Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Valerian A. PoiTOvsKY
,
initial phase of instruction in foreign language should be based on intensive oral practice. The more vocally active the student is from the very beginning, the faster, it is assumed, he
learns the foreign language. Jn ihU study I wish to challenge this assump-
The rationale on
which this hypothesis is based suggests diat intensive pronunciation practice is not the logi-
uncr of oral practice in a languaKr iiaininK piogram. Ihc 4|ui-s[hiii attdresticd m this paper refers to (he diMriWiion of ui ui {iravtiri- aciim (he phases ot msiiucnun taihet lhan to the imlilv of oral practice per je. The view* of ihe author do nor purptjit to reflect the position of the Departtnem o( the Arm) or the Department of Defense
VAI1.RIAS A
POSTOVSKY
peipmc inclndt-s ai least two reciprocally correlated events: capacity (o process audilory inpul and capacity lo generate speech output, and
thai the former Is concerned with decoding
porary methodology of foreign language leaching in general, this principle has received only a
Needless
sume thai in the natural learning process, development of recognition knowledge would precede. noi follow, the development of retrieval knowledge.
When the student is tasked with production
with the s|)eed of speech output. When he is tasked with comprehension of a foreign sentence. he has to ilore linguistic information in hi< audilory shori-tcrm memory for a brief
Tan-Gau" method for leaching French to English-speaking students. The method aliempu to develop aural comprehension by the process of bilingual communication: (he teacher speaks
"
speaking readiness"
is more productive in the initial phase of instruction and that development of recognition knowledge is in fact prci quisite for the developincnt
of retrieval knowledge.
prehension as the most underestirnaicd and least understood aspect of foreign language learning I Belasco. 1965). At about die same time Asher conducted his first experiments in
"
"
"
produce any intelligible speech. Empirical evidence to substantiate this common sense notion
has been provided by several excellent studies of child language 'Smith. Shipley, and Gleiiman,
1966; Fraser, Bellugi, and Brown. 1965; Carrow. 1968; Bloom. 1970: Lee. 1970.) Although there are significant diflerences be-
Asher. 1963. 1969). attempting to develop aural comprehension by requiring sludents lo act out situations in response to commands in a foreign language. More recently Winitz and
'
Reeds (1971) have developed a totally comprehension-oriented program in German in which meaning of utterances in the foreign language is conveyed by pictorial events The
bv Ervin I'tipji in her paprr ' Sinu nitr and Procru in LanKUflgc' Acqimiiion dfliven-d ai ihc 21m Animal Round Tj
"
EFFECTS Of DELA V
on effects of delay in oral practice at the beginning of second language learning (Poslovsky.
19701 conducted for a doctoral dissertation dur-
ginning of the course for fear of graphic interference. In the comprehension-oriented approach. the argument may be reversed. Conceivably. one may argue thai it is just as logical to present written forms prior to intensive pronunciation practice. In a classroom environment
ing the academic year 1969-70. The principal problem addressed in this study
may be formulated as follows: if processing of
auditory input is essential and intrinsic 10 the nature of the language acquisition process, then
the linguistic properties of that input are crucial
If it Is true, as I propose, that the student learns essentially what he hears. But in the audiolingual class where each student is vocally active, students hear themselves more than they hear the teacher. The auditory input which they
are processing, then, is not the authentic language, but the classroom dialect rich with all
speech output. It is not surprising, therefore, that after extensive study of a foreign language students still experience marked difficulty in understanding a native speaker, while displaying considerable fluency in communicating among themselves."
'
Rased on the above reasoning we may tentatively pro)>ose that intensive oral practice is not
On the basis of the above argument, it is suggested that delaying oral practice at the beginning of the course will significantly enhance
productivt' in the initial phase of instruction and should be delayed until the student is better
prepared for the task, that is, until he has
learned to understand the spoken language. Recognition knowledge is prerequisite for the
development of retrieval knowledge. This thcorciical orientation gives a new di-
proach. It is emphasized that the goal of instruction remains the development of communi-
Intensive
In
the production-oriented "audio-lingual" approach. contextual meaning of a foreign utterance is viewed as a source of interference in the
pronunciation practice is merely shifted to the second phase of instruction, when the student is better prepared for the task and consequently,
.
'
logical features presented and thus adversely affect his pronunciation. In the comprehensionoriented approach, contextual meaning becomes indispensable because the goal of instruction
1 wa;* iiuiclv jolicd by ibr icali/Hiion lliai i( is |M>s>ililr lo develop Mt calttyl '$|>tal(ing' abiliiv
.
the
Kvm 41 ltia( limt* 1 Mtongly suspo* ird thai iho nc ii-pml Kqiiencc <>f entpbasizlng Ifttetfinj;, tpraklog'.
'
n-dil
miimI Miprflicially.
