1 / 40

The effect of metalinguistic information in conjunction with dictogloss tasks on L2 learning

The effect of metalinguistic information in conjunction with dictogloss tasks on L2 learning. Sano, Fujiko. Yokohama National University fsano@ynu.ac.jp. Research on t he role of noticing. Howeve r,.

candice-mack
Download Presentation

The effect of metalinguistic information in conjunction with dictogloss tasks on L2 learning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The effect of metalinguistic information in conjunction with dictogloss tasks on L2 learning Sano, Fujiko Yokohama National University fsano@ynu.ac.jp

  2. Research on the role of noticing

  3. However, • Combination of output-based instruction and input-based instruction has not been extensively carried out. • How noticing could affect the subsequent learning of the target feature has not yet been thoroughly investigated.

  4. Background of the study • Noticing is prerequisite for learning. • Output promotes noticing.

  5. Dictogloss activities 1) Students listen to a text twice. 2) They are allowed to write keywords or phrases only while listening. 3) Students form small groups and communicate about the content of the given story, occasionally pay attention to and discuss linguistically problematic forms. 4) Each group reconstruct the story.

  6. Focus on form Attention to forms within the context of communicative activities (Long, 1990).

  7. The key features of FFI: • An overall emphasis on the communication of meaning. • A brief diversion from the emphasis on communication to focus on language as object. • A problem-based trigger for the diversion. ⇒Form-Focused Instruction is best accommodated after communicative language learning.

  8. Problematicity Problematicity / Grammatical difficulty: 1) frequency, 2) saliency, 3) functional value, 4) regularity, and 5) processability (Ellis, 2006). Thus, a problematic grammatical feature is feasibly targeted in FFI.

  9. Types of focus on form (Ellis, Basterkmen, & Loewen, 2001) a) Preemptive– attempt by the teacher to initiate explicit attention to a linguistic form because it is problematic at a particular moment in the discourse. b) Reactive – occurs when a learner has said something that contains a real or perceived error and the teacher or another learner responds to this error,

  10. The study Preemptive focus on form Conversational and didactic focus on form interactions Explicit didactic instruction vs. enhanced input

  11. Research questions • What are the relative effects of enriched input (implicit) and provision of (explicit) didactic instruction on the learning of the past hypothetical conditional? • What are the learners’ proficiency effects on the learning of the past hypothetical conditional?

  12. The target grammatical feature The past hypothetical conditional in English: • Consists of two clauses: (1) subordinate clause, (2) main clause. • Requires an accurate form of (a) modal verb, and (b) past participle.

  13. The participants Japanese university students Number: 135 Age: ranging from 18 to 20 years old, Background: • enrolled in three first-year English classes in the engineering department. • completed 6 years of study of English as a foreign language before entering university.

  14. The number of each class for data analysis Exclusion from the study: • the absentees of any one of the five sessions, • returnees, foreign students, • those students who scored more than 95% or less than 5% Class 1 (advanced) 41  22 Class 2 (intermediate) 46  36 Class 3 (intermediate) 48  30

  15. Three groups Explicit didactic Enriched instruction input ------------------------------------------------------ Advanced Class 1 (N=22) IntermediateClass 3 Class 2 (N=36) (N=30) -------------------------------------------------------

  16. Research Design a pretest, immediate and delayed post-tests design involving: 1) Dictogloss + Didactic Grammar Instruction Group (high proficiency) 2) Dictogloss +Enriched Input Group (intermediate proficiency) 3) Dictogloss + Didactic Grammar Instruction Group (intermediate proficiency)

  17. Procedure carried out in 5 class sessions over a period of nine weeks Week 1: Pretest <2 weeks> Week 3: Practice Week 4: Treatment (1) Week 5: Treatment (2) + Immediate post-test <4 weeks> Week 9: Delayed post-test

  18. Dictogloss activity sequence • The participants listened to a short story twice. Two “if” clauses and two main clauses were included in a 78-word story. • The participants worked in groups of 3. They interacted in their L1 while they were reconstructing the story. • After the completion of the reconstruction task, the written text was provided for post-task instruction.

  19. Tests Pretest, immediate-post-test, and delayed post-test included: (1) a recognition test to assess the participants’ receptive knowledge of the target feature (2) a written production test to assess their language use.

  20. Coding of production test One point was given to each aspect that determines the past hypothetical conditional. If … had + p.p. …, … would have + p.p. 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 total=7

  21. Results • To measure the effectiveness of different options of grammar teaching, improvements from pretests to posttests were compared across the groups with repeated measure ANOVAs. • The average difference level -- .05 for all analyses in this study. • No significant differences between the two groups at the starting point • Statistical significances between the scores of pretest and immediate post-test, and pretest and delayed post-test, and significant interaction effect

  22. Grammar recognition test results: Classes 2 & 3

  23. Recognition tests: Classes 2 & 3(F(1, 56)=37.797, p<.001)

  24. Production test results —Classes 2 & 3

  25. Production tests: Classes 2 and 3(F(1, 64)=166.482, p<.001)

  26. To sum greater effects metalinguistic instruction > enriched input

  27. Differences of proficiency level • Different proficiency levels groups (Classes 1 and 3) • metalinguistic instruction • the pretest to immediate and delayed post-tests • The results of ANOVAs showed statistical significance at the starting point • no statistical significance between the scores of immediate and pretest of Class 1 and 3

  28. Grammar recognition test results: Classes 1 & 3

  29. Recognition tests: Classes 1 & 3(F(1, 47)=57.251, p<.001)

  30. Production test results: Classes 1 & 3

  31. Production tests: Classes 1 & 3(F(1, 50)=145.948, p<.001)

  32. To sum: The results of both recognition and production tests indicated that explicit metalinguistic instruction gave greater effects on Class 3, whose starting points were lower than the other class.

  33. Discussion • Explicit instruction served better to promote L2 learners’ use in a classroom setting. • However, this does not necessarily mean that L2 learners acquired the target feature by way of the combination of “noticing, collaborative reflection, collaborative language production, and follow-up form-focused instruction”. • The development shown in the results of this study may only indicate the development of L2 learners’ interlanguage which is based on metalinguistic knowledge, and not represent their acquired implicit knowledge. • To investigate the distinct nature of grammar knowledge, different types of grammar tests would be needed, such as oral imitation test.

  34. Knowledge of the target feature anomalous and inconsistent  systematic • Out of the six characteristics of implicit and explicit knowledge that Ellis (2008) classified, only one characteristic of implicit knowledge was gained though dictogloss and explicit FFI. • This may indicate that explicit teaching and learning can foster a part of implicit knowledge of the second language.

  35. Language learning in EFL context: • Explicit knowledge: the most feasible and learnable • Accumulating explicit knowledge + experiencing opportunities to produce the language + explicit knowledge base  automatic use of declarative knowledge  procedural knowledge • Task-based language teaching should be deployed to foster L2 learners’ procedural knowledge of rules. • In order not to miss out on the target feature to be used in the task, dictogloss will provide more frequent opportunities to use the declarative knowledge that L2 learners gained in the context of instructed SLA.

  36. Conclusion • (1) Greater effects by metalinguistic instruction than implicit enriched input for the development of grammatical recognition and grammatical knowledge use • (2) The effects maintained for a long term of at least four weeks • (3) Effects gained across the different levels of proficiency • (4) Interaction / collaborative dialogue in L1 was effective.

  37. Limitations and future research Future research might need to deploy two types of tests: 1) elicitation tests (performance-based tests) 2) unplanned communicative language use. Thus, a battery of tests that measure both implicit and explicit L2 grammatical knowledge will be able to clarify interlanguage development.

  38. Bibliography • Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of explicit knowledge. Language Learning 54, 227-275. • Ellis, R. (2005). Instructed language learning and task-based teaching. In E. Hinkel. (Ed.). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, (pp. 713-728). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. • Ellis, R. (2006). Modeling learning difficulty and second language proficiency: the differential contributions of implicit and explicit knowledge. Applied Linguistics 27, 432-463. • Ellis, R. (2008). Investigating grammatical difficulty in second language learning: Implications for second language acquisition research and language testing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18, 4-22. • Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., and Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning 51, 281-318. • Qin, J. (2008). The effect of processing instruction and dictogloss tasks on acquisition of the English passive voice. Language Teaching Research 12, 61-82.

  39. Song, M-J. & Suh, B-R. (2008). The effects of output task types on noticing and learning of the English past counterfactual conditional. System 36, 295-321. • Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Maddeen. (Eds.). Input in second language acquisition, (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. • Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer. (Eds.). Principle and practice in applied linguistics, (pp. 125-144). Oxford University Press. • Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty and J. Williams. (Eds.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, (pp. 64-81). Cambridge University Press. • Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: theory and research. In E. Hinkel. (Ed.). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, (pp. 471-483). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. • Williams, J. (2005). Form-focused instruction. In E. Hinkel. (Ed.). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, (pp. 671-691). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

More Related