes her research by noting that mimicry skills appear to be a distinct
talent distributed across the age population, thus eliminating the connection to neural
plasticity. Her corollary states that; "If mimicry skill is not related to neural plasticity
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 87
in children, it is probably not possible to invoke neural plasticity as a basis for
superior performance by adolescents and or adults.
However, "the evidence clearly indicates that the typical child has the advantage over
the typical older learner in the ultimate acquisition of L2 pronunciation, with or
without good mimicry skills at the outset." Nevertheless, the mid point position
suggesting a critical age period as opposed to sound contradictory evidence, is of
great importance to elementary school teachers in Korea who are responsible for the
'critical age children.'
Of interest and concern and encompassing the critical age theory are two letters of the
English alphabet that the Koreans have the perceived greatest difficulty with, namely
the letter "L" and the letter "R". Douglas Brown (1994:57) notes that an infant with
developing speech muscles advances from simple cries to articulated vowels and
consonants by the age of 5, however, "…complex sounds …r and l…sometimes are
not achieved until after the age of 5, though virtually complete phonemic control is
present in most 5 year old children."
This has serious implications for Korean students trying to master the pronunciation
of the letters "l" and "r". This will be returned to later. According to Yamada and
Tohkura, (1992) it is especially difficult for Japanese children to pronounce the letter
'R' after the age of 14. However, learners vary in multiple other ways apart from age,
and it is these differences, associated with Terrell's Natural Approach (Krashen),
which will subsequently be looked at and linked together in returning to our central
research questions.
However, the Korean teacher at this level (elementary) has studied and received
his/her qualification mostly from a University of Education where broad stroke
training is applied, namely all topics are learnt with not one specifically, hence
Korean elementary teachers do not have specific language training skills in the
English language, for it is but one of 12 or more topics they must teach. The Korean
Middle school system is for 3 years. English is taught in all grades. The difference
here is that the teachers have majored at a University in English and their knowledge
and spoken level of English is supposed to be better than the Elementary school
teachers. The teachers also only teach one subject, namely English.
High school is for 3 years, with teachers possessing the same educational ability as
the Middle school teachers, however, as spoken English is not an major part of the
High school English system, some Korean High school teachers can't speak English
and if they do it is of a sub-standard level on the whole, such that if 'understandable
English' is the criterion, they fail the test. However as the High school exam system is
not geared towards spoken English but only grammar and rote memory, the High
school teacher needs rarely speak a word of English in his class. This is undergoing
change however as University entrance exams will now place emphasis on spoken
English, thus one can foresee a demand for competent English language teachers in
High schools. Hence, in Korea, if we accept the critical age theory, then an urgent
reassessment of just who teaches English and what are the qualifications, is vitally
important, for logically, by age 12-14, the student who now has a qualified teacher, is
in the situation where it is too late to benefit from that teacher's skills. (also see
Conclusion chapter)
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 88
Recent research by scientists at the University of Alabama into this vexed question
have broadly determined that in all skills, the maxim the 'younger is better' is
applicable. They further conclude that the more words a child hears before the age of
2, the better vocabulary he or she will be able to develop later in life. (Matire. J. 1999,
95)
In conclusion with other factors traversed in this book, it is suggested the term,
"windows of opportunity" is more apt than 'critical period.' If one accepts the word
'critical' then one impliedly accepts that teaching a second language learner after age
of 14 is a lost cause. This presents psychological factors on both the teacher and
student side, which could affect the training. It is submitted that if we consider this
time frame (2 - 14) merely as an excellent window of opportunity to teach our
pronunciation program and teach according to principles applicable to that age range,
we will succeed more often than not in our teaching program. However, merely
because we have missed that window of opportunity, doesn't mean categorically we
can't teach pronunciation successfully. What it means is that the teacher will have
other factors to consider and employ in his teaching program, and that success in
teaching what we can term as acceptable pronunciation is still highly probable, and
that we should also make the student aware that our goal is such and is attainable.
This is the sign of a good language teacher.
Appendix 3.
Survey overview:
Much debate exists over the likelihood- existence of Critical Age period for SLA.
(noted in depth herein.) Much of the debate is hypothetical or based on small survey
samplings. In 1998 the Korean Education system offered a totally unique existence to
make some comparisons. Prior to 1999 Korean students only began to study English
in Middle Schools (age 14) for the first time. Those students who had received any
English education prior to their first year in Middle school were omitted from the
survey.
Thus at the beginning of the survey we had the rare situation of children beginning
English language lessons at Middle School for the first time, and children at
Elementary school (aged 9) also learning English for the first time. The starting point
was to obtain as large a sampling as was possible. To this end, Korean elementary
students from 3 schools were surveyed. Children in third grade elementary were
sampled. A total of 602 children from elementary school grades were sampled. Also
students from 3 Middle schools were sampled; one boys school in what is considered
a low socio/economic district where one parent families are not unusual, and a second
girls only Middle school in an average socio/economic suburb. The Middle schools
are single sex schools whereas Elementary are co-educational. 800 students were
sampled at these schools.
A further small sampling was obtained from a private school, where students are of
adult years and pay to attend to receive their education. Thus the sampling came from
government and private schools. Finally a survey of 102 Korean English teachers was
taken.
