Chapter 11 Instructed Second Language Learning Summery
This chapter mainly deals with two problems. Firstly, how learning in and out of the classroom may or may not differ. Secondly, how an understanding of SLA might inform classroom practices. Here are five most important point mentioned in this chapter.
1. Input in classroom vs. Input out of classroom (i.e. Naturalistic context)
Source of input from classroom are teacher, materials, other learners, which is limited in both quantity and quality. Some scholars carried out some experiment on classroom language and drew such conclusions:
A. Learners do not pick up errors from one another. (Gass & Varonis, 1989)
B. The change of learner language was in the direction of the target language and not from a correct form to a n incorrect form. (Bruton & Samuda, 1980)
C. Learners may use conversation as a tool for learning. (Swain & Lapkin, 1998)
D. Even though the classroom is a place where conversational interaction can often provider opportunities for learning, teacher intervention is often essential. (Swain & Lapkin, 1998)
2. Processing instruction
[1] Definition: a type of instruction that takes as its basis how learner process input. It deal with the conversion of input to intake and specially focuses on form-meaning relationship. (VanPatren, 1995)
[2] Two instructional models
A.
Input→intake→developing system output
B. Processing instruction
[3] Principles of L2 input processing (VanPatten, 2007)
a) Learners need input for acquisition.
b) A major problem in acquisition might be the way in which learners process input.
c) If we can understand how learners process input, then we might be able to devise effective input enhancement or focus on form to aid SLA.
[4] Basic features of processing instruction (VanPatten, 2007)
a) Give learners information about a structure or form.
b) Inform learners about a particular processing strategy that may get in the way of selecting the form/ structure during comprehension.
c) Structure input so that learners must rely on form/ structure to get meaning and not rely on natural processing tendencies.
[5] VanPatten’s experiment to verify the processing instruction-----French causative teaching
[6] Corrective feedback was more meaningful after learners had been induced to produce an error as opposed to prevent an error. (Tomasello & Herron, 1988)
[7] Semantic comprehension is necessary for syntactic comprehension but does not guarantee it. (Rost, 1990)
3. Teachability & learnability
[1] Krashen: pedagogical intervention cannot alter natural acquisition orders. (Lightboen, 1983)
[2] Pienemann (1984, 1989); stages in the developmental sequence cannot be skipped even as a result of instruction.
[3] Mackey (1995, 1999): interaction was able to step up the pace of development, but was not able to push learners beyond a developmental stage.
[4] AH (accessibility hierarchy): learnability
● Learners’ capability to generalize
● Learners’ maximum generalization occurs from more marked structures to the less marked ones.
4. Focus on form
[1] Focus on form vs. Focus on form S
a) Focus on form: overly draws students’ attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overriding focus is on meaning or communication= enhanced input (input that can be enhanced by external source e.g. teacher or an internal source)
b) Focus on form S: [teaching methodologies in which the main organizing principle for language classrooms was the accumulation of individual language items.]
[2] Williams (1999):
a) Learners at low levels of proficiency do not often spontaneously attend to language form
b) When there is learner-generated attention to form, the attention is generally given to words rather than to other linguistic features.
[3] Learner-generated attention to form may require some pedagogical training, including corrective feedback.
[4] Not all forms are teachable.
[5] Timing
a) Harley (1998): one needs to learn what needs to be learned before being able to sort out specific facts of what is to be learned.
b) Lightbown (1998): input on stages that may be considerably beyond the learner’s current level does not lead to learning, but there’s not harm done to the learner. Teachers should have appropriate expectations. Unanalyzed chunks may serve as further input for learner’s own developing systems.
c) Torres (2005): the ordering effects of classroom presentation of input and interaction. [groups that had two kinds of input, regardless of the order did better than those with only input or only interaction]
d) Larson, Freeman (2006): variation can reflect instability.
[6] Forms to focus on
a) Williams & Evans (1998): learners’ readiness contributes to their ability to focus on and take in new information; not all structures are created equal with regard to input type.
b) One cannot use focus on form instruction with all grammatical constructions.
[7] Input manipulation and input enhancement
a) Input manipulation is a significant function of language instruction.
i. That is, teachers can provide varying degrees of explicitness in the input.
ii. Krashen: comprehensible input can be used to create implicit knowledge. [Explicit input lead to explicit knowledge]
iii. Dekeyser (2003): explicit learning can result in implicit knowledge through practice.
Practice {traditionally: rote repetition & substitution drills; cognitively: interacting with the language in some meaningful manner}
b) Input enhancement→make input salient to learners.(Sharwood & Smith, 1991)
i. Ways: drawing attention to a form (e.g. by coloring or bold facing in written input)
ii. Noticing is a prerequisite to processing of the input
iii. Salience{internally created; external created}
5. Uniqueness of instruction: instruction may have produced unique results
[1] Pavesi (1986) compared naturalistic versus instructed learners in terms of their acquisition of relative clauses.
[2] Lightbown (1983) studied the overuse errors.
[3] Kaper &Rose (2002): without instruction pragmatic knowledge will be difficult.
[4] Laufer (2005): input alone is insufficient for vocabulary learning and focus-on-form instruction is essential to instruction and does not need to be conducted with the context of a communicative task.
6. Effectiveness of instruction is not a matter of yes or no, but a matter of what, when and how.
本文来源：https://www.2haoxitong.net/k/doc/acaf2dcd050876323112121e.html
文档为doc格式