Language Acquisition vs.

Language Learning
Jason Fritze - Nashville, TN www.comprehensibleinput.c

 

How do you view your role as a teacher? What do you consider the role of the student? What informs your perspective?

A moment for reflection

What is the big picture?

How do we acquire

HOW and WHY have languages been taught in school?

How do we acquire

Dr. Stephen Krashen says that we acquire language in only one way…

by understanding messages  comprehensible

Input Hypothesis (CI)

Humans acquire language in only one way ­ by  understanding messages or by receiving  "comprehensible input”  CI = i + 1

Language Acquisition
 Similarities

& differences between first and second language acquisition
 L1  L2  SLA

Acquisition - Learning Distinction  Natural Order Hypothesis  Monitor Hypothesis  Input Hypothesis  Affective Filter

Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses: the Monitor Model

Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses
Acquisition - Learning Distinction  Natural Order Hypothesis  Monitor Hypothesis  Input Hypothesis  Affective Filter

Acquisition leads to spontaneous, unplanned communication.

Acquisition vs. Learning
  

Implicit Subconscious Informal situations Uses grammatical feel Depends on attitude Stable order of acquisition

  

Explicit Conscious Formal situations Uses grammatical rules Depends on aptitude Simple to complex

PAIDEIA philosophy
The 3 columns of instruction

QuickTimeª and a QuickTimeª and a QuickTimeª and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor TIFF (Uncompressed) decompres are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture.

QuickTimeª and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompre QuickTimeª and a QuickTimeª and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture are needed to see this picture. are needed to see this picture.

Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses
Acquisition - Learning Distinction  Natural Order Hypothesis  Monitor Hypothesis  Input Hypothesis  Affective Filter

Natural Order Hypothesis
  

We acquire the rules of language in a predictable order We do not yet know the exact order of language acquisition Implications for grammar syllabus instruction…

Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses
Acquisition - Learning Distinction  Natural Order Hypothesis  Monitor Hypothesis  Input Hypothesis  Affective Filter

Monitor Hypothesis

Conscious learning ... can only be used as a Monitor or an editor (Krashen & Terrell 1983)

Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses
Acquisition - Learning Distinction  Natural Order Hypothesis  Monitor Hypothesis  Input Hypothesis  Affective Filter

Input Hypothesis (CI)

Humans acquire language in only one way - by understanding messages or by receiving "comprehensible input” CI = i + 1

Providing Input for Acquisition

In classrooms we can provide input that is optimal for language acquisition  Focus on the message / not the form

Evidence for the Input Hypothesis
(chiefly Krashen 1985)

We speak to children acquiring their first language in special ways We speak to L2 learners in special ways L2 learners often go through an initial Silent Period Comparative success of younger and older learners reflects provision

Evidence for the Input Hypothesis
(chiefly Krashen 1985)

More comprehensible input greater L2 proficiency Lack of CI delays language acquisition Immersion teaching is successful because it provides CI Bilingual programs succeed to

Evidence for the Input Hypothesis According to Stephen Krashen:

“teaching methods work according to the extent that they I would add “work” for use comprehensible input”
acquisition

How can we encourage subconscious acquisition?
We must devote our major pedagogical efforts to encouraging language acquisition.

Acquisition or Learning?
1. repetition of sentences in a dialogue 2. reading a story aloud followed by questions 3. students exchanging views about their favorite music 4. students listening to grammatical explanation 5. studying a poem together 6. learning lists of vocabulary with their translation 7. listening to how an activity

Optimal Input for Acquisition
 Comprehensible  Interesting

Relevant  Not grammatically sequenced  Sufficient quantity

and

Signal meaning visually

 

Gesture or act out meaning of words Use props Draw or show other visuals

Krashen’s 5 Hypotheses
Acquisition - Learning Distinction  Natural Order Hypothesis  Monitor Hypothesis  Input Hypothesis  Affective Filter

The Affective Filter

The Affective Filter
How do we lower the affective filter?
 

Interesting topic (Comprehensible) Student should “forget” that the message is encoded in another language Not insisting on too-early production

The Affective Filter
How do we affective

  

Pushing students to speak before they are ready INCOMPREHNSIBLE INPUT Uninteresting message Error correction

raise the filter?

Errors in the target language
   

Errors are inevitable Errors are plentiful in the early stages EC puts students immediately on the defensive EC encourages a strategy in which the student will …

try to avoid mistakes & difficult constructions  and focus less on meaning and more on form

Selinker (1974) coined the term INTERLANGUAGE

INTERlanguage

“the language of the learner”

an individual language system created by second language learners resulting from 5 cognitive processes:
Native language interference Effects of instruction

INTERlanguage

INTERLANGUAGE 

Overgeneralization of rules L2 learning strategies L2 communication strategies

Error correction is NOT the basic mechanism for improving second language performance.

A safe procedure is simply to eliminate error correction entirely in communicative-type activities

“We can prepare them for the certainty that they will not be able to find the right word, that they will not be able to understand everything, and we can help insure that they will continue to obtain comprehensible input.” -Krashen

Types of errors
Strong errors - interfere with meaning  Weak errors - poor grammar usage but doesn’t affect meaning

Long’s Interaction Hypothesis
1983

Input can be made comprehensible in three ways

Simplifying the input (using familiar structures and vocabulary)  Using linguistic and extralinguistic features (background knowledge, gestures…)  Modifying the interactional structure of the conversation -

Students and teachers make input more comprehensible by negotiating meaning Students need to ask more questions to negotiate meaning and negotiate the type of input they receive in order to acquire language Students who acquire best negotiate most

Long’s Interaction Hypothesis

Negotiating Meaning
Both parties in the teacherstudent and student-student interaction must seek clarification, check comprehension and request confirmation that they have understood or are being understood by the other.

After two years of instruction the student who is willing to participate in a conversation with a speaker of the language is rare! Solution? -Make them

conversationally competen

By giving them the means of managing conversations, we can help them participate in conversations despite their inadequacies.

Devices to control the quantity and quality of INPUT
 

Asking the native speaker for help Verbal and non verbal cues:
Uh, yeah, I mean …  Nodding appropriately, eye gaze, behavior

Changing the subject to something easier to understand

Input Processing Instruction

Input Processing
INPUT (simplified and tailored to the learner’s level)

INTAKE (a filtered, processed version of the input)

Professional Literature and Research

    

Standards for Foreign Language Learning
COMMUNICATION CULTURES CONNECTIONS COMPARISONS COMMUNITIES
S

From Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the 21st Century

COMMUNICATION

Standard 1.1 (interpersonal): Students engage in conversations, provide and obtain information, express feelings and emotions, and exchange opinions. Standard 1.2 (interpretive): Students understand and interpret written and spoken language on a variety of topics. Standard 1.3 (presentational): Students present information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of listeners or readers on a wide

CULTURES

Standard 2.1 - Students demonstrate an understanding of the relationship between the practices and the perspectives of the cultures studied. Standard 2.2 - Students demonstrate an understanding of the relationship between the products and perspectives of the

CONNECTIONS

Standard 3.1 - Students reinforce and further their knowledge of other disciplines through the foreign language. Standard 3.2 - Students acquire information and recognize distinctive viewpoints that are only available through the foreign language and its culture.

COMPARISONS

Standard 4.1 comparisons Standard 4.2

Linguistic

Cultural comparisons

COMMUNITIES

Standard 5.1  Students use the language both within and beyond the school setting Standard 5.2  Students show evidence of becoming life-long learners by using the language for personal enjoyment and

ACTFL K-12 Performance Guidelines
Comprehension Language Comprehensibilty

Control Vocabulary Usage Communication Strategies Cultural Awareness

K-12 Performance Guidelines Advanced
Int. High Int. Mid Int. Low Novice High Novice Mid Novice Low K-4 K-8 K-12 5-8 5-12 7-12 9-10 11-12

ACTFL K-12 Performance Guidelines
Perhaps the single most useful document to inform our teaching and assessment of student language and culture acquisition Available at ACTFL.ORG

Professional Literature and Research

The Standards
In the past, foreign language instruction focused primarily on the memorization of words and grammar rules.
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the 21st century. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, 1996, p. 97

The standards require a much broader definition of the content of the language classroom, one in which students are given ample opportunity to explore, develop, and use communication strategies, learning strategies, and critical

as well as the appropriate elements of the language system and culture.

