Elbie Adendorffelbie@sun.ac.za

University of Stellenbosch

Introduction The rationale of the research Needs identification Example of analysis of Robinson’s

framework Conclusion

The position of Afrikaans◦ Constitution of South Africa◦ multilingualism◦ Afrikaans for Specific Purposes

Language Policy for Higher Education◦ supports multilingualism◦ promotes use of Afrikaans as a medium of

academic teaching and communication◦ access for non-Afrikaans speakers should be

accommodated

Challenges at the University of Stellenbosch◦ Monolingual/bilingual language medium option of

Afrikaans and English Communication needs of students and

lecturers for learning Afrikaans for Specific Purposes in the university context

Representative dialogues (see task descriptions)

Questionnaire and interviews◦ communicative skills in Afrikaans to study

effectively at university Common European Framework of

References – educational domain Two clusters of language use identified

◦ Generic student-student-communication (social interactive)

◦ Generic student-lecturer-communication (academic language proficiency)

Dialogue 3:Two students talk about what they like about the social life in Stellenbosch and places to go to. They discuss some of the most popular student places to go to and what the pros and cons of each are. They also talk about their prefrences. They futher discuss which are night places and which are day places. Each student names his favourite place and explains why. They talk about nice restaurants and where and when they can eat cheaply. They decide to go to each others' favourite place and also some of the restaurants.

Use a communication task (dialogue 3) to identify typical language use situations according to Van Avermaet & Gysen’s (2009) format

Parameters for analyzing task complexity examined

Goals set for tasks directed towards social-interactive language learning

Finally textual features described schematically

Language use situations Language tasks

Asking/Understanding a route description

Understand/ask questions about how to drive/walk to a destination

Answer questions to a person who asks for a route description

Understand simple instructions from a person who describes a route

Making a reservation at a restaurant / recreational venue

Understand/ask questions about the restaurant / recreational venues

Understand/ask questions about the menu

Express personal requests and wishes Understand instructions about parking

facilities

Compare restaurants/social places/recreational venues

Asks questions/understand restaurants, social places and recreational venues

Express personal requests and wishes Answers questions about restaurants,

social places and recreational venues Motivates choice of favourite place

Skills involved: comprehensive listening and speaking Text genre: dialogue Level of information processing: restructuring level Interlocutor: familiar peer Topic: personal opinion Contextual support: here and now Linguistic features: frequent word list of vocabulary on

restaurants and social places; grammar rule on preferences and not (negative form) like "I prefer" or "I like" to "I do not like"; also question and answer construction and instructions.

On a descriptive level, the language user can:1. understand the main thoughts and ideas with regard to information in texts for entertainment and recreational venues.

On a restructuring level, the language user can:2. select relevant information and instructions regarding entertainment and recreational venues in advertisements and commercials.

On a evaluating level, the language user can:3. compare the information, arguments and conclusions as regards entertainment and recreational venues in advertisements and commercials.

Vocabulary Words, phrases and expressions are predominantely frequent

Grammar Sentences are predominately complex (7, 16, 24). Some sentences are simple (4, 12, 15). The negative form is used; also question and answer format, for example "Which place do you like?" and "I like". Also mainly present tense structure

Structure/Coherence/Length Structure is clear and explicit

Pronunciation Is clear

Tempo Is normal

Topic Is about the social aspect of the university life

Register Is informal

Fundamental claim Utilized for an analysis of the dimensions of

cognitive complexity Used same task as above (dialogue 3)

◦ Sentences 1-5: introductory phase◦ Sentences 6-43: narrative phase◦ Sentences 44-48: final phase

+ many elements+ reasoning+ there and then + planning+ prior knowledge+ single task 3LOW PERFORMATIVE AND HIGH DEVELOPMENTAL COMPLEXITY

+ many elements+ reasoning+ there and then - planning- prior knowledge- single task 4 HIGH PERFORMATIVE AND HIGH DEVELOPMENTAL COMPLEXITY

+ few elements+ no reasoning+ here and now + planning+ prior knowledge+ single task1LOW PERFORMATIVE AND LOW DEVELOPMENTAL COMPLEXITY

+ few elements+ no reasoning+ here and now - planning- prior knowledge- single task2HIGH PERFORMATIVE AND LOW DEVELOPMENTAL COMPLEXITY

Resource-directing features:◦ [+ many elements]◦ [+ reasoning]◦ [+ here and now]

Resource-dispersing features:◦ [+ planning time]◦ [+ prior knowledge]◦ [- single task]

Syntactic analysis Classification: quadrant 3

Dimensions of complexity

Simple1 2 3 4

Complex5

planning time(before speaking)

+ - - - -

single task(route marked, i.e. from hostel to library)

+ + - - -

prior knowledge(familiar area, i.e. hostel to library)

+ + + - -

few elements(a small area)

+ + + + -

Purpose of analysis: syllabus and course design for Afrikaans as second language within multilingual context of Stellenbosch University

Contribute to facilitating and optimizing second language development in Afrikaans

Crucial competence base for effective development of discipline-specific receptive and/or productive communication

Robinson, P. (2001a). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22, 27-57.

Robinson, P. (2001b). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.). Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P. 287-318.

Robinson, P. (2003). The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies 21(2), 45-107.

Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics 43,1-32.

Robinson, P. (2007a). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In: M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.). Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. P.7-27.

Robinson, P. (2007b). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. In: P. Robinson, & R. Gilabert (Eds.). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language instruction. Guest-edited special issue. International Review of Applied Linguistics 45, 193-215. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.

Robinson, P. & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and performance. In: P. Robinson, & R. Gilabert (Eds.). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language instruction. Guest-edited special issue. International Review of Applied Linguistics 45, 161-177. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.

Van Avermaet, P & Gysen, S. 2009. From needs to tasks. Language learning needs as task-based approach. In: Van den Branden, K., M. Bygate & J. Morris. Task-Based Language Teaching. A Reader. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin.