Research and the language teacher

Penny Ur

2

This session

1. Research as one component of the professional knowledge of the teacher

2. The contribution of research-based insights3. The problems 4. Possible answers: selective and critical

reading5. The importance of mediators.

3

1. Research as one component of professional

knowledge

4

Sources of teachers’ knowledge

• Courses (pre- and in-service)• Conferences• Reading (research, professional literature)• Recommendations of colleagues• Feedback from students • Classroom experience + reflection

5

Schön: The Reflective Practitioner

Professionals learn mainly by reflecting in/on actionNot by applying research-based theories

(Schön, 1983)

6

Research-based theory in teaching

“The teaching profession, as with all high-standard professions, needs the best available academic knowledge in order to fulfil its commitments to society… Teachers have to be familiar with the latest knowledge and research about the subject matter.”

(Niemi, 2008).

7

And the teachers themselves?

Most teachers do not read the research literature very often, if at all.Reasons: ‘I don’t have the time.’‘I don’t have access.’‘It’s not of practical help.’‘It’s difficult to understand.’

(Borg, S. 2009)

8

The teacher as researcherLawrence Stenhouse

(Hopkins & Rudduck, 1985) Research as ‘disciplined enquiry made public’ Action ResearchBut: it hasn’t happenedIf it does, only within a supportive framework (course, external initiative)

9

Interim summary• Research-based theory is not seen by most teachers as

the main contributor to professional knowledge. • Teachers learn mainly from reflection on experience.• Teachers do not usually do research themselves.• But the importance of the research continues to be

stressed in the professional literature.• There is a trend towards ‘academicization’ of the

profession

10

Bottom line: dissonance

An uncomfortable, unresolved discrepancyRising awareness and increasing discussion in the literature and at conferences (Ellis, 2010, 2012; discussions in the research SIG at IATEFL, 2012)My position: research is not the main source of teacher knowledge, but it can enrich it.

11

2. The contribution of research-based insights

12

1. Different types of research-based literature

1. Original empirical research

2. Overviews / meta-analyses

3. Theory, drawing on research evidence

13

How does it contribute?

Research produces evidence, that can be used to create practical principles for teaching.May provide new insights / information that hadn’t occurred to usMay contradict comfortable, but inaccurate, assumptionsMay confirm our own intuitions

14

Example 1 Guessing from context (‘inferencing’)Convincing evidence that in over 50% of the cases, in natural contexts, unknown words cannot be guessed (Nassaji, 2003)Even if they are guessed correctly, this does not lead to better learning (Mondria, 2003) Guessing from context is no substitute for learning. It’s probably better simply to explain, or gloss, new

vocabulary in a text rather than asking students to guess.

15

Example 2: lexical sets

•Tinkham (1993) •Does it help learners to master a new set of lexical

items if they are all members of a lexical set (same part of speech, same kind of meaning: e.g. clothes, animals)?

16

Learners were presented with two sets of items from an artificial language, and told their ‘meanings’; one set all related to the same domain, the other did not.shirt = mosheejacket = umausweater = blaikel

rain = achencar = nalofrog = kawvas

rain = mosheecar = umaufrog = blaikel

shirt = achenjacket = nalo sweater = kawvas

17

The learners consistently learned the unrelated items

better.•The research was later replicated, with similar results.•e.g. Waring (1998), Papathanasiou (2009)•When asked, learners said that they found they were confused because words had similar meanings. •i.e. if you learn two words with similar meanings (or forms?) the learning of one ‘interferes’ with learning the other.

18

But words linked to each other syntagmatically and thematically are learnt well.e.g. blue + sky rather than blue + redThe vocabulary presented in elementary textbooks should be based not on semantic sets or pairs, but on thematic and syntactic links.e.g. if the theme is ‘family’ then items might be things like:home, love, mother, father, kitchen, cook, marry, happy, comfortable...and not just a list of family membersmother, father, brother, sister, aunt, uncle...

19

Example 3: Corrective feedback

‘Recasts’ are the least effective of oral corrective feedback strategies.

(Lyster, 1998) When correcting we need to involve the

student (elicitation, negotiation).

20

Problems

21

Why don’t teachers read the research?

1. Time!2. Lack of clarity3. Contradictions 4. Researcher bias4. Practical application may be limited or

inappropriate:i. Trivial or impractical topicsii. Small population, time-frameiii. The ‘Hawthorne effect’iv. Local pedagogical or practical constraintsv. Inadequate professional experience of researcher

22

Time

• Teachers are busy: lessons, preparation, checking assignments, paperwork.

• Reading and study are not built in to the teachers’ work description.

• Sometimes actively discouraged by employers.

23

Lack of clarity

Sometimes inevitable: specific terminology, statisticsOften unnecessary (and unforgivable!): difficult language for its own sake (Aaronson, 1977)

24

ContradictionsExample:

The role of practice in instructed language learning

Salaberry(1997)vs.Ellis (2001)

25

Researcher bias

Articles which use the research to support a particular positionExamples:

Truscott (1999): Against the giving of corrective feedbackSwan (2005): Against task-based instruction

26

Limited practical application(i) Trivial, irrelevant or

impracticalStudies on problems with a particular grammatical point.Studies on topics that aren’t relevant to our context (e.g. CLIL)Studies that draw conclusions that can’t be implemented in practice (e.g. teachability hypothesis)

27

Limited practical application(ii) Small population or time-

frameSmall populations: usually university studentsRelatively short time

Example: Studies quoted in Norris & Ortega (2001)

28

Limited practical application(iii) The Hawthorne effect

Impressive results in an empirical study may be simply the result of change, and subjects’ awareness that this is an experimental innovation.

e.g. Research on the use of CALL

(Macaro, Handley, & Walter, 2012)

29

4. Limited practical application

(iv) Pedagogical / practical constraints

The published research on ELT is nearly all second language acquisition (SLA).But practical pedagogical issues are often more important to practitioners: large and/or heterogeneous classes discipline problems pressure from stakeholders upcoming exams the local culture of learning limited time to prepare

… etc.

