Three Different Perspectives Of Second Language

Acquisition Researcher Toward Classroom

1.Comparing the effect of different language

teaching methods on L2 learning.
2.Viewing the classroom as a place where
interaction of various kinds take place.
3.Involving the investigation on the effects of
formal instruction.
 METHODS OF RESEARCHING LEARNING IN THE SECOND
LANGUAGE CLASSROOM

TRADITION TYPICAL ISSUES METHODS

Language gain from different Experiment method-- pre-and
methods, materials, and post -tests with experimental
PSYCHOMETRIC treatments. and control gropus.

Extent to which learner Coding classroom interactions in

INTERACTION behaviour is a function of terms of various observation
ANALYSIS teacher-determined interaction. systems and schedules.

Analysis of classroom discourse Study classroom transcripts and

DISCOURSE in linguistic terms. assign utterances to pre-
ANALYSIS determined categories.
Obtain insights into the Naturalistic ‘uncontrolled’
ETHNOGRAPHIC classroom as a cultural system observation and description.
 Comperative Method Studies
The aim : to establish which of two or more methods is most effective
in terms of the actual learning.

In 1964, Scherer and Wertheimer compared the grammar translation

method and the audiolingual approach.
 Result : Students in grammar translation group did better in reading
and writing while the students in audiolingual group did better at
listening and speaking.

In 1970, the Pennsylvania Project (Smith) compared three methods

(Grammar translation, Functional skill, Functional skill plus Grammar).
 Result : No significant differences among the three methods,
except the traditional group was superior on reading tests but did
worse on oral mimicry.
 Comperative Method Studies
In 1970, Hauftman compared a structural approach and situational
approach
Result : situational group performed better than structural group;
however, this difference was found to be significant only for high IQ
students in the situational group.

In 1977, Asher compared TPR and audiolingual approach

 Result : Students taught by TPR were likely to display more
positive attitudes.

With the exception of TPR studies, comparative method studies

have failed to produce evidence that one method results in more
successful learning than another.
 EXPERIENTIAL AND ANALYTIC FEATURES IN LANGUAGE
PEDAGOGY (FROM STERN 1990)

EXPERIENTIAL FEATURES ANALYTIC FEATURES

Substantive or motivated topic or Focus on aspects of L2, including

theme (topics are not arbitrary or phonology, grammar functions,
trivial) discourse, sociolinguistics
Students engage in purposeful activity Cognitive study of language items
(tasks or projects), not exercises. (rules and regularities are noted)

Language use has characteristics of Practice or rehearsal of language items

real talk (conversation) or skill aspects

Priority of meaning transfer and Attention to accuracy and error

fluency of over linguistic error avoidance
avoidance and accuracy
 Aspects Of Classroom Interaction
The perceived failure of the global method studies of the 1960s led
to the development of an alternative approach to investigating
classroom language learning.

Classroom process research was based on three basic premises:

1. The rejection of notion that classroom differ on a single variable
such as method
2. The description of instructional events
3. The priority of direct observation of classroom lessons. (Gaies,
1983)

Long claimed that the value of classroom interaction modified

input in investigation.
 The Nature Of L2 Classroom Discourse
Syllabus Input

Classroom
Methods Interaction Practice opportunities

Atmosphere Receptivity

The relationship between plans and outcomes (from Allwright and Bailey 1991 : 25)
 Structure And General Characteristics
Classroom discourse has three components in general subject
lessons :
1. Opening phase
2. Instructional phase
3. Closing phase (Mehan, 1979).

Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) develop hierarchical model in

the structure of a lesson:
1. Lesson
2. Transaction
3. Exchange : IRF and IRF(R)
4. Move
5. Act
 IRF And IRF(R)
Teaching ‘exchange’ typically has three phases, called IRF:
1. Initiating (I) T : Ask Dito what his name is.
2. Responding (R) S : What’s your name?
3. Follow up (F) T : Good.
(Sinclair and Coulthard, 1975)

The three phases were modified by McTear (1975) becoming

IRF(R), in example:
T : What do you do every morning? (I)
S : I clean my teeth. (R)
T : You clean your teeth every morning. (F)
S : I clean my teeth every morning. (R)
 Analytical And Experiential Instruction
UTTERANCE
T : What’s the date today?
S : April 15th
T : Good
UTTERANCE
T : What did you do on the
weekend?
S : I went to see a movie
T : That’s interesting. What
did you see?
S : E.T. I like it. He’s so cute.
T : Yes. I saw it too and really
liked it. Did anyone else see
it?
COMMUNICATIVE FEATURES
L2/pseudo-request/minimal speech
L2/predictable information/minimal speech/limited form
L2/pseudo-request/comment/minimal speech
COMMUNICATIVE FEATURES
L2/genuine request/minimal speech
L2/giving unpredictable information/minimal speech/unlimited
form
L2/comment/elaboration(genuine request for information)
/sustained speech.
L2/giving unpredictable information/sustained
speech/unrestricted form
L2/comment/elaboration(genuine request for
information)/sustained speech
Four Basic Types of Classroom Interaction

Four basic types of classroom interaction based on Van

Lier’s (1982; 1988):
1. Teacher controls neither topic nor activity
2. Teacher controls the topic but not the activity
3. Teacher controls both topic and activity
4. Teacher controls activity but not the topic
 Turn Taking
Classroom discourse is often organized so that there is a strict
allocation of turns to cope with potential transition and
distribution problems and that who speaks to whom at what time
is firmly controlled.