Standards for Foreign Language Learning:  Preparing for  the 21st Century, p. 97  

Unfortunately, as generations of language students have taught us, grammar by itself does not produce individuals who can speak or understand the language they studied.
Standards for Foreign Language Learning:  Preparing for  the 21st Century, p. 97

Foreign languages are not “acquired” when students learn an ordered set of facts about the language (e.g., grammar facts, vocabulary).
Standards for Foreign Language Learning:  Preparing for  the 21st Century, p. 97   

Students need to be able to use the target language for real communication … to carry out a complex interactive process that involves speaking and understanding what others say in the target language as well as reading and interpreting written materials Standards for Foreign Language Learning:  Preparing for 
the 21st Century, p. 97  

Incorporating Comparisons Standard 4.1 into Foreign Language Teaching
Serafima Gettys Stanford University
Foreign Language Annals Vol. 36, No. 2 p. 188

“…instruction might be more effective and students might benefit more if teachers and textbook authors start thinking about language in terms of words, as contemporary linguistics and psycholinguistics suggest (and not so much in terms of Gettys, Serafima. Incorporating Comparisons grammar or structure).”
Standard 4.1 into Foreign Language Teaching p 188 Foreign Language Annals Vol. 36, No. 2

“…In a word-oriented approach, learning outcomes are seen by the teacher more in terms of concrete lexical items. Grammatical skills are acquired through the acquisition of the most common words and their Gettys, Serafima. grammaticalIncorporating Comparisons p properties. Standard 4.1 into Foreign Language Teaching
188 Foreign Language Annals Vol. 36, No. 2

Put differently, students learn not so much grammar, but rather engage in exploring individual words in the entirety of their syntactic, morphological, and semantic features. Gettys, Serafima. Incorporating Comparisons
Standard 4.1 into Foreign Language Teaching p 188 Foreign Language Annals Vol. 36, No. 2

VYGOTSKY - “Scaffolding” the expert takes control of those portions of a task that are beyond the learner’s current level of competence, thus allowing the learner to focus on the elements within her/his range of

Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language Instruction
Shrum, Judith, and Eileen Glisan, 2000 (Heinle)

Chapter 7: Using a StoryBased Approach to Teach Grammar

Contextualized Language Instruction Chapter 7: Using a StoryBased Approach to Teach Grammar
In the past, a traditional classroom with its emphasis on grammatical competence and explicit knowledge

for learners to “communicate” in the ways that communication is currently being defined and understood by psycholinguists, applied linguists, materials developers, and the language teaching Language Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Instruction - Chapter profession.7: Using a Story-Based Approach to Teach Grammar

who spend years learning the formal properties of the language
(sound system, verb conjugations, rules of syntax, vocabulary lists, etc.)

could not, in the end, exchange information, express ideas or feelings, construct and control problem solving, or develop and nurture a social relationship in a second-

…we need to remember that understanding grammatical structures apart from their use and function is pointless unless one wants to be a linguist and describe a language scientifically without necessarily becoming a communicatively competent

Like road signs, grammatical structures take on meaning only if they are situated in a context, in people and in connected discourse.  
Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language Instruction - Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based Approach to Teach Grammar

Furthermore, Krashen (1982) reminds us that grammatical structures will become internalized only if the learners are placed in a situation in which they need to use (process) the structures for communicative purposes.  

Consequently, an important role of the teacher is to create learning situations in which the learners feel a need to call upon and make use of the grammar in order to comprehend and communicate in the target language.” Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language
Instruction - Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based Approach to Teach Grammar

…Many of us have probably experienced this method of grammar instruction, since most textbooks present grammar in this fashion.
Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language Instruction - Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based Approach to Teach Grammar

Unfortunately, many of the textbooks manipulative drills are grounded in shallow and artificial contexts (Walz, 1989) that have little importance to the real Teachers Handbook: learners. concerns ofContextualized Language Instruction - Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based
Approach to Teach Grammar

Thus the practice opportunities are meaningless to learners and are not capable of engaging their commitment to learning, their imaginations, or their desire to communicate using the forms they are Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language learning. Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based Instruction Approach to Teach Grammar

teachers to observe that these mechanical, repetitive drills often result in unmotivated and lethargic responses in learners, no matter how much context is given in the directions or how much personalization is

time to begin a serious reappraisal regarding the teaching of grammar and a new vision that goes beyond dichotomies in approaches. In this chapter, we are advocating a story-based and guided participatory Teachers Handbook: Contextualized Language Instruction approach. - Chapter 7: Using a Story-Based
Approach to Teach Grammar

But what about GRAMMAR?

