The first study I want to mention is study #2 on page 128 (Recasts and private speech). In this short paragraph L & S state, "that learners noticed recasts when they were provided by the instructor. Furthermore, learners were more likely to react to a recast with private speech when it was directed to another learner or to the whole class". I think that this is worth mentioning because it reminds me of how a simple change in the instructor's reaction to a speech error can make all the difference. When learning my L2 I found that this method of recasting a student's error indirectly was used very often and it was very effective. The result that this had on me and other students was that we became aware of the fact that this was more than likely a common error that we all shared instead of an individual mistake on our part. It sort of unified the class. This way we were able and more willing to adopt the recasts and to work on our own errors without feeling stupid or behind the curve.
Another study that I'd like to mention is study #7 on page 132 of L & S. Here our authors discuss how closed questions from an instructor usually produce a "simple on-word response" from the student, while open questions produce "longer and more complex answers". I would agree with this in general, but I want to focus on how this type of questioning is used in beginning level L2 classrooms. I want to focus on this because for beginning level second language students it is often difficult to create complex answers because of their lack of vocabulary and grammatical forms. But with this difficulty in mind I also want to mention that beginning level L2 students can often surprise a teacher with their limited abilities. One thing that I noticed in my own L2 was how, even with very limited knowledge, I was able to express ideas beyond my L2 abilities by making the most use of the vocabulary and grammatical forms that I already possessed. Usually all it takes (or took) is for the instructor to assist their students by giving them a couple words of new vocabulary that interests them or by helping the students to make a more complete and complex sentence than they would have come up with on their own. This negotiation of meaning along with a few metalinguistic comments can help an engaged student to keep looking to the horizon of their abilities (+1).
The last thing that I want to point out which is fairly obvious but important is study #9 on page 133. At the end of that study it focuses on how important the home life is on a student's second language acquisition and education in general. Even though I think that this is obvious, it is something that we, as teachers, should always keep in mind.
4 comments:
I thought the studies were interesting as well and actually liked chapter 5 more than most of the others because of the studies.
See you in class tonight.
Can you summarize what you wrote, please?
Excellent reflection, Aaron.
I just would like to add to the study #7, as for the questioning techniques. When I was learning English, French, and Polish, in the beginning, we were tough standard questions and standard ways of answering to those questions, which were more than just 'yes' or 'no' answers. This technique gives the students the possibility to reply quickly to a question, and then think of possible ways to add information. Younger children would reply 'yes' or 'no', just because they would do the same in their L1. In classes with students age 15 or more it is a tendency to reply asking the teacher for additional vocabulary. But while doing this, students usually forget about the grammar in a sentence. There are just too many things you need to keep in mind. So, if the teacher accepts the student trying to make progress in speaking, but making a lot of mistakes, this method is great. The problem is that some ESL teachers pressure their students too much for making any mistakes, which decreases their willingness to speak at all. And then students complain about not having the chance to practice English in their home countries.
Post a Comment