The age range was from third grade elementary 9 years old and upward. Of course it
must be pointed out that Korean age is two years older than western age for the same
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 89
age, i.e., when a Korean child is born he is already one, and come January first he
turns two, hence a child born in December 1999 becomes 2 in January 2000.
The survey was presented in the written English language, with guidance from a bi-
lingual Korean English teacher to assist the students with unknown words. The
reasons for presenting in the target language were; a) responders immediately
associated with the language they were being asked about; b) responders were then
required to respond with their acquired second language, thus, though not identifiable,
arguably increasing the coefficient of reliability and affective factors towards genuine
responses.
The following factors were considered present at the time of survey that could
influence any result.
a) Elementary schools.
a) time of day survey taken. Elementary students become progressively more tired
after lunch than in the first period. It is anticipated a tired mind negates motivation
and could affect the response.
b) Weather. The survey taken was conducted in the autumn, when daily temperatures
were reaching the mid to upper 20s Celsius, with high humidity present. Some days
the weather provided oppressive conditions in the classroom. This may negatively
affect enthusiasm of either doing the survey or motivation to the target language.
c) Interpretation. The survey, in English language, was translated by a Korean English
teacher to the class. Obviously a key factor is the interpretation of the words and the
understanding of the question by the students. A further factor was the closeness of
the translation to the question framed.
d) Class atmosphere. Some classrooms showed visible signs of 'color and friendship'
towards the English language. Others remained bleak. Thus class motivation and
mood towards English must be present.
e) Socio economic regions. The survey was taken over 6 schools covering what was
considered to be a fair range of living standards.
f) Affective factors. At the time of survey students had been at school for a second
term period of some four months, with still almost 2 months of study remaining.
Student's motivation, it can be presumed with no need for analysis, would be less than
say in the final week before a long summer or winter break.
g) Classrooms in which the survey was carried out were; either in new modern
luxurious schools, or in old and 'dirty' schools.
h) Elementary schools are well equipped in each room with the latest multi media
facilities, computer, dvp, etc, thus given an overt look of high quality training.
Middle schools.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 90
Some factors that could affect the response are.
a) Middle school students are generally stressed and tired at all times owing to large
amounts of study. English may be seen as a 'burden rather than something 'living' and
enjoyable.
b) Single sex schools. Unlike elementary schools, middle schools are single sex. The
survey covered one girl's school from a middle class district to a boy's school in a
lower class factory zone.
c) Second language learning in middle schools is more book and drill oriented than in
elementary schools, where teachers are generally more inventive and less restricted in
terms of curriculum schedules, thus students are more likely to be 'tired' and
physically exhausted than elementary students.
d) Classrooms were generally devoid of any affective materials and gave a cold
inhospitable feel and look.
e) Classrooms were also devoid of multi-media equipment, adding to the negative
atmosphere.
Korean Teachers. A sampling of (102) was taken.
Some factors that could affect any objective result noted were;
a) the survey was taken on day two of their teacher training courses. The course began
at 3.00 p.m. after the teachers had completed a long working day. Tiredness was a
factor here.
b) Korean teachers have suffered a substantial pay cut following the IMF crisis and it
is expected this will in some 'negative' way affect their answers.
c) Teacher's level of comprehension. Despite the fact they were teachers, it does not
follow their English was at a level that could understand and respond to the questions
correctly in some circumstances.
d) Teachers surveyed at teacher training classes were compulsorily conscripted to
attend.
Thus, in an attempt to spread the 'negative and positive factors around, surveys were
carried out during the first and last lesson times, in classrooms where the temperature
was either ideal or slightly uncomfortable.
Further, in the case of the student survey, only classes surveyed were those where the
teacher interpreting the survey was a senior English teacher at that school, so as to
reduce misinterpretations as much as possible. However, a caveat exists; (see Gieve
(1991) in relation to a survey conducted in Japan that noted that differences in
responses were discovered depending upon whether the questions were presented by a
Japanese teacher or native English-speaking teacher.
As Ellis (1996) says, doubts must exist as to whether such survey results can be valid
and reliable. However, little short of responders answering on a computer-generated
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 91
survey, the element of non-native or native presenter cannot be overcome.
In this Korean survey, a range of socio economic zones was surveyed, ranging from
affluent to poor. A further point common to all groups is the countries overall view of
the English language. At the time of survey, and unlike during the IMF crisis when
anti western literature was appearing daily in the media accusing the 'west' of
manipulating the crisis, at the time of survey, only one negative press release accusing
western nations of manipulating the current economic situation appeared, although
some sentiment was expressed against the US involvement in Serbia, not to mention
an anti American attitude running through society in relation to U.S. troops on Korean
soil.
How does one build in a factor to take into account all these issues? Maybe all that
can be said is that the test had general face validity. (Hughes. A. 1991, 27) Whilst
suggested analysis's for a 'second testing' were not considered feasible, for in such a
survey, certain factors present in one survey may well be removed in the next, or
complemented by corollary issues not hitherto accounted for, nevertheless, small
random second samplings provided similar results fitting within the + or - 3% variable.
It can only be said that by surveying a wide range of students and adults in a variety
of Affective conditions, can one somewhat equate the results to a medium point.
