ling 511 – module 2 form
DESCRIPTION
Ling 511 – Module 2 Form. October 3, 2011. Agenda. Form in instruction situated Form in instruction – Research Form-focused instruction and Focus on Form -- in Practice Brief overview of M2 TPOVs. FFI References (+M&B). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
October 3, 2011
![Page 2: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Form in instruction situated Form in instruction – Research Form-focused instruction and Focus on Form
-- in Practice
Brief overview of M2 TPOVs
![Page 3: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Spada, N. & P. Lightbown. (2008). Form-Focused Instrution: Isolated or Integrated? TESOL Quarterly 42(2): 181-207.
Nassaji, H. & S. Fotos. (2004). Current Developments in Research on the Teaching of Grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24, 126-145.
Celce-Murcia, M. & D. Larsen-Freeman. (2004).The Grammar Book, 2nd Edition, New York: Newbury House.
![Page 4: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Relationship to meaning (Laws of Form, Brown, 1969)
Form and social relationships Models Attending to form Correcting “deviant” form Form and cognitive style Krashen’s (1972) “monitor” Interlanguage & form “Focus on form: after the fact” (vs form-focused
instruction: teach grammar before other)
![Page 5: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Children & FFI Classroom-based SLA & FFI Krashen (1982) position on underlying
grammatical development Nature of early studies related to FFI
(discrete-point & metalinguistic - talk about grammar - biases)
Essential tie in FFI to meaning
![Page 6: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Johnson (1982) “unificationist vs separationist”
Long (1991) “focus on form” target of opportunity
Isolated FFI “ . . . Primary purpose to teach about form that would not be acquired naturally” (p. 187 spada and lightbown) esp, academic functions
Integrated – In classroom during communication.
![Page 7: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Long (1991) FonF should be fully integrated Transfer appropriate processing (TAP), cf.
MATESOL program epistemology LB&S (1990) Young learners w/”certain” lg
features (p.190) Jean (2005) w/FFInt, learners showed more
vocab variety (All are learned vocab, grammar are
learned together)
![Page 8: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Stern (1992) still a place for isoffi (Writing papers, essays, etc. this would be
helpful in this context) DeKeyser (1998) FFI first . . . , Trofimivich
(2005) TAP model would predict isoffi would work
better e.g., w/some types of composition instruction, especially ESP @ higher levels.
No solid empirical research comparing Int w/Iso
![Page 9: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
L1 influence◦ Iso advantageous, esp. where l2 developed
Salience◦ Iso if the features are relatively “simple”, e.g., 3rd
person singular ‘-s” Input frequency
◦ Iso useful when forms are not frequent Rule complexity
◦ Int useful when structure “too difficult to do . . . “
![Page 10: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Communicative value◦ Int, if errors lead to clear comm errors
Learner development level◦ Int once a feature has emerged in IL
Learner age◦ Iso w/older learners (but adults more aware of
Int., Ohta, 2000) Lg-learn aptitude
◦ More working memory; more int awareness
![Page 11: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Learner & teacher prefs◦ Mismatches, learners wanting more FFI, in
general, expectations◦ Learning styles—focus on class or group
response, not individual learners◦ Variability among instructors (Borg, 2001)◦ Burgess & Etherington (2002): Int useful, but not
sufficient◦ General variability in research
![Page 12: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
“ . . . Give students a feel for . . .aware of general rules and formulas” (CM&LF, 1984)
Bring to attention, vs. notice Noticing characterized by uptake or later
evidence to that effect (How do you know?) Question: How to make it stick. Monitoring modalities: e.g., haptic-
integrated pronunciation instruction
![Page 13: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Hammering on FonF (repetition) Hopping on FonF (targets of opportunity) Hitting on FonF (strong sensual anchoring) Harping on FonF (comment only, w/o anchor
or follow up) Hoping on (they’ll get it w/o attention) Modalities: visual, auditory, kinesthetic,
haptic (visual + kinesthetic)management
![Page 14: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Feedback on errors Metalinguistic terminology Statement of rules Explanations (stopping and asking for
rules.) Note: “Context” is a communicative activity
![Page 15: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
(before noticing) demonstrate or model Ask to describe or explain function (p. 413) Paraphrases Collocation Students find examples of form in text and
are required to come up w/explanation Bring to attention & manipulate
![Page 16: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Deconstruct form Relate to other forms; relate to system Expand form Show error Correcting errors Do an activity to correct it . . . (p. 493) Note: FonF, less practice strategy work
![Page 17: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Processing instruction – tasks that encourage comprehension, ~production
Interactional feedback, i.e., negotiation or modification strategies, recasts
Textual enhancement, elaboration Task-based instruction, esp. consciousness
raising “ . . .more research is needed . . .”
![Page 18: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Collaborative output, “pushed output” (Swain, 1985), activities which have require FonF opportunities “engineered in”
Discourse-based approaches, esp. in written media w/cultural and rhetorical FonF strategies
![Page 19: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Essential conditions: (p. 137)◦(1) learner noticing and continued
awareness, ◦(2) repeated meaning-focused exposure
to input containing them◦(3) opportunities for output and practice
“ . . . More research is necessary . . .”
![Page 20: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Grammar-translation Method Audiolingual Method Silent Way Method (developed in response to
audio-lingual method) different way of seeing learner’s role.
How do they treat form
![Page 21: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
What is it? What was it's historical context? What are the principle techniques and
tasks? How does the method order the "line of
march"?
![Page 22: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
1. Pedagogical (in the classroom) 2. Professional (for persuading colleagues) 3. Political (for persuading administrators or
public "owners")
![Page 23: Ling 511 – Module 2 Form](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062809/56815a30550346895dc771a9/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
How does it deal with "form” in general? What were it’s strengths in its historical
period? What were its potential shortcomings? What evidence do you see of FonF?