232
VALERIAS A
POSTOVSKY
f rst day of instruction and all students' re- American family. i Experimental Procedure. In order to ensure sponses during the pre-vocal training will be in
writing. Jt is assumed that the dynamics of
contextual meaning and the facilitiation of the
student s
Objectives. Although the basic tenet, central to this study, is that in the second language learning situation aural comprehension must be developed ahead of production, the present experiment was not designed to test this tenet
January 9 and April 3. 1970. Each of the two classes participating in the
study was divided into the Experimental and Control conditions. Subjects in the Experimental condition were individually matched with subjects in the Control condition.* The September class contained seventy-three students: of these,
respond in writing, the second objective of this study was to investigate the efTecdveness of oral
versus writing practice.
eleven were disqualified as experimental subjects due to prior exposure lo Slavic languages. The remaining sixty-two students were grouped
into thirty-one matched pairs and randomly divided between the Experimental and Control
For this purpose a carefully ronlrolled experimental investigation was conducted, comparing an experimental condition, a four-week delav in oral practice, wilh a control condition. no delay in oral practice. Evaluation was carried
out for all four language skills-listening, speaking, reading and writing. Learning Environment. The experiment was
conducted at the Russian Depanment. Defense Language Institute. West Coast Branch
(DI,,1WC), Presidio of Monterey, California. DLIWC offers a unique learning environment and an exceptionally favorably cxpeiimental setting. The Russian course is an intensive sixhour-a-day program; four of these hours are
conducted in small classes of nine or ten stu-
M.ik
dents, and two in a conventional language laboratory. Subjects. The subjects used in the study were selected from military personnel who volun-
\inn I. rifiurit;1' Apiiiudr I'rsi (Al.AT) and Oils Lfnnmi t \d\.lined K'nni J) Inielligem r Tcm (Olis L) Age, cducanun .ind Itirmer itaininy in tnieiRn UnKuagrs <nihcr rhan
Slam l were mcd as addiiiunal eriieiia li)t inaiehitiR Kan
linn unniU-is uerc used U) deirrminc which Mud m tmni
speakers of English, they came from different geographic areas of the continental United Siaies. Most of them were between eighteen and twenty-four years of age. Their education ranged from high school to six year? of college.
Due lo aiiriiion. the imtiibei ol matched paii5 in Sep iiinbi'r cla*s reduced iv ovcmvfighi at the end of the sixth
'
week and m iweiuv live .11 rhe end ot ihe cwclfih week, lit
ihe I.muatv titss ihe nutnbei of maulied pairs was trilut ed III ItaTniy-arVni and irni\ ft>m irspecmely. thus reducing
1 hi- i<itjl t.imple 10 fij manhed paiitt f< ihe mk-week losiing pi-iiod ami 49 lor the twelve-week testing period
EFFECTS OF DELAY
Treatment
Week 1
Control
2 3
A
b 6
Transition
1
i
*.
Integration
Regular
Russian program
Regular
Russian
program
9
10 11 1?
the same number of contact hours per day, the only difference bcin j in the methodology of
instruction.
conventional writing system (Cyrillic alphabet) from the very first day of instruction. To establish association between Russian sounds and
the regular Russian program. Common examinatiom were administered at the end of the
In boih Project Classes ihc E*. aiul (hr Cs were carh di A B, C, and D- with eiKhi or nun- suuk-ms per wiiinn (hus making a mul r>r eight scc'
,
requiring students to respond in writing. The j{(mi|-, A typical whedult for an iiBtructor may be as fol
lows
Section B(C)
minpleu'lv controlled
Z34
VALERIAS A
POSTOfSKY
diciation pracdce, pattern drills by writing computing odd and even item correlation and practice of pattern-drill responses, recitation of applying the Spearman-Brown correction (Guildialogues by writing out dialogues from memory. The Cs from the beginning followed the regular DLIWC Russian program with great
emphasis on habit-forming drills and oral prac-
Toi Keliability
B'Wks
l2r*E
-89
"
SpfakmR Resiling
-88 7fl
-91 .68
Wriilng
90
-90
practice during the initial four weeks of in- and Cs assembled together in a single language struction. laboratory. All students' responses during the In an attempt to reduce the difference be- Spcaking Tesi were recorded on tape. To entween conditions to the mode of siudent re- hance reliability of the Speaking Test, three
sponse, eijual emphasis was made in both groups
raters were used to score each individual stu-
on development of aural comprehension. Cover- dent tape. The raters were senior instructors. ing identical tearhinii materials, both groups naiivr speakers of the Russian language, and were exposed 10 exactly the same vocabulary skilled in scoring this type of test by previous grammar, and lesson content. The same dia- experience. They were not members of the logues were first presented in both grtmps as Project Class faculty and did not know the
,
And
only after comprehension of the dialogue was on tape bv code number only, and the order of achieved, the oral rcpelition praciiti" in the listening 10 tapes was randomized. Conlrol condition and dictation pr;iriice in ihe
Experimenial rondilion would start Achicvemcni Tesls and Telling Piticfdiire.