In the following questions, both question 14 and question 15 leave themselves open to
the Social Desirability Effect phenomena. An example in this survey can be seen in
question 14, where respondents may answer "yes" despite the fact that their local
Korean teacher speaks excellent English without a foreign accent, and produces just
as good a pronunciation model as the native speaker. One way considered to reduce
this possible survey defect was by using forced choice question such as, "Whom do
you think it is better to learn pronunciation from?
(i) a native English speaker
(ii) one of your Korean English teachers who speaks very good English."
However, even this question is not likely to produce perfect data because the phrase
"…to learn pronunciation…" is too imprecise.
Some respondents will address the fact that a native speaker will, all other things
being equal, tend to provide a more accurate model of correct pronunciation, and
therefore will choose (i). However, others may be more mindful of the fact that the
Korean teacher is able to explain the niceties of English pronunciation to them in their
own language, something most native speakers are unlikely to be able to do, and
therefore will choose (ii).
In other words, different respondents may interpret the question in different ways, and
the data gained from their response will therefore not represent the true views of the
group surveyed. Having noted this, it was felt, nevertheless, to leave question 14 and
15 in their raw form.
Question 6 also uses the word 'pronounce' and does not make any distinction between
spontaneous learning, that is free from any language tutoring or second language
schooling and the second type, namely systematic learning. Nor does it impose any
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 92
time limit living in the target country. However, the base question is free of issues that
could confuse the responder, and is in response to recent media, television and print
media that has strongly suggested that Koreans need not travel to another country to
learn fluent English. (Korean Herald)
Question 17 was added following suggestions from many Korean teaching staff.
Appendix 4.
SURVEY:
16 questions were asked. The first four are purely statistical:
1. Age.
2. Sex.
3. Number of children in the class.
4. Years study.
5. Have you lived in an English speaking country?
6. Do you think living in an English speaking country would help you pronounce
English;
much better
a little better
I can learn in my own country
7. Which letters of the alphabet do you find difficult to pronounce?
8. Do you like speaking English?
9. Do you speak English at school, home, both?
10. How do you learn English pronunciation?
- teacher
- watching t.v.
- listening to music
- other
11. Why are you learning English?
-school rule
-parents want me
-I want to
-my friends are
-for future or work
-other
-it's fun
12 Which 3 foreign languages (after Korean) are the most important to you learn?
- English
- Japanese
- Chinese
- German
- Spanish
- French
- other
14. Can you learn good English pronunciation from a native English speaker?
15. Can you learn good English pronunciation from your home country (Korean
English) teacher?
16. Omit from report.
17. Do you think it is
a) very important
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 93
b) important
c) useful
d) no good
in learning body language movements as part of a pronunciation and communicating
course?
RESULTS.
The survey was broken down into three components.
Component A. Elementary school students in their 2nd and 3rd year of English
language study. The age was 11 and 12 years old.
Component B. Middle school students in their 2nd and 3rd year of middle school. The
age is 14-15-16 years old.
Component C. Korean teachers and adult learners of English. The age range is from
the mid 20s to the upper 50s. The average age was 29.
By breaking the survey down to 3 specific life zones, with an interval of four years
minimum between Elementary and Middle school students, and a minimum of ten
years interval from middle school to the youngest teacher, it was hoped that changes
would be observed in the time spans.
**There is also one considerable advantage and benefit through this method. The
Korean education system is in flux. We have the rare situation of Elementary school
students beginning to learn English (Korean age 10-11-12) western age (8-9-10).
Similarly we have Middle School students who have only begun learning English at
Middle school, and have had two to three years study. Their Korean ages are (14-15-
16) Western ages 12-13-14, thus we have rare insight into the Critical Age theory,
from the early days in the critical age, to the later days. The survey reflects a unique
window of opportunity to examine students at two ends of the spectrum both doing
the same thing.**
Appendix 5.
ELEMENTARY RESULTS. Survey group = 880 students. E
MIDDLE SCHOOL RESULTS. Survey group = 820 students. M
TEACHERS. Survey group = 102 T
Question 5. Any student who responded affirmatively was not counted in the survey.
Question 6
Do you think living in an English speaking country would help you pronounce
English;
E. MS. T.
Much better 63% 62% 51%
A little better 24% 26% 26%
I can learn good pronunciation
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 94
In Korea. 11% 11% 22%
Comment.
There is a small falling off (much better) in belief as the age increases, yet still a
substantial proportion believe in the virtues of going to study overseas. Business
operators can take heart in this and should consider their advertising campaigns! It
also shows the Korean authorities have failed in their attempts to convince the
students that they can receive a good level of pronunciation training in their own
country. In January 1997 there were 133,249 Koreans studying abroad in 69 countries.
The IMF era has seen this 'exodus' (Korean Herald October 29, 1998) decrease
substantially, although according to Matire. J. (1999, 29) that will only be temporary,
especially with countries such as the U.S.A. easing regulations and allowing Korean
students to hold part time jobs whilst studying. Note the editorial, Chosun Ilbo
Newspaper, 11th June 2000, strongly advocating Korean students save their money
and study English in Korea as opposed to Canada. This may have changed post
September 11.
Question 7.
Which alphabet letters in English do you find difficult to pronounce?
