Six Proposals For Classroom Teaching

Six proposals for classroom teaching Proposa Features Research Finding ls 1. Get -audiolinguingual , -lg. is not learned by the it grammar gradual accumulation righ translation method -motivation in learners is t (Lado) important fro a. audiolingual -develop fluency before m pattern drill by accuracy the Lightbown 1970s begi b. Gr. Plus nnin communicative g practice by Savingon 1972

2. Just liste n… and rea d

3. Let’s talk

4. Two for one

-comprehensive input through listening/reading Krashen -controversial (L2 doesn’t need drill and practice, learners do not need to speak at all -TPR (Asher) vocab. & structures are carefully graded and organized -interaction, taskbased instruction (Long)

-content based instruction, bilingual education

-learners never practiced spoken Eng. In their classes (Lightbown) -the more students read, the more words they learned (Horst, 05) -Substantial vocabulary growth through reading is possible -input flood (White), enhanced input (Smith), processing instruction (VanPattern) -negotiation of meaning through a variety of modifications/corrective feedback -learners offer genuine communicative practive that includes negation of meaning (Long & Porter) -patterns of pair interaction/collaborative interaction (Storch 02) -usefulness of pair work & small group activities (McDonough 04) -students develop both their academic skills & L2 ability

Interpreting the research -learners are unable to communicate their message and intentions effectively -meaning-based instruction is advantageous (Savignon) -emphasis is on understanding and expressing meaning -foundation: comprehension of meaningful lag. -active listening, TPR, reading for meaning: valuable components in pedagogical practices

-investigated factors to quality & quantity of interactions -the measure of L2 was the learners’ immediate production following interactions

-increases the amount of time for learners

(Cumming) -immersion and CLIL programs

-French immersion: comprehensible input is not enough (Lambert & Tucker) -Inuit children in contentbased programs: oral abilities were limited

-creates need to communicate, motivating students

5. T eac h wha t is teac habl e

-developmental stages (Pieneman) (sths can be taught only if the learner is ready for them

-focus on developmental features/individual vocab items, variational features -instruction cannot change the ‘natural developmental course’ -ready to learn, unreadies and recasts (Mackey & Philp 98) -developmental states and L1 influence (no corrective feedback)

6. Get it righ t in the end

-form/focus (sths cannot be taught if the teaching fails to take the student’s readiness) stage of development

-necessary to draw learner’s attention, & to focus on certain linguistic points -focusing on the condition, gender, verb form, recasts/prompts, collaborative dialogue,

-instructional /interactional input in L2 can be beneficial -increased ‘exposure’ but not ‘instruction’ (S & L ) -important for helping teachers understand why students don’t always learn what they are taught (Lightbown 98) -effects of instruction are not always long lasting. -students can and do help each other to reflect on lang. form if they are given guidance and supportive structure (Swain & lapkin)

I developed this chart for my personal use. Krishna K. Bista Troy University Oct 22, 2008