,
The two comprehensive tests especially developed for this experiment were similar in formal
to the MLA-Coopcrativc Foreign Language Tests. These tests were designed tn provide separate measures of listening, speaking, reading and writing skills at Iwo levels of acfiievemenl
.
-
cal procedure used in the analysis of the data was to eniplov ihe Multivariate Matihcd Pair T
Test. The Motelling TJ statistic appeared to be
periods in the DI.IWG Russian program. Administering and scoring of the tests followed the
procedure recommended for MLA Tests by the Educational Testing Service (1964). I lie test validity was established bv computing the Pearson Product-Moment correlation
in testing for variance between the Experimental and Control condilions, it simultaneously
accounts for covariance in all four related
coefficients between ihe scores obtained by the students on the lests and their classroom performance grades. The correlation coeHlcients for the oral part of the lest wen- .72 at the sixweek level and .8- at the twelve-week level. For
language skills. As mav be recalled, two consecutive expenmcnts were conducted in which students performance was measured at two dilfereni levels
'
87 respectively.
of achiivement: {I) at the end of the six weeks of instruciion, and (2) at ihe end of the twelve. weeks of instruction. Mean scores obtained by
EFFECTS OF DELAY
233
combined sample, the data may be summarized as is shown in the following diagram:
87 03
81.07
ConO)l>on
Scpiembei
N - 2R
Expcrimemal
Comrol
28.78
28.50 4 4.92
Sz.W
34.32
6 Week Level
12-Week Level
Januarv
N - 27
Experimental
Comrol
31.33
29.9b
47.15
45.33
36.37
35.15
87.37
82.b7
E -C
N =55"
E - C N = 49'
TABLES
.
See Note 5
CorflittOn
SeiiHrmlwr
N - 2h
ExiM'rimemal
Comrol
24.64
23,20
48.56
44.84
31,92
31.68
81.20
77.44
Jjnuarv
N - 24
Expernm-mal
Control
26,66
23.66
49.92
48.38
33.08
32.79
79.92
78.67
equality, and upon finding no significant difference between the groups (/ = .62 at the sixweek level, and p = .58 at the twelve-week level) the data obtained from both project classes were merged to form a larger sample. In a matched-paii design, the data obtained from the Experimental and Control conditions maybe reduced to the difference in observed values
difference between the Experimental and Control londitions at each of the two levels of achievement.
12-Week N = 55
N-49
E
90-
11
80vv
i
//
v.
li
\\
70 -
\\ \\
\\ \\
'
11 11
Ji
ji
l
Sign.
p-< 01
.
60-
\ 11
s
v '
Ji
Jl
1 1
y
50 _
p<:.09
1 1
w
1
_
Figure 2.
236
VALERIAN A
POSTOVSKY
Mimicry (Mim.)
2 3
4
Fluency (FU)
analysis of the data (confidence iniervals) revealed that the E s at the twelve-week level were
'
Mean scores for the Es and ihe Cs on each of these variables were transformed to the com-
significantly superior to the Cs in listening comprehension (/)<.008), while at the sixweek level, the most significant dideionces between groups was in speaking, reading, and writing skills. The observed difference in reading and writing skills was not surprising. The Es received more practice in these skills, therefore their superiority on these criterion measutes was anticipaled. Of more interest was the difference in
,
mon scale and plotted on the profile graph which is presented in Figure 3.
tl must be noted thai the difference between
groups on these criterion measures was found to be signifiram at the .0001 level of confidence.
The two variables dial contributed most to this
parison between two radically different approaches to the initial phase of foreign language
Six-Week Level
70-
60M
--
~
.
50-
Sign. p<,C001
40
1
Mim
1
Read
III
OA.
Nar.
.1Vocab
Gram
EFFECTS OF DELAY
217
oral production as one of the more dificult aspects and, therefore, not an appropriate
slardng point. Il attempts to reduce complexity of the learning task by deiayinc oral practice. In the experimental design, overall language proficiency is viewed as a function of method.
Therefore, while practicing the same drill material. the Cs had a clear advantage over the
Es in terms of the number of studeni trials per item. This advantage becomes less apparent when we consider some of the positive features
of writing practice from spoken input First, the
.
while
the Cs heard both the authentic models and the imperfect student imiiations It is possible, there-
each instance. Although not all differences were statistically significant, the data obtained clearly suggest thai the experimental method provoked
a greater amount of learning. The results obtained are quite uniform for both project elas-ses. but due to grossness of measures, the data generated by this investigation can be interpreted only in general terms. Any attempt to draw specific conclusions about the second language- acquisition process without additional
fore, that the Es stored more precise acoustic data in their memory. Secondly a written response requires longer storage of auditoiy input in
,
and more detailed research would be pure speculation. In this respect, the present study raised many more questions than it supplied
answers.
that its conscious application increases the learning potential of the student And. finally, we
.
study in greater detail. At the end of six weeks of training, the Es were found to be significantly better than the Cs in speaking reading, and
,
writing skills. The last two are not surprisingthe Es had more written practice and they
simply learned what they were taught. However
,
the same generalization cannot be applied to the observed difference in speaking. In this case the Cs had far more oral practice, but their
,
performance on the test was inferior to that of the Ks. The data generated by this experiment
the amount of oral practice and quality of performance on the test. This outcome clearly requires some plausible explanation. We may recall that absence of oral practice
in the Experimental condition did not mean
absence of practice f>rr se but rather a different kind of practice. In ihe Experimental condition oral practice was substituted by written re.
Ob-
1!38
VALERIAN .1
POSrOfSKY
of graminaiical siniclure.1 The second significant diirercncc between groups al (he six-week
in this area cannot be explained by the difference in the initial emphasis of instruction. A more plausible interpretation, and one which conforms with subjective observation, is
diat during the initial phase of instruction', when the Es were learning to use the Cyrillic alphabet, their attention and effort were consumed by the new writing system and the learning rate in aural comprehension was correspondingly reduced. In the second six-week period, however, the writing system presented no problem: on the contrary, it was likely to aid in the development of other language skills. Thus, it is possible that writing practice from spoken input may have latent elTects on subsequent develop-
apply lo learning Russian as a second language. Furthermore, they apply specifically to the
sample population and the learning environment of this investigation. However, some characteristics of the sample, such as age. educalional background, and socioeconomic status, indicate that the sample was in many respects represetnative of a general population of college
students, thus makins the findings and conclu-
interference. The superiority of the Eb on this criterion measure seerns in support an argument presented here earlier. That argument sugiresied
a reversal of the sequence of events, presenting written forms prior to oral practice and using
dictation as an exercise in sound discrimination
sions of this study more generalb applicable. On the basis of the data reported, the following conclusions are made:
praciiee is delayed in the initial phase of insituetion, proiided that ihn pre-vocal period u
delated to training in aural comprehension
wridng to speaking, provided that written pracnec is from spoken input. In the initial pha.se of insirueiiim. when written
praniec from spoken input is compared with oral practice of the same drill material, written practice develops benet control of grammaiicaUduciure.
that the Es tended to progress faster in the listening and speaking skills, while die Cs gained
more in ihe reading and writing skills. This
outcome clearly reveals the efTects of treatment during the first four weeks of instruction; skills
the training in listening comprehension was not de-emphasized in the Experimental condition.
2S9
ph.ibrt prior 10 intrtisivr pronunciation ptacticp dor$ not crcatr a grratrr problem of
graphic imrrffrener than normally crratrd by
ate anaKsisof variance, rosanance and re Tession. A For tran IV I'toRrjin [une 19hK li.isc-i (,. I'rsula Bellugt and K Brown. Control ot gram
iivOy,, Hi is.
pbvtu al tcsponsr
(.authiec.
mi; a second language. Teacher f Guide In Accomftany Ihr Tan Gau Melhctd. lotomo: W J Cage l.iinitrd
IWi*.
BrlaM.o Sirnoti Nucleation and (lie audio lingual ap pioach I he Mndi rn LanguuKrJournal. Vol XLIX. No.
8|IVtemher I'tfi'i).
'
ol Fient h I'honemev
l?>JI
PiinccMR. NJ.
Beikelev.
I less
'
ll?!!
Cairoll |ohn H . I he conmbutious 01 psvchulugicil the4>rv tod tducaiiooal research to the te thio o( totei>;n Ian
.
Kobeit L
A Lirt-
t (Mav, lt|t$l
281
r.ti
row M \ I he deielopment ol auditors comprehen sion of lattijuaije snuciure in children. / Speech Hear
/) IS (1!>I W ill,
Sctiiier Ceoige A C:.. lowaid mote ellecme mchsidualt/< d It .lining Lunguage Learning I he Indnidual and the />"<'*'. Edited b\ Edward W. Najam Bloomirtgton.
.
ImiI.
Ntiiiih
'
.
.
ij!e t I
'
Hiri v75.
4 :,tiIota S. I wo studies ol ibessntaciic knowledge of tun 1 InUlien Presemed .11 the Linguistic C'olloqutum. I aytetil Peltosslvanta Psychtaiiic Instnole M.LI . 19fit>. Wttiii/ I latits antl jame-. Rei-tts Rapitl at quisition of a for
.
.
I mn [iTemv Mulltvatiaiice
guistii s Ninnbi-t I wo. Lfniyenhl ol MisM.nin Kansas City iSt jii. mliet 1971).