E MS T
l (light -dark/approx) 11% 12% 50%
r 10% 34% 92%
f 9% 27% 70%
p 18% 10% 27%
z 34% 60% 89%
T / D 34% 76% 91%
Comment.
N.b. Phonetic symbols were provided on the blackboard by the Korean English
teacher for all sounds.
A significant difference is noted in Elementary 'r' and Middle school 'r' with the
difficulty factor increasing. Given that there is no continuity of education, we cannot
say the student's perceived an increase in language difficulty. However, we can say
that at the end of the 'critical age' students with no formal training show markedly
higher rates of perceived difficulty as they are entering second language acquisition at
the end of the critical age time frame. This consequently must have serious
implications for all teachers at elementary level, who must initiate pronunciation
programs into their training.
A second significant perceived difficulty arises with the letters 'r,f,z, and /T/ D/
sounds. This has serious implications for teaching pronunciation, such as minimal
pairs, sound glides, etc, at Elementary level.
Also it must be noted that with the exception of the letter 'p' all letters showed (for
elementary and middle schools) an increase in perceived difficulty. This in itself is
worthy of further investigation, namely given the critical age period has elapsed, why
has the letter 'p' gone in the opposite direction to the others.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 95
What seems to be stunning is the percentage rate of perceived difficulty with adult
Korean teachers. The significant figure is the rate between /l/ and /r/. It is consistent in
elementary schools. But both Middle school students and adults show a marked
difference in perceived difficulty with the letters.
This indicates strong support for the proponents of the critical age hypothesis. It is
known these adult teachers did not receive formal pronunciation or communication
training at school or teachers college. It is also known their ability has been largely
self-attained well after leaving school, indeed after leaving Teachers Training college.
If anything, it shows the urgent need to formulate a clear and decisive training course
including the fundamentals of speech and pronunciation given that they themselves
are responsible for Elementary school English training. Conversely however, it may
just show an adult's desire to master perfection in the target language.
Question 8.
Do you like speaking English?
E MS T
Yes 68% 33% 34%
No 7% 47% 43%
Not sure 22% 19% 22%
Comment.
It seems as the Elementary student proceeds to Middle school, the inhibitive factors
increase, resulting in an increase in those who don't like studying English. This result
should be considered next to point 7 above, with the increase in perceived
pronunciation difficulty. Of significance is the high percentage of those who remain
undecided about their beliefs on learning English.
Also over the age range it can be seen that those who like speaking English decrease
with years, those who don't enjoy speaking English similarly increases. The reasons
need further elaboration to determine if inhibitive factors have 'selective' periods and
are more common to one group than another. It was noted ((not listed in the above
analysis)) that a greater percentage (62%) of boys showed a positive preference to
speaking English than girls at the Middle school level. This point may need further in-
depth analysis.
Question 10.
How do you learn pronunciation?
(Only one category is included)
E MS
From schoolteacher. 67% 75%
This result, although open to arguments of being too narrow in scope, merely
indicates that the teacher plays a perceived significant role in the teaching of
pronunciation.
Question 11.
Why are you learning English?
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 96
E MS
i. school rule - -
ii. my parents want me to 10% 10%
iii. I want to 37% 21%
iv. my friends are 37% 10%
v. for my future 5% 50%
vi. other 89% 10%
vii. it's interesting and fun 54% 10%
Comment.
Students were allowed multiple answers hence the mathematical anomaly.
School rule was answered almost 100%.
Of note is the relatively small percentage where parental influence applies, despite
earlier discussions on this point herein.
Sadly the self-desire to learn falls heavily from Elementary school to Middle school
reflecting factors of concern, namely what has caused the fall off in interest? Similarly
peer pressure falls away markedly in the Middle schools, yet the concern for the
future soars from Elementary to Middle school. This does not sit comfortably with the
small percentage of parents who want their middle school child to study English. It
would be assumed that parents would discuss the future employability of their child
with their child. The alternative is that schoolteachers have installed this belief (fear)
in the students whilst they are at Middle school. And despite H. Douglas Brown's
argument (1996) that peer pressure from friends to learn English exists, this seems
resoundly refuted by these results. The final point of concern shows the massive
decline from Elementary school where children enjoy English to Middle schools
where they do not. This must reflect on Middle school curriculum and or teaching and
practices and needs serious attention.
Question 14.
Can you learn good English pronunciation and good spoken English from a native
English teacher?
YES E = 79% MS = 56% T = 86%
NO E = 20% MS = 43% T = 13%
Comment.
It seems surprising that a large percentage of all categories think it possible to learn
good pronunciation from a native English teacher, especially as it is noted elsewhere
teachers have few qualifications, (something private schools could exploit) yet only
about 50-60% believed (in point 6) that they could significantly improve their
pronunciation by living in an English speaking country. The discrepancy, it is
submitted, is possibly (probably) due to the fact that Koreans believe they have a
'platform' of proficiency in pronunciation above which they cannot go. That platform,
it is submitted, can be achieved in Korea from a qualified native English teacher with
a clear pronunciation program.Although the figures for those who do not believe a
native English speaker can teach pronunciation well are 13% -43%, it is submitted
this figure is consistent with those who indicated in (point 8) above, that they do not
like speaking English. It is submitted that that category has a negative factor built in
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 97
about liking and learning English. This may be consistent with Porter & Garvin
(1989) who warn that pronunciation programs may do more harm than good and
should be further researched.