Case against a grammatical syllabus
 

All students may not be at the same stage The “structure of the day” may not be i + 1 for some students Each structure often only presented once Assumes that we know the order of acquisition Places serious constraints on

In other words a grammatical focus will usually…
PREVENT COMMUNICATION USING THE SECOND LANGUAGE !!!!!!

Grammar within context

Content (a story, etc.) provides a context for detailed grammar study First the students acquire language, then they hone their communication skills with a more specific grammar focus

Shumann’s Acculturation Hypothesis

Acculturation is the major casual variable in SLA The degree to which the learner acculturates to the target culture group will control the degree to which he acquires the language Acculturation may be the most affective way of lowering the active filter and getting input for

Multiple Intelligences

Mini-Documentary: The Key Learning Community: Cultivating "Multiple Intelligences”  Interview: Howard Gardner on Multiple Intelligences and New Forms Clips from the George Lucas Educational of Assessment

Foundation

http://glef.org/index.html#

PERSONAL  Intrapersona l / Introspectiv e  Interpersona l / Social ACADEMIC  Logical / Mathematical  Verbal /

Multiple Intelligences 

EXPRESSIVE  Bodily / Kinesthetic  Visual / Spatial  Musical / Rhythmic EMERGING  Naturalist

INTRAPERSONAL / INTROSPECTIVE Journals, personal reflection, problem-solving activities, autobiographies and family heritage study, open-ended expression

Multiple Intelligences

INTERPERSONAL / SOCIAL

Multiple Intelligences

Cooperative tasks such as think-pair-share (interpersonal communiative activities) and jigsaws; creative group tasks such as collages and storybooks; interactive technology such as email, CDROM, and Internet

LOGICAL / MATHEMATICAL

Multiple Intelligences

Graphic organizers that show patterns and relationships; problemsolving and manipulatives, puzzles and games; challenge tasks

VERBAL / LINGUISTIC

Multiple Intelligences

Graphic organizers to promote brainstorming and generating ideas; list making; mnemonics, verbal games, speakers, interviews, peer teaching, personal expression (opinions and reactions), logs or journals

BODILY / KINESTHETIC

Multiple Intelligences

TPR; creative dramatics and mime; creating things; role playing and interviews; projects, field trips, active learning

VISUAL / SPATIAL

Multiple Intelligences

Learning experiences using drawings, charts, props, posters, photographs; illustrations, demonstrations; use of overhead projector, chalkboard, video

MUSICAL / RHYTHMIC

Multiple Intelligences

Songs, music, dance of the target culture; music mnemonics, jingles, raps, cheers; using movement or dance to illustrate ideas or concepts

NATURALIST

Multiple Intelligences

Data collection; demonstrations; research projects; logs; reports

Foundation of immersion programs since the 60s Research confirms that CB approaches result in student attainment of advanced levels of proficiencies Researchers suggest implementing CBI at the high-school level by offering content-based electives such as art, PE, and music

Content-Based Instruction

Content-Based Instruction
 

What is CBI? CBI uses the content, learning objectives, and activities from the school curriculum as the vehicle for teaching language skills

Content-Based Art Units
Frida Kahlo  Fernando Botero  Pablo Picasso  Francisco de Goya  The Huichol Henri Matisse people Claude Monet  The Aztecs Mir— Cézanne Georges Seurat

¥ Chiffres et Constellations

   

¥ Las Meninas

1656

V e l ‡ z q u e z

Content-Based Units Based on Videotext (film
clips)

Sequencing game -simplified, adapted text

Timed writing in groups with whiteboards

Videotext Content-Based Units Les Parapluies de Cherbourg
• French musical directed by Jacques Démy, Music by Michel Legrand • Highly comprehensible • Authentic language and culture

Reading

An essential source of CI

Reading in the language
 

  

Short Stories Free Voluntary Reading Classroom Libraries Reading Log Graded Readers Cultural Readings

Provides research supporting reading in FL programs Makes a strongs case for Free Voluntary Reading

Free Voluntary Reading

 

