Chapter 6 Teach What is Teachable

8/14/2019 Chapter 6 Teach What is Teachable

1/18

CHAPTER 6:SECOND LANGUAGE

LEARNING IN THE

CLASSROOMSix proposals for classroom teaching:

TEACH WHAT IS TEACHABLE

By Pirada Petchngarm ID: 540231048

Romchalee Udthep ID: 540231050


2/18

Have tried to explain why it often seems that some things can be

taught successfully whereas other things seem to remainunacquired, even after extensive or intensive teaching.

In Chapter 2, their research provides evidence that some linguistic

structures, for example, basic word order in sentences develop

along a predictable developmental path.

Manfred P ienemann and h i s assoc ia tes


3/18

Developmental features

Stage

1

Stage4

Stage

1

Stage

2

Stage

3

Stage

4


4/18

Variational features

Depend on factors:

Motivation

The learners sense of identity

Language aptitude

Quality of instruction


5/18

Example 6

S1: Mylne, where you put your Kids of the Week poster?

T:Where did you put your poster when you got it?

S2: In my room.

(two minutes later)

S3: Beatrice, where you put your Kids of the Week poster?

T:Where did you put your poster?

S4: My poster was on my wall and it fell down.


6/18

Example 7

S1: Is your mother play piano?

T: Is your mother play piano? OK. Well, can you say Is your mother

play piano? or Is your mother a piano player?

S1: Is your mother a piano player?

S2: No.


7/18

Example 8

S1: Is your favourite house is a split-level?

S2:Yes.

T:Youre saying is two times dear. Is your favourite house a split-

level?

S1:A split-level.

T: OK.


8/18

Example 9

S: Do the boy is beside the teacher desk?

T: Is the boy beside the teachers desk?

S: Is the boy beside the teacher desk?


9/18

Research Findings

Teach what is teachable view suggests that while some features of

the language can be taught successfully at various points in thelearners' development, other features develop according to learners'

internal schedule.

The recommendation is to assess the learners developmental level

and tech what would normally come next.


10/18

Study 28: Ready To Learn

Manfred investigated whether instruction permitted learners toskip a stage in the natural sequence of the development.

Australian university

students @stage 2

Australian university

students @stage 2

were

taught

German word orderrules associated with

stage 3

German word orderrules associated with

stage 4

moved easily into stage 3unable to skip a stage in a

developmental sequence


11/18

Study 29 : Readies , Unreadies And Recasts

Alison Mackey and Jenefer Philp investigated whether adult ESL

learners who were at the different stages in their acquisition of

questions could advance in their immediate production of these

forms if they received negative feedback (i.e. recasts ) in

conversational interaction.


12/18

Study 29 : Readies , Unreadies And Recasts

Readies in

the

interaction

The result revealed that:

Readies in

the

interaction

Recasts >

Unreadies

were

orwere not

exposed torecasts

Did not show

more rapidimprovement


13/18

Study 30 : Developmenta l s ta ge and

f i rs t language inf luence

Nina Spada and Patsy Lightbown investigated the acquisition of questions in relation to

learners' developmental readiness. The researchers were interested in discovering whether

stage 3 learners who considered to be developmentally ready would benefit more from the

high frequency exposure to Stage 4 and 5 questions than the Stage 2 learners, who were not

yet developmentally ready.

Participants: French speaking students aged 11-12 in intensive ESL classes


14/18



Finding:

Learners performance on an oral post-test measure indicated no advantage for stage

3 learners.

A more detailed examination of the learners performance on this task showed thatlearners tended to accept stage 4 and 5 questions when subject of the sentence was a

pronoun.

Ex. Are you a good student? or When are you going to eat breakfast?

However, when subject of the sentence was a noun, there was a tendency forstudents to reject higher stage questions.

Ex. Are the students watching TV? or What is your brother doing?

This pattern in the students performance appear to be related to a question rule in

their first language. That is , in French, questions with nouns in the subject positionare not inverted.

Ex. Peut-Jean venir chez moi?= Can John come to my house?

In French questions with pronoun subjects, however, inversion is permitted.

Ex. Peut-il venir chez moi?= Can he come to my house?


15/18



These results indicate that instruction timed to match learners

developmental readiness may move them into moreadvanced stages, buttheir performance may still be affected by other factors. In this study first

language influence seem to be responsible for the learners' inability to

generalize their knowledge of inversion to all questions.


16/18

The result of these studies suggested that targeting instructional or interactional input to learners when they

are developmentally ready to progress further in the second language can be beneficial. However, other factorssuch as type of input and first language influence can interact with learners developmental readiness in complex

ways.

Pienemann provided the most explicit instruction for learners who were both ready and unready.

The result showed that learners who were ready moved into the next stage of development whereas

learners were not ready did not.

Mackey and Philp study also offer some support for the teachability hypothesis but revealed that

developmental readiness is not the only predictor of success. In fact that the readies responded more

positively to recasts than the unreadies suggests that the type of instructional/interactional input is also

important.

Spada and Lightbown study shows how the learners first language may interact with developmental

readiness in determining instructional outcomes.

Furthermore, in that study there was no explicit instructional on question.

Interpreting The Research


17/18


18/18

THANK YOU

Documents

Chapter 6 Teach What is Teachable