Question 15.
Can you learn good English pronunciation and good spoken English from a Korean
English teacher?
YES. E = 55% MS = 37% T = 53%
NO. E = 9% MS = 15% T = 17%
Not Sure E = 35% MS = 47% T = 29%
The figures for Elementary students and teachers on the 'yes' vote is consistent, whilst
the figures for the Middle schools is also consistent with the fact that they have only
had two or three years English study, and fall on the outer limit of the critical age
period, thus making learning that much harder and their perceptions more negative
and although those teaching them have majors in English from a University, the
spoken English of Korean Middle school teachers often leaves much to be desired,
thus the added perception by the students that English is all the more difficult because
their teacher either does not speak English (as happens in an English class, or the level
is sub-standard, thus making learning that much harder.)
Similarly, many Middle school students have had tuition at private schools thus
exposing them to native English teachers, and allowing a comparison to be made.
Interestingly, less than one quarter of all categories believe that Korean teachers can't
teach good English pronunciation, although the undecided factor is high. Clearly,
however, the Korean education system has a lot of work to do in the field of training
Korean English teachers if it is to meet the student's demands and expectations.
Question 16.
Do you think it is
a) very important
b) important
c) useful
d) no good
in learning body language?
a) E = 25% MS = 23% T = 19%
b) E = 44% MS = 23% T = 25%
c) E = 25% MS = 34% T = 53%
d) E = 0% MS = 6% T = 2%
Comment. As argued above, non-verbal gestures (body language) falls within the broadened
definition of what is pronunciation. The figures in all categories provide a good
positive spread indicating that 'non verbal communication' should be taught. Of note
is the tiny percentage that does not believe that body language is important at all. If
anything, this stresses the need for curriculum writers to consider inserting sections
and exercises relating to body language. This undoubtedly, if well done, would
provide a fun and interesting way for students to learn about another aspect of this
area of English, and indeed give them something tangible to compare to their Korean
(native) language.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 98
Survey Error analysis. A sample survey of 50 elementary students, 50 middle school students and 20
teachers was conducted 3 months later outside of the survey time frame. The results
fell within a + or - 3% difference in all categories, suggesting the figures obtained
from the initial applicants were fairly indicative.
Appendix 5.
Survey conclusion.
Applicants from a broad spectrum were surveyed and surveyed under a variety of
conditions and from a variety of socio-economic areas.
The results tend to give weight to the hypothesis of the critical age period, not as an
absolute irrefutable time frame which beyond all is impossible, but as a time frame in
which it is highly ideal to professionally and correctly teach students English and
pronunciation. This time frame I prefer to label, "The window of Opportunity.” Also,
the results give weight to the theory that affective conditions are very significant.
Further, the results show that there is far more work to be done, firstly in the teaching
of pronunciation to students, secondly, in determining why such a large fall in those
'who like English' occurs after elementary school, thirdly, that English as a language
seems to fail when it comes to public relations, in so far as a great percentage of
applicants showed results suggesting a negativity towards the language. The survey
does show, however, that more questions and more research needs to be done in
relation to affective conditions.
Index: Amtmann, J. & Evans, R. 2001, 'Interview Protocols', Corrections Compendium, vol.
6. pp1-11.
Asher. J. & Garcia. R, 1969, 'The Optimal Age to Learn a Foreign Language', Modern
Language Journal, vol. 53, pp.334-341.
Bickerton, L. 1967, Roots of Language, Ann Arbour, Karoma Publishers. NY.
Brown, H. Douglas, 1994, Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 3rd edn,
Prentice Hall, NY.
Burke-Johnson, R. 1997, 'Examining the Validity Structure of Qualitative Research',
Education, vol. 118. pp.282-286.
Caporaso, J.A. 1995, 'Research Design, Falsification and the Qualitative -
Quantitative Divide', American Political Science Review, vol. 89. pp.457-461.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, W. 1985, Becoming Critical. Education, Knowledge and Action
Research, The Falmer Press, London.
Cheon, H. 2001, The viability of computer mediated communication in the Korean
secondary EFL classroom. Ma Thesis, Pukyong National University, Korea.
Christensen, L.B. 1997, Experimental Methodology, 7th edn, Allyn and Bacon,
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 99
Boston.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. 2001, Research Methods in Education, 5th edn,
Routledge, NY.
Cook, T.D. & Campbell, D.T. 1979, Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis
Issues for Field Settings, Rand McNally, Chicago.
Creswell, J.W. 1994, Research Design; Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches,
Sage, CA.
Cross, G., David, C., Graham, M. & Thralls, C. 1996, 'Thinking and Re-Thinking
Research Methodology', Business Communication Quarterly, vol. 59. pp.105-115.
Crozet, C. & Liddicoat, A.J. 1997, 'Teaching Culture as an Integrated Part of
Language Teaching: An Introduction,' ARAL Series S, no. 14, pp.1-22.
Dooley, D. 2001, Social Research Methods, 4th edn, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Ellis, R. OUP, 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition, O.U.P., Oxford.
Flege. J, 1995, 'A Critical Period For Learning to Pronounce Foreign Languages',
Applied Linguistics, vol.8., pp.162-177
Fox, D. 2000, 'Classroom Assessment Data: Asking the Right Questions', Leadership,
vol. 30. pp.22.
Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A.1992, Becoming Qualitative Researchers, Longman, NY.
Hara, K. 1995, 'Quantitative and Qualitative Research Approaches in Education',
Education, vol. 115. pp. 351-356.
Heydon, J.D. 1996, Cross on Evidence, 5th edn., Butterworths, Sydney.
Hoover, K.R. 1984, 'Measuring Variables and Relationships', The Elements of Social
Scientific Thinking, 3rd edn, pp. 100-135, St Martin's Press.
Jakobson, R. 1968, Child Language, Aphasia, and Phonological Universals, Mouton,
The Hague.
Kim, K,. Relkin, N,. Lee, K.M. and Hirsch. J. 1997, 'Distinct Cortical Areas
Associated with Native and Second Languages', Nature, July, vol.388, pp.171-174
Klein, W. 1996, Second Language Acquisition, Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge.
Krashen, S., Long, M. & Scarcella, R. 1979, 'Age, Rate and Eventual Attainment in
Second Language Acquisition', TESOL Quarterly, vol. 13, pp. 573-582.
Kroll, B. 2001, 'Considerations for Teaching an ESL/EFL Writing Course', 219232 in
Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 3rd edn, ed M. Celce-Murcia,
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 100
Heinle and Heinle, USA.
Kumar, R. 1996, Research Methodology, London, Longman.
Lather, P. 1986, 'Issues of Validity in Openly Ideological Research', Interchange, vol.
17. pp.63-84.
Lennenberg, E. 1967, Biological Foundations of Language, Wiley, New York.
Liebscher, P. 1996, 'Quantity with Quality', Library Trends, vol. 46. pp.668-681.
Long, M. 1997, The Role of Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition,
in W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia, eds, Handbook of Research on Second Language
Acquisition, pp. 413-468., Academic, New York:
McDonough, J. & McDonough, S. 1997, Research Methods for English Language
Teachers, Arnold, London.
McLaughlan, B. 1992, (accessed March 30, 2002) 'Myths and Misconceptions about
Second Language Learning. What Every Teacher Needs to Unlearn.', University
Santa Cruz, CA: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second
Language Learning, http://128.48.120.7/mw/mwcgi.mb#LB
Malterud, K. 2001, 'Qualitative Research; Standards, Challenges and Guidelines,' The
Lancet, vol. 358, pp. 483-499.
Matire, J. 1999, Small Group Discussion Topics for Korean Students, PNU Press,
Korea.
Matsuda, P. 'Situating ESL Writing in a Cross-Disciplinary Context' Written
Communication, vol. 15(1), pp.99-121.
Neufield, G. 1980, On the Adult's Ability to Acquire Phonology, TESOL Quarterly,
vol. xiv3, pp.285-298.
O'Grady, W. & Dobrovolsky, M. 1996. Contemporary Linguistic Analysis, Copp
Clark Ltd. Toronto.
Poggenpoel, M., Myburgh, C. & van der Linde, C. 2001, 'Qualitative Research
Strategies as Prerequisites for Quantitative Strategies,' Education, vol. 122. pp. 408-
414.
Popkewitz, T. 1994, Paradigm and Ideology in Educational Research, Falmer Press,
Mass.
Punch, K.F. 1998, 'Mixed Methods and Evaluative', Introduction to Social Research,
Sage Publications, London.
Repp, A.C., Nieminen, G.S., Olinger, E. & Brusca, R. 1988, 'Direct Observation
Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Observers, Exceptional Children, vol. 55, pp.29-37.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 101
Saville-Troike, M. 1989, 'The Analysis of Communicative Events', in The
Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction, 2nd edn, Basil Blackwell, Oxford,
pp. 107-180.
Scovel, T. 1981, 'The recognition of foreign accents in English and its implications to
psycholinguistic theories of language acquisition,' in eds, J, Savord and L, LaForge,
Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of AILA. Laval. University of Laval Press.
Seliger, H. 1978, Implications of Multiple Critical Period Hypotheses for Second
Language Learning. In Ritchie. W., Second Language Acquisition Research, New
York, Academic Press,. pp.11-20.
Singleton, D. 1989, Language Acquisition. The Age Factor, Clevedon,
Avon.Multilingual Matters.
Somekh, B. 1993, 'Flies On the Walls of Their Classrooms', Times Educational
Supplement, no. 4021, pp.11.
Smith, J.K. 1984, 'The Problem of Criteria for Judging Interpretive Inquiry',
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, vol. 6. pp.379-391.
Stapp, Y. 1999, 'Neural Plasticity and the Issue of Mimicry Tasks in L2 Pronunciation
Studies', University of Tsukuba, Japan., TESL-EJ vol. 3 January, No. 4
Thompson, I. 1991 Foreign Accents Revisited. Language Learning, vol. 41, pp.177-
204
Wash, M. & Diller. A,. 1981, Neuro-linguistic Considerations of the Optimum Age
for Second Language Learning. In Diller, A. ed, 1981, Second Language Learning
and Neurolinguistics, Copp Clark, N.Y.
Wolcott, H.F. 1990, Writing Up Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, California.
Yates, L. 1999, 'Transitions and the Year 7 Experience: A Report From the 12 to 18
Project', Australian Journal of Education, vol. 42, no. 1, pp.24-41.
Wright, P. 1999, 'The Thought of Doing Drama Scares Me to Death', Research in
Drama Education, vol. 4, no.2., pp.227-237.
Zelditch, M. 1962, 'Some Methodological Problems of Field Studies', American
Journal of Psychology, vol. 67. pp. 56-576.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 102
TESOL Course:-
Questions for Consideration:-
(1) How do you asses your student’s spoken level of English?
(2) How do you answer questions you are not sure about?
(3) What do you say if the student says you made a mistake?
(4) How do you motivate the student?
(5) What do you do if the student says the material is boring?
(6) How do you respond if the student says your pronunciation is not good?
(7) What is the best way to ensure your teacher student relationship begins well?
(8) Some students have studies Second Language Acquisition theories. They may
well know much more than you. What do you say to them?
(9) What do you say (how do you teach) to students who are so shy and have such
low level English skills that they do not want to talk?
(10) How much praise should you give to students on their language progress?
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 103
TESOL Teaching.
(1) A sample chapter – A very useful way for:-
a) promoting conversation
b) vocabulary acquisition
c) gives students confidence
d) promotes reading skill
e) promotes fluency
Weather:-
(a) Picture description. In this picture (beach scene from Pusan, Korea, you can see
many things. There are over 200 words that can be described from this picture.
Discuss the picture then go on to the topic and read that and answer the questions in
free flow discussion style.
Key description words:- In the foreground
In the background
In the middle
In the top left (right) corner
Student says: - This looks like a picture taken at the beach. It is summer time. I can
see…..”
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 104
(2) A sample chapter
Sample text: - “Words in blue may need describing/translation”
Weather
On Earth, common weather phenomena include such things as wind, cloud, rain, snow,
fog and dust storms. Less common events include natural disasters such as tornadoes,
hurricanes and ice storms. Almost all familiar weather phenomena occur in the
troposphere (the lower part of the atmosphere). Weather does occur in the
stratosphere and can affect weather lower down in the troposphere, but the exact
mechanisms are poorly understood.[1]
The atmosphere is a chaotic system, so small changes to one part of the system can
grow to have large effects on the system as a whole. This makes it difficult to
accurately predict weather more than a few days in advance, though weather
forecasters are continually working to extend this limit through the scientific study of
weather, meteorology.
It is theoretically impossible to make useful day-to-day predictions more than about
two weeks ahead, imposing an upper limit to potential for improved prediction skill.
Chaos theory says that the slightest variation in the motion of the ground can grow
with time.
This idea is sometimes called the butterfly effect, from the idea that the motions
caused by the flapping wings of a butterfly eventually could produce marked changes
in the state of the atmosphere. Because of this sensitivity to small changes it will
never be possible to make perfect forecasts, although there still is much potential for
improvement.
Questions:-
1. What is your favorite season
2. Describe the four seasons in Korea
3. What do you do in summer (winter, spring, and fall?)
4. What do wear in these seasons
5. Do you play any sports? What season do you play them in?
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 105
(2) A sample chapter – A very useful way for:-
f) promoting conversation
g) vocabulary acquisition
h) gives students confidents
i) reading skill
j) fluency
1. Discuss what you see in the picture.
2. Read the article and answer the questions
Smoking ban hits French cafe culture
PARIS - From next week, one of France's most iconic institutions — the smoky cafe
— will be but a hazy memory. The extension of France's smoking ban to bars,
discotheques, restaurants, hotels, casinos and cafes on Jan. 1 marks a momentous
cultural shift.
For smokers, this is the most distressing part of a phased smoking ban that began last
February in workplaces, schools, airports, hospitals and other "closed and covered"
public places like train stations. But many bartenders and restaurant staffers are
looking forward to breathing easier and to clothes that don't stink of seeped-in odors
from the clouds of smoke where they work. Just about anywhere indoors will be off-
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 106
limits for smoking, except homes, hotel rooms, and sealed smoking chambers at
establishments that decide to provide them.
"The French culture associated with smoking is a 20th-century thing, but we won't
forget the experience," ex-smoker Lisa Zane, a Chicago-born singer who lives in Paris,
said at Le Fumoir (The Smoking Den) restaurant and bar behind the Louvre.
"Smoking seems insane now — we have to adapt."
The Health Ministry says one in two regular smokers here dies of smoking-related
illness, and about 5,000 nonsmokers die each year of passive smoking. About a
quarter of France's 60 million people are smokers. The ban will likely mean more
unsightly cigarette butts on sidewalks and in gutters. British American Tobacco's
French arm on Wednesday began a pilot program in and near Paris of putting ashtrays
outside bars where tobacco products are sold.
Countries like Italy, Spain, Belgium, Britain and Ireland already have smoking bans.
But it's tough to imagine the style-conscious French bundling up in blankets to smoke
on chilly restaurant terraces, like some Londoners have. Many restaurateurs, cafe
owners and disco operators fear lost business: Smokers who light up with a
countertop morning coffee, on the dance floor or after a meal make up a huge
customer base.
"There will be a drop, certainly. The tobacco-bar is part of the French tradition," said
Christophe Mgo, owner of Le Marigny bar in northwest Paris. "They (customers who
smoke) will surely stay less time and they will only drink one coffee or beer, instead
of two."