30

Example 1: Culture of learning

Task-based or communicative teachingThe task-based approach seen by many as

the best basis for successful instructed language-learning

But not appropriate for some cultures of learning

(Carless, 2007; Hu, 2002)

31

Example 2: stakeholder pressure

The optimal age for starting to study English in schoolIn the context of instructed language learning, late starters learn better.

(Muñoz & Singleton, 2011)But the pressure of parents, politicians and commercial interests leads to early-start programs.

32

(iv) Inadequate professional knowledge of researcher

The rearcher’s ‘practical pedagogical implications’ are often in fact impractical.Many excellent studies are followed by ‘off the wall’ suggestions for classroom teaching. Practical application of research to teaching has to be determined by the teacher (Widdowson, 1990; Ellis, 2012).

33

Selective and critical reading

34

Main problems: time, access, practical use, comprehensibility.

Time and access: the contribution of the Internet

Access: national and international conferencesPractical use, comprehensibility: the need for

selective, critical reading.

35

Selective reading

• Check the topic: look it up on the Internet• Check the source: a respected publisher or

journal• Check the author• Websites, e.g.

http://www.tesolacademic.org/• Webinars, conference proceedings,

Youtube…

36

Critical reading

• Check for clarity• Check for replications / contradictions• Check for applicability to your teaching• Draw your own conclusions

37

4. Mediators

38

Who are the mediators?

‘Mediators’: Teachers who are also trainers, readers of research and perhaps writers: can mediate the research literature for other teachers.

39

Types of mediators

Speakers at conferences presenting their own interpretations of researchWriters of teacher handbooksTeacher trainers or counselors.

40

The research component in teacher courses

It is important to include insights from the research in teacher courses(whether preparation or השתלמויות)But why, if it’s not a major source of teacher expertise.

41

The reasons

1. It’s not a major source, but it is a significant one, not available from daily practice.

2. Teachers rarely, if ever, have opportunities to encounter it elsewhere.

3. The trainer is in a position to mediate the research.

42

What is ‘mediation’ in this case?

1. Selection. The trainer selects for inclusion research studies that present reliable evidence, and that have clear implications for teaching/learning.

2. Clarification. The trainer presents / explains the studies, rather than leaving teachers to read on their own.

3. Criticism. The trainer leads discussion of the implications of the research for teaching, including reservations and criticism.

43

SummaryThe research literature is an important source of professional knowledge.There is too much of it, and a lot of it is impractical or difficult to read.It should be read selectively and critically.Hence the need for mediators: chiefly the teacher trainers. (Ur, 2014)

44

References

Aaronson, S. (1977-8). Style in scientific writing. Essays of an Information Scientist, 3, 4-13. Available from: http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v3p004y1977-78.pdfBorg, S. (2009). English language teachers’ conceptions of research. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 358–388.Carless, D. (2007). The suitability of task-based approaches for secondary schools: Perspectives from Hong Kong. System, 35(4), 595-608.Ellis, R. (2001). Grammar teaching - Practice or consciousness-raising? In Richards, J. C. & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp.167-174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ellis, R. (2010). Second language acquisition, teacher education and language pedagogy. Language Teaching, 43(2), 182-201.Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Chichester, Uk: Wiley-Blackwell. Hopkins D., & Rudduck J. (Eds.) (1985). Research as a basis for teaching: Readings from the work of Lawrence Stenhouse. London: Heinemann.Hu, G . (2002). Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: the case of communicative language teaching in China. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 15(2), 93-105.

45

Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48(2), 183-218.Macaro, E, Handley, C., & Walter, C. (2012). A systematic review of CALL in English as a second language: Focus on primary and secondary education. Language Teaching, 45, 1-43.Mondria, J- A. (2003). The effects of inferring, verifying and memorizing on the retention of L2 word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(4), 473-499.Muñoz, C., & Singleton, D. (2011). A critical review of age-related research on L2 ultimate attainment. Language Teaching, 44(1), 1-35. Nassaji, H. (2003). L2 vocabulary learning from context: Strategies, knowledge sources and their relationship with success in L2 lexical inferencing. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 645-670.Niemi, H. (2008). Advancing research into and during teacher education. In Hudson, B. & Zgaga P. (eds) Teacher education policy in Europe (p.184). Faculty of Teacher Education, University of Umeå, in co-operation with the Centre for Educational Policy Studies, Faculty of Education, University of LjubljanaNorris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2001). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analytic review. Language Learning, 51, Supplement 1, 157-213.Papathanasiou, E. (2009). An investigation of two ways of presenting vocabulary. ELT Journal, 63(4), 313-322.Salaberry, M. R. (1997). The Role of Input and Output Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(2), 422-451.

46

Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: the case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 376-401.Tinkham, T. 1993. The effect of semantic clustering on the learning of L2 vocabulary. System 21(3): 371-80.Truscott, J. (1999). What's wrong with oral grammar correction? The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 437-56.Ur, P. (2014). Practice and research-based theory in English teacher development. European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 3(2), 143-156.Waring, R. 1998. The negative effect of learning words in semantic sets: a replication. System 25(2), 261-74.Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

47

Useful Resources Journals The Reading TeacherEducational LeadershipEnglish Teaching Professional ELT JournalEnglish Teaching ForumThe Modern Language JournalModern English TeacherBlogshttp://leoxicon.blogspot.co.il/http://elt-resourceful.com/https://janecohenefl.edublogs.org/