Van Lier (1988) identifies a number of turn taking behaviours that

he considers indicative of such an initiative:
1. Topic
2. Self selection
3. Allocation
4. Sequence
 The Difference Between Classroom And
Naturalistic Discourse
The discourse that results from trying to learn a language is different from
to communicate (Edmondson, 1985).

Classroom discourse depends on:

• The roles the participants adopt
• The nature of the learning tasks
• The kind of targeted knowledge (Kramsch, 1985)

Natural discourse is characterized by:

• Providing more fluid roles established through interaction
• Encouraging equal participation in the negotiation of meaning
• Focusing on the interactional process itself and on fluency (Breen, 1985)
 Teacher Talk
MAIN FEATURES OF TEACHER TALK
Amount of talk Teachers take up about two-thirds of the total talking time in
classroom
Functional distribution Teachers mostly address the talk to explain, question, and
command learners to respond
Rate of speech NS Teachers slow down their rate of speech when talking to
learners in comparison to NNS teachers
Pauses Teachers are likely to make use of longer pause when talking to
learners than to other NS
Phonology, intonation, Few studies about these aspects but teachers appear to speak
articulation, stress more loudly and distinctly when addressing L2 learners

Modifications in Teachers vary vocabularies in accordance with the learners’

vocabulary proficiency level
Modifications in syntax Teachers use shorter utterances , fewer marked structures such
as past tense, more declarative with less proficient learners,
Modifications in Teachers use more self-repitition with L2 and low level
discourse proficiency students
 Error Treatment
General area of error treatment
1. Feedback
2. Repair
3. Correction

Chaudron (1977) distinguishes four types the term of “treatment”:

1. Treatment resulting in learners’ autonomous ability to correct themselves
2. Treatment resulting in the elicitation of a correct response from a learner
3. Treatment that transforms or demands improvement
4. Positive or negative reinforcement involving expressions of approval and
disapproval

Opinions to consider toward error treatment

1. Error treatment should be conducted in a manner that is compatible with
general development
2. Self-repair is more conducive to acquisition than other-repair
 Teachers’ Questions
Two types of reasoning questions (Barnes, 1976) :
1. Open question (only one acceptable answer in mind)
2. Closed question (it permits a number of different acceptable answers)

Kearsley’s Extensive Taxonomy of Question Types

Types Sub-Category Example
Echoic Comprehension check All right? Ok? Does everyone understand?
Clarification requests What dou you mean? What? I don’t understand
Confirmation check Carefully? Did you say ‘he’?
Epistemic Referential Why didn’t you do your homework?
Display What’s the opposite of ‘up’ in English?
Expressive It’s interesting the different pronounciation we
have now, isn’t it?
Rhetorical Why did I do that? Because...
 Learner Participation

Quantity Of Participation
There is no clear evidence that extent to which learners participate
productively in classroom affects their rate of development. It can
be concluded that quantity of participation may not be a key factor
in L2 acquisition.

Quality Of Participation
The quality of participation depends on the kind of activity they are
involved in regarding the distribution of practice opportunities
provided by the teacher.
 Small Group Work and Interaction
Group work is often considered as an essential feature of
communicative language teaching. Long and Porter (1985) summarize
the main pedagogical arguments in favour of it.

 It increases language practice opportunities

 It improves the quality of student talks
 It promotes a positive affective climate
 It motivates learners to learn
 It provides opportunities to promote rapid L2 acquisition
 Interaction between learners can facilitate acquisition more readily
 The Relationship Between Classroom
Interaction And Second Language Learning
Second Language Learning in The Communicative Classroom
 The most effective way of developing successful L2 competence in a classroom
is to ensure that learners have sufficient opportunities to participate in
discourse.
 Communicative classroom may not be successful in promoting high levels of
linguistic competence.
 Giving beginner learners opportunities for meaningful communication which
results in linguistic abilities no worse than those developed through
traditional one.
 Conclusion
It is easy to point to the weaknesses of L2 classroom research. Long (1990) gives
number of reason why findings are not ready to be passed on to teachers:
1. The studies have been generally been small-scale.
2. They have tended to consider the short-term result and little is known the long-
term result.
3. The findings tend to be partial or fragmented that they have focused on
isolated aspects only.
4. The studies are methodological flawed.

The strong point of L2 Classroom research:

1. Availability of descriptive information on specific instructional behaviors
(example, error treatment and questions)
2. Some insights into how classroom interaction shapes L2 learning
3. Developing of understanding the variables of classroom research