A national union of disco owners has said it expects a 5- to 8-percent decline in
business initially, and has urged the government to send pamphlets to police to show
"understanding" in their enforcement of the ban. Some 10,000 protesters, mainly
tobacco vendors, marched across Paris last month in an unsuccessful attempt to
persuade lawmakers to add flexibility to the new prohibitions.
In a minor concession, the government says it won't fully enforce the new ban on New
Year's Day — giving smokers the right to puff away until Jan. 2. The government is
increasingly encouraging smokers to quit. A traveling campaign went to seven cities
in November and December, offering rapid-fire meetings with anti-smoking experts
— a bit like speed-dating sessions. For those who continue to smoke, the bitterness
will take time to fade over what they see as an infringement of their freedoms. "Great
idea," smoker Daniel Marierouyer, 45, said sarcastically at Le Fumoir. "I love it when
things get imposed on us — Buckle your seat beat, don't smoke, you need to be
healthy, you're too fat."
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 107
Lesson Plans:-
Successful teachers are invariably good planners and thinkers. They didn't get that
way overnight. The road to success requires commitment and practice, especially of
those skills involved in planning lessons, activities, and managing classroom behavior.
Planning lessons is a fundamental skill all teachers must develop and hone, although
implementation of this skill in actual teaching can, and usually does, take some
time. Being able to develop an effective lesson plan format is a core skill for all who
teach. So let's begin at the beginning.
The purpose of a lesson plan is really quite simple; it is to communicate. But, you
might ask, communicate to whom? The answer to this question, on a practical basis, is
YOU! The lesson plans you develop are to guide you in organizing your material and
yourself for the purpose of helping your students achieve intended learning outcomes.
Whether a lesson plan fits a particular format is not as relevant as whether or not it
actually describes what you want, and what you have determined is the best means to
an end. If you write a lesson plan that can be interpreted or implemented in many
different ways, it is probably not a very good plan. This leads one to conclude that a
key principle in creating a lesson plan is specificity. It is sort of like saying, "almost
any series of connecting roads will take you from Key West Florida to Anchorage
Alaska, eventually." There is however, one any only one set of connecting roads that
represents the shortest and best route. Best means that, for example, getting to
Anchorage by using an unreliable car is a different problem than getting there using a
brand new car. What process one uses to get to a destination depends on available
resources and time.
1. Preliminary Information
The development of a lesson plan begins somewhere, and a good place to start is with
a list or description of general information about the plan. This information sets the
boundaries or limits of the plan. Here is a good list of these information items: (a) the
grade level of the students for whom the plan is intended; (b) the specific subject
matter (mathematics, reading, language arts, science, social studies, etc.); (c) if
appropriate, the name of the unit of which the lesson is a part; and (d) the name of the
teacher.
2. The Parts
Each part of a lesson plan should fulfill some purpose in communicating the specific
content, the objective, the learning prerequisites, what will happen, the sequence of
student and teacher activities, the materials required, and the actual assessment
procedures. Taken together, these parts constitute an end (the objective), the means
(what will happen and the student and teacher activities), and an input (information
about students and necessary resources). At the conclusion of a lesson, the assessment
tells the teacher how well students actually attained the objective.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 108
In a diagram, the process looks something like this:
Input ======>process=====>output
Input: This part refers to the physical materials, other resources, and information that
will be required by the process. What are these inputs? First of all, if you have thought
about what the lesson is supposed to accomplish, the inputs are much easier to
describe. In general categories, inputs consist of:
1. Information about the students for whom the lesson is intended. This information
includes, but is not limited to the age and grade level of the students, and what they
already know about what you want them to learn.
2. Information about the amount of time you estimate it will take to implement the
lesson.
3. Descriptions of the materials that will be required by the lesson, and at some point,
the actual possession of the materials.
4. Information about how you will acquire the physical materials required.
5. Information about how to obtain any special permissions and schedules required.
For example if your lesson plan will require a field trip, you must know how to
organize it. If your lesson will require a guest speaker (fire chief, lawyer, police
officer, etc.) you must know how to make arrangements for having that person be at
the right place at the right time.
Process
This is the actual plan. If you have done the preliminary work (thinking, describing
the inputs), creating the plan is relatively easy. There are a number of questions you
must answer in the creating the plan:
1. What are the inputs? This means you have the information (content description,
student characteristics, list of materials, prerequisites, time estimates, etc.) necessary
to begin the plan.
2. What is the output? This means a description of what the students are supposed to
learn.
3. What do I do? This means a description of the instructional activities you will
use.
4. What do the students do? This means a description of what the students will do
during the lesson.
5. How will the learning be measured? This means a description of the assessment
procedure at the end of the lesson.
*The value of lesson plans has often been overstated, however, they do serve
purposes for both new and experience teacher alike.
new teacher: - experienced teacher:-
1. plan a possible lesson keep track of students progress
2. have back ups when things ‘go wrong’ follow a student’s progress
3. Evaluate yourself re-work and improve the lesson
4. list requirements in advance makes good material to re-use
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 109
Your lesson plan.
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 110
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 111
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 112
TESOL Certificate. The MMBS Course. January 2008
TESOL Certificate Studies 113