The missing ingredient in FL instruction Reading for pleasure Rich print environment

My classroom libraries

Spanish

French

Children’s Literature and Classic Tales
An excellent source of repetitive, highly predictable yet interesting CI

The Natural Approach
Krashen & Terrell, 1983

Natural Approach Techniques
a) Affective-Humanistic activities
* dialogues – short and useful - 'open' dialogues * interviews – pair work on personal information * personal charts and tables * preference ranking – opinion polls on favorite activities * revealing information about yourself – e.g. what I had for breakfast * activating the imagination – e.g. give a

Natural Approach Techniques
b) Problem-solving activities
* task and series – e.g. components of an activity such as washing the car * charts, graphs, maps – e.g. busfares, finding the way * developing speech for particular occasions – e.g. What do you say if … * advertisements c) Games, e.g. What is strange about … a bird swimming?' d) Content activities, e.g. academic subject matter such as math

The Natural Approach

Limitations:
 Often

i + 32  Lack of sufficient quantity of input

input

incomprehensible

Total Physical Response
“Classical TPR” Created by James Asher

TPR steps
 Model  Assess
 Delay

modeling  Remove modeling  Vary the groups  Novel commands

PACE model
   

Presentation Attention Co-construction Extension

Developed by Donato and Adair­Hauk

Total Physical Response Storytelling
created by Blaine Ray

TPRS

TPRS = Teaching Total Physical Proficiency Response through Reading Storytelling & Storytelling
created by Blaine Ray

TPRS

STORYTELLING ASKING

Step 1 ­  Step 3 ­  7 STEPS THE Vocabulary Literacy  Vocabulary - Pre-teach it  Personalize - Ask questions  Mini-Situation - Ask a story  Retell (Teacher)  Reading  Discuss the reading & personalize Step 2 ­   Assess (Student retell) Story

ASK the STORY Questioning is the key!
  

State and question Attempt to ask four questions for each statement Low to high level questions
 yes

/ no  either / or  Fill in the blank  Who? Where? When? What?  How? Why?

Popular Songs
EL BARQUITO Había una vez un barco muy chiquito … ( x 3 ) que no podía … ( x 3 ) navegar. Pasaron una, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 semanas… (x 3) pero el barquito todavía, no podía navegar. Y si esta historia no les parece larga… (x 3) Volveremos, volveremos, volveremos a

Methods I use to teach language and culture
  

 

Total Physical Response (TPR) TPR Storytelling (TPRS) Content-Based Instruction (Immersion)  Thematic Units  Children’s Literature  Culture: Art, Food & Music Reading Traditional and Popular Music

Assessment
      

Accuracy - ACTFL proficiency guidelines Informal vs. Formal Class participation Performance Based assessment Quizzes Timed writings Use informal assessments to indicate when students are ready to perform on more formal

I believe that all students can successfully acquire more than one language, and that I am responsible for making

My Philosophy
In order for all students to acquire and language, I must provide the motivation and the language input in my classes. I am only successful when each student is successful to the best of his/her ability.

“The purpose of language instruction is to provide students with what they need so they can progress without us.” -Krashen

Recommended Reading
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), 1995. Standards for Foreign Language Learning: Preparing for the 21st Century. Yonkers, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, Inc. ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines, 1989. Yonkers, NY: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, Inc. Asher, James, 2000. Learning Another Language Through Actions. Los Gatos, CA: Shy Oaks. Curtain, Helena and Carol Ann Bjornstad Pesola, 1994. Languages and Children Making the Match. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing.

Recommended Reading Cont.
Krashen, Stephen, 1995. the Easy Way. Foreign Language Education Krashen, Stephen, 1993. The Power of Reading: Insight from the research. Englewood, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Krashen, Stephen, & Tracy Terrell, 1983. The Natural Approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Hayward, CA: The Alemany Press. Pennac, Daniel, 1992. Gallimard. Comme un roman, Paris:

Ray, Blaine and Contee Seely, 2000. Fluency Through TPR Storytelling: Achieving Real Language Acquisition in School. Berkeley, CA: Command Performance Language Institute. Shrum, Judith, and Eileen Glisan, 2000. Teacher’s Handbook - Contextualized Language Instruction, Boston: Heinle. Williams, Marion and Robert Burden, 1997.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful