Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: Current Perspectives and Future Directions (Studies in Second and Foreign Language Education)

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond

Studies in Second and Foreign Language Education 3

Editors

Anna Uhl Chamot Wai Meng Chan

De Gruyter Mouton

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond Current Perspectives and Future Directions

edited by

Wai Meng Chan Kwee Nyet Chin Titima Suthiwan

De Gruyter Mouton

ISBN 978-1-61451-000-0 e-ISBN 978-1-61451-016-1 ISSN 2192-0982 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Foreign language teaching in Asia and beyond : current perspectives and future directions / edited by Wai Meng Chan, Kwee Nyet Chin and Titima Suthiwa. p. cm. ⫺ (Studies in second and foreign language education; 3) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-61451-000-0 (alk. paper) 1. Language and languages ⫺ Study and teaching. 2. Second language acquisition. I. Chan, Wai Meng, 1962⫺ II. Chin, Kwee Nyet. III. Titima Suthiwan. P53.F599 2011 418.0071105⫺dc23 2011020141

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. ” 2011 Walter de Gruyter, Inc., Boston Cover image: Creatas/Thinkstock Printing: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ⬁ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface

Chapter 1 Foreign language teaching in Asia and beyond: An introduction to the book Wai Meng Chan, Kwee Nyet Chin and Titima Suthiwan

vii

1

Part 1: Theoretical foundation and research Chapter 2 Preparing language teachers to teach learning strategies Anna Uhl Chamot

29

Chapter 3 Discourse Politeness Theory and second language acquisition Mayumi Usami

45

Chapter 4 Integrating general purpose and vocationally-oriented language learning (VOLL) – New goals for language and teacher training Christina Kuhn

71

Chapter 5 Pragmatics in foreign language teaching and learning: Reflections on the teaching of Chinese in China Hong Wang

93

Chapter 6 Development of a foreign language anxiety model Yujia Zhou

109

Chapter 7 Facilitating students’ understanding of English news: Peer scaffolding in an EFL listening classroom Danli Li

135

vi

Table of Contents

Chapter 8 Vocabulary learning strategies among adult foreign language learners Shameem Rafik-Galea and Bee Eng Wong

145

Part 2: Classroom practice and evaluation studies Chapter 9 Technology in the service of constructivist pedagogy: Network-based applications and knowledge construction Wai Meng Chan and Ing Ru Chen

191

Chapter 10 Pedagogical concerns: Some common features of content-based instruction, task-based learning and business case study, and their roles in an EBP class Wenhua Hsu

217

Chapter 11 Memorizing dialogues: The case for “Performative Exercises” Izumi Walker and Tomoko Utsumi

243

Chapter 12 The whole world communicates in English, do you? — Educational drama as an alternative approach to teaching English language in Japan Naoko Araki-Metcalfe

271

Chapter 13 From oral interview test to oral communication test: Alleviating students’ anxiety Satomi Chiba and Yoko Morikawa

289

Authors and their affiliations

315

Index

317

PREFACE

In December 2004, the Centre for Language Studies of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at the National University of Singapore, held its inaugural Centre for Language Studies International Conference or CLaSIC 2004. The three-day conference brought together over 200 academics, researchers, practitioners and other professionals from Asia and beyond for a productive and rewarding exchange of insights, experiences, views and perspectives on current and future developments in foreign language education and the important feeder disciplines of second language acquisition and linguistics. It also provided an avenue for the discussion and critical examination of new and innovative concepts and approaches expected to have an impact on future practices. In all, some 140 papers and posters were presented, twelve of which have been selected for publication in this book by the editors following reviews by a Scientific Committee, consisting of Anna Uhl Chamot (The George Washington University), Stephen Culhane (Kagoshima University), Hermann Funk (University of Jena), Yoshiko Kawamura (Tokyo International University), Brian Tomlinson (Leeds Metropolitan University), Mayumi Usami (Tokyo University of Foreign Studies) and Wu Weiping (Chinese University of Hong Kong). There are many to whom we owe a debt of gratitude for the success of CLaSIC 2004 and the publication of this book. In particular, we would like to thank the following persons and organisations: the Guest-of-Honour and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Associate Professor Tan Tai Yong, for opening the conference; Professor Peter Reeves, then Director of the Centre, for having believed in and supported the conference from the onset; members of the Scientific Committee for the selection of papers for this book; the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences for a generous research grant (Academic Research Fund Project No. R-127-000-005-112) in support of the conference and this publication; our other sponsors, including the Lee Foundation, the Goethe-Institut Singapore, 3A Corporation, NUS Extensions and the Chinese Language Teaching and Research Fund administered jointly by the Centre and the Department of Chinese Studies; and Lionel Lye for his invaluable help in proof-reading and formatting the manuscript. Last but certainly not least, we feel compelled to convey our sincere thanks to the colleagues on the Organising Committee of the conference and in the Centre’s administrative support

viii

Preface

team, whose dedication and tireless efforts provided the basis for the resounding success of CLaSIC 2004.

Wai Meng Chan, Kwee Nyet Chin and Titima Suthiwan, Singapore, June 2006

1 FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHING IN ASIA AND BEYOND: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK

Wai Meng Chan, Kwee Nyet Chin and Titima Suthiwan

1 The spread of foreign language learning and its significance Given the spread of foreign language learning around the world today, it may come as a surprise to many that “futurologists” of the 19th century had actually failed to predict the importance of foreign language learning and its unprecedented growth since the second half of the 20th century (Graddol, 1997/2000). After all, the European Union (EU) has identified proficiency in foreign languages as one of several key competencies “considered vital for a lifetime of successful participation in society” (Eurydice, 2002, p. 3). In fact, it justifies this view by citing several benefits which foreign language proficiency can provide: Competence in foreign languages has long been recognised as an indispensable economic and social resource within a culturally and linguistically diverse Europe and beyond. Competence in foreign languages is not limited to technical skill in a particular language but also includes openness to different cultures and respect for others and their competence and achievements. Learning other languages promotes an extended sense of identity, making people feel part of more than one linguistic and cultural community. It also increases people’s employment, education and leisure options, which in turn may generate a whole range of personal, social and workplace competencies. (Eurydice, 2002, p. 17)

Earlier, in 2000, the Lisbon European Council had called for the establishment of a framework to provide EU citizens with five basic skills: IT skills, technological culture, entrepreneurship, social skills and foreign languages (European Council [EC], 2000). The Barcelona European Council in 2002 recommended the learning of at least two foreign languages from a very early age. Certainly, countries in the EU have made much progress in the realisation of these goals, as data from 2002/2003 reveal that, in almost all EU countries, pupils have to learn a foreign language from primary school on-

2

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

wards, with pupils in Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands and Norway starting as young as 5 or 6 (see Eurydice, 2005). In thirteen of the surveyed countries, 50% or more of primary school pupils learned at least one foreign language in 2001/2002, while at least 50% of upper secondary pupils learn at least two foreign languages in fifteen countries in the same time period (Eurydice, 2005). Across the Atlantic, in the United States, a Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies came to the conclusion in 1978 that Americans’ lack of foreign language proficiency threatens to compromise the country’s security and could have an adverse effect on its economic growth (Crystal, 1995). Efforts have been undertaken since then to improve the status and availability of foreign language learning both in schools and colleges in the U.S. Moderate success was achieved as foreign language enrolments almost doubled in U.S. public high schools, rising from 23% of the student population in 1978 to 44% in 2002 1 . Despite this almost twofold increase in enrolments, the American administration argues that much more needs to be done and cites the following statistics (see U.S. Department of Education [USDE], 2006) as cause for serious concern: 1) Only 31% of American elementary schools and 24% of public elementary schools report teaching foreign languages; 2) Of these schools, 79% provide no more than introductory exposure; 3) Of the 44% of high school students enrolled in foreign language classes in 2002, 69% are enrolled in Spanish and 18% in French; 4) Less than 1% of high school students combined study Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, Japanese, Korean, Russian or Urdu; and 5) Less than 8% of undergraduates in the U.S. take foreign language courses, and less than 2% study abroad in any given year. To counter these trends, the U.S. Department of Education will be proposing a sum of 57 million U.S. dollars in its budget for financial year 2007, representing an increase of 35 million U.S. dollars over the previous financial year, to fund various initiatives to educate students, teachers and government workers in critical need foreign languages such as Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and Korean, and to increase the number of advanced level speakers in these and other languages. Myriam Met (n.d.) of the National Foreign Language Center in Maryland provides two main reasons why more Americans should bother to learn foreign languages. First, she believes that foreign language proficiency will im1

Data collected by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (Draper & Hicks, 2002) show that foreign language enrolments in US public high schools rose from 23% in 1978 to 43.8% in 2000. U.S. Department of Education figures place the percentage of American high school students enrolled in foreign language classes at 44% (U.S. Department of Education, 2006).

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

3

prove the United States’ competitiveness in a globalised world and aid its increasingly service-based economy in securing business volume. As an essentially monolingual society, the U.S. would otherwise concede significant ground in international trade to multilingual countries. Second, the lack of foreign language skills would severely hinder its efforts to ensure its national security and defend itself against terrorism, as intelligence gathered is unlikely to be in clear, comprehensible English. If the U.S. are to continue to “make progress toward achieving humanitarian goals and promoting prosperity and democracy around the world” (Met, n.d., paragraph 4), then the country must pay far greater attention to foreign language learning. This view is echoed by the U.S. Department of Education, which — in justifying its intended injection of 57 million U.S. dollars — cites the same two reasons of security and competitiveness (USDE, 2006). There can be little doubt that globalization as well as the economic conditions and opportunities it has created have greatly influenced the way foreign languages are viewed and valued — in particular those languages which are considered of greater economic value. In 1997, the United Nations published two rankings of languages according to their relative economic strength. To arrive at the first of these lists, the educational consultancy and research firm, The English Company (UK) Ltd (henceforth: engco), uses the GDP of countries in which major languages are spoken to calculate a Gross Language Product (GLP) for these languages. Table 1 shows this ranking of languages by GLP. Table 1. Estimates of Gross Language Product (GLP) of major languages in $billion (source: Graddol, 1997/2000, p. 29)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

English Japanese German Spanish French Chinese Portuguese Arabic Russian Hindi/Urdu Italian Malay Bengali

7,815 4,240 2,455 1,789 1,557 985 611 408 363 114 111 79 32

4

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

A different calculation model, which uses the relative international trading volume of countries where these languages are spoken, leads to a different ranking, reproduced in Table 2. Table 2. Major languages by traded GLP in $billion (source: Graddol, 1997/2000, p. 29)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

English German French Chinese Japanese Spanish Italian Portuguese Malay Arabic Russian Hindi/Urdu Bengali

2,338 1,196 803 803 700 610 488 138 118 85 73 25 9

Interestingly, the relative popularity of foreign languages studied by students at the Centre for Language Studies (CLS) of the National University of Singapore, to which the editors of this book are affiliated, seems to bear out the predictive value of these models. The languages with the highest enrolments in the last few years have been Japanese (with an enrolment of approximately 1520 over two semesters in the academic year 2005/2006), German (850), French (780) and Chinese (730) 2 , all placed within the top six of both rankings. Overall, foreign language courses at the CLS have gained considerably in popularity among students, who read them mainly as free electives, with the total enrolments for all languages growing by 40% from approximately 3,600 in 2001/2002 to 5,150 in 2005/2006. Educational policy in other Asian countries seems also to reflect engco’s estimates of the languages’ economic strength. A recent survey of language education policy and trends in China (Lam, 2005) reveals that English is undoubtedly the most important and most learned foreign language in Chinese universities. There exists in fact a requirement for students to study College English in the first two years of the four-year undergraduate programme (with four hours of instruction per week) and Subject Based English in the next two 2

English, which is not a foreign language in Singapore, and Spanish are not taught at the CLS. The nine languages offered at the CLS are Chinese, French, German, Indonesian, Japanese, Malay, Tamil, Thai and Vietnamese.

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

5

(with two hours per week). The surveyed universities reported that, besides English, the foreign languages attracting the largest enrolments are Japanese, French, German, Russian and Spanish, most of which are placed high in the rankings cited above. Indeed, globalization and the perception held by individuals, society and the state that foreign languages are necessary and valuable assets in today’s competitive economies are apparently the driving forces behind Asian governments’ efforts to promote foreign language learning in their respective countries and to enable students to acquire communicative competence in at least one foreign language; invariably, English has been chosen as the required foreign language by most Asian countries, including the main economic powerhouses, Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan. In introducing his country’s action plan to cultivate “Japanese with English abilities”, the Japanese Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) sums up the new challenges and opportunities created by globalization, which necessitate an adequate grasp of the English language: Recently, globalization in various fields of the economy and society has advanced rapidly. Transfers of information and capital across national borders as well as the movement of people and products have increased. Thus, international interdependency has deepened. At the same time, international economic competition has intensified entering a so-called period of “mega-competition”. Much effort is necessary to meet such challenges. […] Globalization extends to various activities of individuals as well as to the business world. Each individual has increasing opportunities to come in contact with the global market and services, and participate in international activities. It has become possible for anyone to become active on a world level. Furthermore, due to progress in the information technology revolution, a wide range of activities, from daily life to economic activities, are being influenced by the movement to a knowledge-based society driven by the forces of knowledge and information. Thus, there is a strong demand for the abilities to obtain and understand knowledge and information as well as the abilities to transmit information and to engage in communication. In such a situation, English has played a central role as the common international language in linking people who have different mother tongues. For children living in the 21st century, it is essential for them to acquire communication abilities in English as a common international language. (MEXT, 2003)

While enrolment statistics and curricular descriptions for foreign language courses at institutions of higher education in these countries are difficult to come by, such information is more readily available for primary and secondary education. Such data as well as the respective governments’ policy statements provide a clear indication of the growing importance of foreign lan-

6

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

guage education, especially the learning of English as a foreign language. Besides making College English a curricular requirement in universities, the Chinese government requires primary schools to introduce English lessons latest by Primary 3, with no less than four lessons a week. English language learning is to continue through all twelve years of school education from the primary to the upper secondary level (Ministry of Education, People Republic of China [MOEPRC], 2001). In Japan, English language teaching was introduced in primary schools in 2002 as part of the state’s plans to promote international understanding and, ultimately, to advance the internationalisation of Japanese schools and local communities. Pupils are exposed to the English language within the subject of Integrated Studies from Primary 3 onwards, with the emphasis on learning conversation through appropriate hands-on activities (MEXT, 1998; see also Araki-Metcalfe in this book, chap. 12). As prescribed by MEXT’s Course of Study for lower and upper secondary schools, implemented in 2003, foreign language learning remains a compulsory component of the school curricula at these levels (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology [MEXT], 2003). At upper secondary level, students may also opt to learn other foreign languages, including major languages such as French, German, Spanish and Chinese, depending on the availability of teaching resources. In South Korea, starting from 1997, English has become a part of the regular curriculum, with one hour of instruction per week in Primary 3 and 4, and two hours per week in Primary 5 and 6 (see Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development [MOEHRD], n.d.). It remains a compulsory subject for students through all three years of lower secondary education, with a total of 340 hours of instruction from years 1 to 3. While English is required only in year 1 of the upper secondary level, it is in fact taught in most upper secondary schools for all three years. However, students do have the option of learning a second foreign language in addition to or in place of English at designated foreign language high schools, established in the 1990s to “provide students with the skills needed to be internationally competitive and communicatively competent in foreign languages” (Murdoch, 2002, p. 1). The languages available to students in these schools are — besides English — Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Russian and Spanish. Following experiments with the teaching of English in selected primary schools in the latter part of the 1990s, the Taiwanese Ministry of Education introduced it in 2002 as a required subject in schools for five out of the nine years of compulsory education. English language teaching commences in Primary 5 and continues till the end of lower secondary education (Ministry of

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

7

Education, Republic of Taiwan [MOEROC], 2003). Students advancing to upper secondary education are expected to study English throughout the three years at this level. Besides promoting English, which the Taiwanese government has designated a quasi-official language, it has sought to stimulate greater interest in a second foreign language among upper secondary students by implementing a five-year programme for the promotion of a second foreign language in 1999 (Government Information Office [GIO], 2005). Schools started teaching Japanese, French, German and Spanish, and by 2005, one year after the conclusion of the programme, 138 schools offered Japanese to 19,877 students, 50 offered French to 3,274 students, 16 offered German to 765 students, 17 offered Spanish to 581 students, and 2 offered Korean to 42 students (MOEROC, n.d.). The Taiwanese government had in fact achieved a more than twofold increase in total enrolments in these second foreign languages from 11,500 in 1999, when the programme was launched, to 24,539 in 2005. It would appear apparent that a common pattern is emerging among Asian countries in their efforts to promote foreign language learning and to ensure that their people will partake in international communities and the economic activities of an increasingly globalised world. First, English — as the lingua franca of the financial, academic and technological sectors — has been firmly installed as the first and most significant foreign language taught in schools and universities, which is not surprising considering that it easily topped the two rankings of major languages based on their economic value (see pp. 3–4). Second, education ministries have all chosen to give their students an early start to English language learning, beginning as early as Primary 3 in most cases. Third, the teaching of English is sustained thereafter through primary and lower secondary education till at least the first year of upper secondary education. Fourth, students are increasingly being encouraged to learn a second foreign language at the upper secondary level. Fifth, there are unmistakable parallels in the goals of the foreign language curricula implemented by the various governments. For one, the main goal of these curricula is to develop students’ ability to communicate effective and appropriately in the foreign language. Emphasis is given, particularly at the lower levels, to speaking and listening. Another notable parallel is the goal of fostering a better understanding of the cultures of the target languages and thus greater openness to international exchanges through exposure to foreign languages. Lastly, there is the intercultural goal, namely that students will — in the process of learning about a foreign culture — gain a keener awareness and appreciation

8

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

of their own native cultures (see e.g. Lam, 2005; MOEROC, 2003; MEXT, 2003). While there is no denying that English is the single most important foreign language in Asia (and around the world) and that European languages figure prominently among the second foreign languages taught from the upper secondary level onwards, major Asian languages are by no means marginalized or run the risk of becoming irrelevant in the future as foreign languages. In fact, the engco forecasting model predicts that, while English will most probably retain its significance as the global lingua franca in the latter stages of the 21st century, it is unlikely that it will command a monopolistic position (Graddol, 1997/2000). Rather it expects an “oligopoly” of world languages to emerge, each potentially with its own sphere of influence. Among the languages expected to join English in the top league are — based on current demographic and economic trends — three Asian languages: Chinese, Hindi/Urdu and Arabic. Asian states are also not sparing any efforts to ensure that their respective languages remain relevant and are learned around the world. Japan, South Korea and China have all founded institutions similar to the more established European institutions of British Council (UK), Alliance Française (France) and Goethe-Institut (Germany) to promote the study of their respective countries and the Japanese, Korean and Chinese languages. The first of these institutions to be founded, in 1972, the Japan Foundation (JF) aims to promote the study of Japan and the Japanese language as well as to facilitate intellectual, cultural and arts exchange between Japan and the world. While Japanese has not been predicted in the engco report to be among the world languages of the future, official Japanese statistics reveal that the number of learners of Japanese as a second or foreign language has risen significantly in the last two decades. In a survey conducted in 2003 (see JF, n.d.), it found that there were 2.35 million learners of Japanese as a foreign language in 127 countries, a substantial increase from approximately 127,000 in 1979 and approximately 981,000 in 1990. 60% of these learners are to be found in East Asia and up to 90% in Asia and Oceania together. At the same time, true to its intention to internationalise and to attract more overseas students to its universities, Japan has been working at providing greater financial aid for international students, encouraging greater student exchange between Japanese and international universities, improving the admission system for international students, and promoting the teaching of Japanese as a second language (JSL) for international students. The latter move has seen the num-

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

9

ber of JSL learners in Japan grow from 69,950 in 1992 to over 95,000 in 2000, according to figures released by MEXT (n.d.). Unlike JF and the Korea Foundation (KF), established in 1991, the Confucius Institute conducts its own Chinese language courses. Set up only in 2005 by China’s National Office for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language (NOTCFL), it has quickly expanded its operations worldwide, and there are currently 71 institutes in Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe and the United States, with the number expected to hit 100 by the end of 2006 (Leong, 2006). The pace of its expansion may appear phenomenal, but this may have been precipitated by a remarkable surge in worldwide interest in the Chinese language, underlining perhaps engco’s prediction that Chinese would be a world language to rival English by 2050. According to figures released by the NOTCFL and cited by the People’s Daily Online, there were more than 30 million non-native learners of Chinese worldwide in 2005, while more than 90,000 people took the Chinese Proficiency Test (HSK) — the equivalent of the English TOEFL — in 2004 (“Chinese teaching to match nation's clout”, 2005). While there are apparently no statistics on the number of Korean language learners around the world, it is unlikely that the Korean language would enjoy the same level of popularity as Chinese or Japanese. In institutions of higher education in the US, Korean ranks 15th of 162 foreign languages taught and accounts for only about 5,100 learners or 0.4% of all modern foreign language students (Welles, 2004, cited by Lee, 2006). However, Welles observed that the figures had doubled between 1990 and 2002, which is consistent with KF’s claim “that an increasing number of non-Koreans are also choosing to study Korean as a foreign language to gain a better understanding of Korean culture and society” (“Major programs for 2005”, 2005), attributing the increase to a growing international interest in Korean popular culture. According to figures provided by KF, there were, in 2002, more than 370 universities in 54 countries outside of Korea offering Korean language courses (“KF's support for Korean language”, 2002). The information above on language education policies, foreign language curricula and enrolment figures in various states reveals an unmistakably positive trend in foreign language learning in Asia and beyond. The main reasons for this trend as well as the governments’ intensive promotion of foreign language learning are most likely to be found in 1) the perceived opportunities and needs arising from the process of globalisation, 2) the intention to increase international exposure and exchange, and 3) security concerns (particularly in the case of the U.S.). There may however be another reason for this

10

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

upward trend — one that augurs well for the future of foreign language teaching in Asia. Gone are the days when, for a lack of qualified teachers and teacher preparation programmes, anyone with a reasonable grasp of the target language was considered qualified to teach it. Proficiency in the target language is but one of many criteria which a good language teacher must fulfil. The increasing professionalism in and the scientific grounding of foreign language teaching have, in the last decades, led to significant improvements in teaching and facilitated more effective and enjoyable learning. The science behind foreign language teaching today is turning it into a more refined art, making language learning a motivating and rewarding experience for students. 2 The science behind the art of foreign language teaching As Ornstein and Lasley (2000) remark, “good teachers use and combine a variety of technical skills in ways that create fluid opportunities for learning” (p. 1). Indeed, looking at the teacher behaviours which educationists have found to have a positive influence on learning outcomes, one comes to realise what intricate skills a good teacher must possess. In investigating teacher effects on student achievement, Gage (1978, cited in Ornstein & Lasley, 2000) contends that the following three clusters of teacher behaviour have a positive effect on learning outcomes: 1) teacher indirectness, the willingness of the teacher to accept student ideas and feelings, and the ability to provide a healthy emotional climate; 2) teacher praise, support, and encouragement, use of humour to release tensions, and attention to students’ needs; and 3) teacher acceptance, clarifying, building, and developing students’ ideas. On the other hand, teacher criticism, reprimanding students and justifying authority have been identified as behaviours which are negatively correlated to student achievement. Brophy and Good (1986) point to a number of principles of teaching which one would have to adhere to to ensure good learning outcomes. For instance, they assert that a good teacher should ensure that learning activities are of an appropriate difficulty level and suited to learners’ current achievement levels and needs, be aware of what is going on in the classroom and be alert to the progress of classroom activities, be able to sustain an activity while doing something else at the same time, be able to sustain proper lesson pacing and group momentum, monitor students’ performance and provide immediate help where necessary, and give appropriate feedback and praise. It would appear from the above that good teaching — and likewise good language teaching — would involve a host of personal attributes on the part of

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

11

the teacher, including personality, intuition, a propensity for self-reflection, the ability to communicate and express oneself, creativity, enthusiasm, empathy or simply a good sense of judgement. However, the truth is, good teaching is not just an art, but also a science. It is built as much on these qualities as on a vast body of scientific research and knowledge. Ornstein and Lasley sum this up in the following words: In essence, good teaching is neither exclusively art nor essentially science, but rather a combination of both. Good teachers do things well and know conceptually why they do them well — they have an explanation for what grounds their practices. (Ornstein & Lasley, 2000, p. 5)

Educationists (e.g. Gage, 1978; Ornstein & Lasley, 2000) thus see a scientific basis to the art of teaching. Foreign language teachers and educationists may have encountered the mistaken notion that foreign language pedagogy is an essentially applied discipline devoid of its own theories. Nothing can be further from the truth, for the construction of pedagogical theories is very much at the heart of this discipline and has led to the formulation of influential methods and approaches to teaching such as the audiolingual method or communicative language teaching. Research in foreign language education deals with issues related to the teaching and learning of foreign languages with the ultimate aim of informing curricular and teaching practice (cf. Weskamp, 2001). In arguing how pedagogical theories should inform and impact practice, Ur (1996) has this to say: Good theories generate practice; hence Kurt Lewin’s famous dictum: ‘There is nothing so practical as a good theory.’ […] Theory on its own is even more useless. A statement like ‘Language is communication’, for example, is meaningful only if we can envisage its implementation in practice. (p. 4)

Foreign language education is itself informed by a number of feeder disciplines. For Stern (1983), five areas which language education draws on for its fundamental concepts are the history of language teaching, linguistics, sociology, psychology and education. In a more recent publication, Weskamp (2001) identifies linguistics, psychology, philosophy, education, sociology, cultural studies and literature as feeder disciplines for English language teaching. Linguistics is undoubtedly a primary feeder discipline of foreign language teaching. Communicative language teaching, probably the pedagogical approach which most foreign language teachers and institutions subscribe to today, has its roots in pragmalinguistics and the speech act theory, which look at

12

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

language more as a means to fulfil pragmatic intentions than as a mere system of structures and lexis, and have caused the focus of language teaching to shift from the mastery of grammar for its own sake to the ability to use grammar functionally for the purpose of communication (Neuner & Hunfeld, 1993; Savignon, 2005). The ability to do so is commonly referred to as communicative competence, a term which originates from the work of the sociologists, Habermas (1970) and Hymes (1971). Another branch of linguistics, sociolinguistics, delivers insights into “the relationship between language use and social factors” (McKay, 2005, p. 281) which can influence important curricular processes such as syllabus design, materials development and assessment. An example is the impact of sociolinguistic research into linguistic variation due to differences in geographical region, social class, gender or ethnicity on the choice of curricular contents and the selection/development of materials (McKay, 2005). Take the case of the Japanese language, which is highly sensitive to the social context of its use and the relative status of its speakers: research into keigo, or honorific language, is reshaping the pedagogy of Japanese as a foreign language as researchers, curriculum planners and teachers begin to take into account the importance of the appropriate use of keigo, deeply rooted in Japanese tradition, for smooth and socially appropriate communication (Wetzel, 2004). The influence of psychology, another primary feeder discipline, on foreign language methodologies is all too apparent (see Neuner & Hunfeld, 1993; Richards & Rodgers, 2001). For instance, the audiolingual method is built upon the basis of behaviourism and its theory of learning. The cognitive revolution that displaced the behaviouristic paradigm led to the intensive study of learners’ cognitive processes and individual characteristics. This paradigm shift in the 1950s and 1960s paved the way for the study and application of pedagogical constructs such as learner-centredness, task-based learning, learner autonomy and learning strategy instruction in foreign language teaching. Of particular interest in recent times are also impulses from research in motivational and behavioural psychology for the study of the impact of motivational and affective factors (e.g. anxiety) on foreign language learning processes and outcomes (see e.g. Arnold, 1999; Dörnyei, 2001; MacIntyre, 1999; Young, 1999). Philosophy contributed the epistemological theory of constructivism, which has had a telling impact on education in general. Consistent with such concepts as learner autonomy and learner-centredness as well as findings from cognitive psychology, constructivist pedagogy views learning as an active and subjective process for the construction of meanings and knowledge (Müller,

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

13

2000). The learner interprets and attempts to make sense of newly received information on the basis of pre-existing cognitive structures, including his/her current knowledge and personal experiences, and creates new and meaningful knowledge in this process (see Chan & Chen, chap. 8 in this book). The constructivist view of learning has found resonance among language educationists and provides the theoretical basis for recent approaches and practices in foreign language teaching, including the currently much studied area of computer assisted language learning (see e.g. Chun & Plass, 2000; Rüschoff, 1999; Wendt, 2000; Wolff, 1994). One discipline which has not been included in either Stern’s or Weskamp’s list of feeder disciplines is second language acquisition (SLA), whose main scientific interest lies in the study of “how people learn language” (Cook, 1996, p. 5). For Ellis, it is not the task of SLA to seek and transform such knowledge “into a form applicable to language pedagogy” (1994, p. 4). Ellis views it at best as a “source discipline” (p. 4), whose findings are however of obvious relevance for foreign language teaching. An example is the contribution of the Interlanguage Hypothesis (Selinker, 1972), which was one of the first SLA theories to focus on learners’ psycholinguistic processes for language acquisition, including language transfer from the first to the second language, overgeneralization, and learning and communication strategies. It was thus arguably a decisive precursor to subsequent research on learners’ language learning strategies, culminating in the widespread adoption of learning strategy instruction in the foreign language classroom. The natural proximity between both disciplines is perhaps best demonstrated by the input hypothesis put forward by Krashen (1981, 1985). Krashen himself followed up on it in collaboration with Terrell by proposing the natural approach to language teaching (Krashen & Terrell, 1983), based naturally on the assumptions of his own acquisition theory. 3 The structure and contents of this book This book, comprising two parts, is concerned with both the science and the art of foreign language teaching. Under the theme of “Theoretical foundation and research”, Part 1 of this book informs the readers about recent efforts in theoretical and empirical research which have had a telling impact on foreign language teaching or promise to yield results that will potentially shape its future. These studies, not just from the domain of foreign language teaching but also from its primary feeder disciplines of linguistics and SLA, thus deliv-

14

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

er the necessary theoretical and conceptual foundation for both current and future research and practice. As its theme “Classroom practice and evaluation studies” suggests, Part 2 focuses on new and innovative developments in curricular and classroom practice, all built upon insights from research in the above-mentioned disciplines and possibly poised to become standard practices in the not too distant future. It has not been easy deciding on the component chapters that make up Part 2, for all the projects included here are quite obviously theory-driven and draw on a large body of previous research in various areas, such as constructivist pedagogy, computer and multimedia assisted language learning, foreign language anxiety, automaticity, and information processing models of language acquisition. In fact, a good number of these projects incorporated qualitative and quantitative measures to evaluate their respective pedagogical initiatives and to gather student feedback. In some instances, the data and insights attained are expected to contribute to the refinement and continued development of the projects’ underlying theoretical concepts. Nevertheless, common to the chapters in Part 2 is their reference to practical curricular and classroom projects which have been implemented or are now proposed for implementation. 3.1 Part 1: Theoretical foundation and research In Chapter 2, “Preparing language teachers to teach learning strategies”, the first of seven chapters in Part 1, Anna Uhl Chamot provides a comprehensive review of research into language learners’ learning strategy use and language learning strategy instruction. While language learning strategy research can be traced back to Selinker’s work in SLA on the Interlanguage Hypothesis and studies on the “good language learner” (e.g. Naiman, Fröhlich, Stern & Todesco, 1978; Rubin, 1975; Stern, 1975) in the 1970s, it remains today a most influential area of study which has yielded an immense body of literature and has led to the development and implementation of numerous approaches to learning strategy instruction around the world. Its impact has transcended the dominant areas of ESL and EFL and strategy instruction is increasingly finding its way into curricula and teaching/learning materials for other languages as well. Drawing on findings from recent research, including a substantial number of studies in languages other than English as well as ones conducted in Asia, Chamot concludes that “instruction in learning strategies will assume a greater role in teacher preparation and curriculum design” (p. 40 in this book) and calls for future research to focus more on the development of lan-

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

15

guage teacher expertise in learning strategy instruction. Chamot herself provides guidelines and an instructional framework (Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach or CALLA) which will serve as points of orientation both for language teachers in the implementation of learning strategy instruction as well as for teacher educators in planning appropriate teacher preparation programmes. With the advent of pragmatically oriented and communication-based language teaching approaches, discourse analysis in linguistics has gained greater prominence in foreign language teaching methodology, syllabus design, materials development and assessment. A discourse-based approach to foreign language teaching is consistent with communicative language teaching which emphasises the development of discourse competence and sociocultural competence as vital and necessary components of overall communicative competence (cf. Canale, 1983; Canale & Swain, 1980). Celce-Murcia and Olshtain (2005) in fact propose making discourse analysis an integral part of needs assessment for developing language curricula, including teaching materials, curriculum content, instructional procedures and assessment. Chapter 3, “Discourse Politeness Theory and second language acquisition”, provides an example of the promise which sociolinguistics and discourse analysis hold for future pedagogical developments in second and foreign language teaching. In it, Mayumi Usami introduces a preliminary framework for a universal theory of Discourse Politeness (DP), which has been developed on the basis of a series of empirical studies on discourse behaviour. She distances herself from the concept of absolute politeness, which involves the labelling of “particular linguistic forms or strategies as being intrinsically more polite than others” (p. 53). Instead the Discourse Politeness Theory (DPT) proposed by her embraces a more dynamic concept, that of relative politeness, which allows for the consideration of factors such as the specific discourse situation, the sociocultural context, and the relationship between the discourse participants as defined by social status, age and social distance. Relative politeness is determined by the movement toward and away from the DP default of a given discourse. The DP default denotes the discourse behaviour which is considered appropriate for a given discourse and which would be unconsciously expected of the discourse participants. Usami argues that identifying the appropriate DP defaults would be of vital significance to smooth intercultural and interpersonal communication and that second language learners should be taught the appropriate use of linguistic forms (such as honorifics in Japanese) and conversational strategies to achieve the DP defaults of the various discourse situations.

16

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

In Chapter 4, “Integrating general purpose and vocationally-oriented language learning (VOLL) — New goals for language and teacher training”, Christina Kuhn’s pedagogical model, which seeks to address the rapidly changing needs of foreign language learners in a globalizing world, represents an example of theoretical conceptualization in foreign language education. As mentioned previously in this chapter (see section 1), globalization and the spread of digital communication technologies have changed the nature of professional work and created the need for working professionals to communicate and work — physically and virtually — in an international environment. In response to this situation and the increased demand for foreign language competence, Kuhn puts forward a case for an integrated curriculum which incorporates both general and vocationally-oriented goals in a single course. She provides suggestions for integrating themes from private and professional communication and identifies important instruments for the planning of such a curriculum, such as the “Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching” and “Profile Deutsch” which is targeted specifically at developers of German as a foreign language courses. Kuhn argues further that such integrated courses would necessitate changes to language teacher education programmes which should be directed at helping teachers develop certain key qualifications, including competencies in needs analyses, curriculum planning, quality management, use of media and the promotion of learner autonomy. To round off the chapter, she presents a training model, which employs both online and offline modes of learning, for the preparation of teachers for integrated language teaching. In Chapter 5, “Pragmatics in foreign language teaching and learning: Reflections on the teaching of Chinese in China”, Hong Wang provides a review of the development of teaching of Chinese as a foreign language (TCFL) in China as well as a critique of the curricular practices and teaching methodology prevalent in TCFL classrooms in the country. She laments that TCFL has continued to emphasise the development of linguistic accuracy as the main curricular goal rather than to promote learners’ pragmatic competence. While pragmatics, central to the evolution of communicative language teaching since the 1980s (see section 2), is now being increasingly researched by Chinese linguists and is making an impact on the teaching of foreign languages to Chinese learners, it has thus far had little telling influence on TCFL. In fact, Wang sees a mismatch between the current curricular content and methodology in TCFL, and the needs of students who are now in China to learn the Chinese language for communication, mostly for non-academic purposes. For this situation to be resolved, Wang asserts that TCFL scholars and teachers must

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

17

realise the importance of pragmatics in language use and understand that the teaching of language is mainly the teaching of language use. Lastly, she puts forward an instructional framework for a pragmatically oriented TCFL classroom for further discussion. Chapter 6, “Development of a foreign language anxiety model”, attests to the significant contribution of research in psychology to foreign language teaching, as outlined in section 2 of this chapter. In her bid to develop a theoretical model to shed light on the sources of foreign language anxiety, Yujia Zhou draws heavily on psychological research both for the study’s hypothesis construction and its research methodology. Using the psychometric method of structural equation modelling, Zhou explores the interrelationships between language anxiety and three potential personal sources, namely self-esteem in language learning, self-perception of speaking proficiency, and learners’ beliefs about language learning. The results suggest that self-esteem in language learning and learners’ beliefs about language learning may have a direct effect on foreign language anxiety. In addition, it would appear that self-esteem in language learning mediates the influence of learners’ beliefs about language learning and their self-perception of speaking proficiency on language anxiety. While Zhou concedes that there are some limitations to her study (e.g. only three indicators were adopted to represent the latent variables in her hypothesized models), it has nevertheless yielded a model which, if refined and validated through further research, could serve as a theoretical basis for systematic classroom interventions to control and alleviate students’ anxiety. In Chapter 7, “Facilitating students’ understanding of English news: Peer scaffolding in an EFL listening classroom”, Danli Li presents the results of her study of peer collaboration in an EFL listening classroom in China. The theoretical foundation for this study was provided by Vygotsky’s (1978) highly influential sociocultural theory of learning, which states that cognitive development and learning take place as a result of social interaction in which the child (or learner) learns how to complete a task by sharing responsibility for that task with an expert or a more competent peer. The supportive interaction provided by the expert for the completion of the task is termed scaffolding, which can be effective only if it is appropriate to the learner’s current and potential level of development — or, in Vygotskian terms, the zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978). The purpose of Li’s study was to investigate the features of peer scaffolding and its contribution to the process of language learning, in particular in the negotiation of meaning and form. A microgenetic approach was used to analyse the interactions generated by the subjects, eight intermediate students working collaboratively on five pieces of English news.

18

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

From the study, it was found that 1) peer scaffolding generally create opportunities for students to participate in meaning-focused communication tasks, 2) peer scaffolding may be mutual, and 3) it could facilitate the development of second language acquisition in the negotiation of meaning and linguistic forms of the target language. As pointed out above, the interest in learners’ learning strategies remains strong among SLA researchers and foreign language educationists. This is so because there remain a considerable number of areas which are still largely unexplored. Shameem Rafik-Galea and Bee Eng Wong identify vocabulary learning strategies as one of these areas, despite the fact that the importance of vocabulary in foreign language learning has, in recent years, been emphasised by researchers such as Laufer (2003) and Tschirner (2004). Tschirner laments that “modern notions of the importance of frequency in vocabulary learning and of special vocabularies such as the academic word list (AWL) as well as of the importance of vocabulary learning strategies often have not yet found their way into education ministries, curriculum boards, teachers and teacher trainers” (2004, p. 38). In Chapter 8, “Vocabulary learning strategies among adult foreign language learners”, Rafik-Galea and Wong report on the results of a questionnaire study of the vocabulary learning strategy preferences of foreign language learners in multi-racial Malaysia. The study reveals that the surveyed students of different ethnic groups seem to choose direct strategies (memory, cognitive and compensation strategies) far more frequently than indirect strategies (social and metacognitive strategies) to aid their vocabulary learning. In conclusion, the authors call for the development of more and a greater variety of language tasks which incorporate activities for the acquisition and use of vocabulary learning strategies. 3.2 Part 2: Classroom practice and evaluation studies Part 2 opens with a chapter which documents the impact of the constructivist view of learning as an active and subjective process of knowledge construction on foreign language learning. In Chapter 9, “Technology in the service of constructivist pedagogy: Network-based applications and knowledge construction”, Wai Meng Chan and Ing Ru Chen distill four essential principles of constructivist pedagogy from the considerable literature which has appeared since the early 1990s. These are: 1) learning requires the active participation of the learner; 2) process-oriented and reflective learning should be promoted; 3) learning should be situated in authentic contexts; and 4) learning tasks should be open-ended. In arguing that computer media and network

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

19

technologies can make a telling contribution towards constructivist learning and the realisation of theses essential principles, Chan and Chen point especially to the element of interactivity, probably the single most significant attribute of computer media, which provides a means for the active involvement of learners and for providing learning support for the complex process of knowledge construction. To illustrate their point, they present three networkbased applications, “My Vocab Book”, “Interactive Situation Simulation” and “Movie Studio”, the design of which is underpinned by the above-stated principles and which enable learners to take control of their learning and task processing. Though content-based instruction (CBI) and task-based learning (TBL) are no longer novelties in foreign language teaching as both have been discussed in research and implemented in practice since about two decades ago (for a review of literature on these approaches, see Snow, 2005; Richards & Rodgers, 2001), they have apparently not lost any of their relevance and continue to generate intensive research and practice. As Wesche and Skehan (2002) point out, both approaches share the common feature that they enable learners to develop both content knowledge as well as language proficiency. Both approaches are thus compatible with communicative language teaching as they allow learners to use the learned language to meet authentic needs. Chapter 10, “Pedagogical concerns: Some common features of content-based instruction, task-based learning and business case study, and their roles in an EBP class”, Wenhua Hsu describes an English for Business Purposes course in Taiwan which applies the principles of CBI, TBL and business case study (BCS) in a single course to help students acquire subject-matter knowledge, linguistic knowledge and knowledge of a disciplinary approach (that of BCS). In an evaluation of this 3-in-1 instructional framework, she comes to the conclusion that the CBI and TBL approaches help students to improve on their performance in the business case studies undertaken, both in terms of the content and the language. Among other findings was the indication that languageoriented pre-tasks based on the TBL approach can boost students’ language performance and enhance the learning outcome of the CBI course components. Students also found CBI and BCS tasks, which provided them with immediate opportunities to apply their content knowledge, to be useful and indicated that these tasks stimulated their interest. Probably because of its close association with the audiolingual method and its unrelenting drills, memorization has gained a somewhat negative connotation in foreign language learning. In Chapter 11, “Memorizing dialogue: The case for ‘Performative Exercises’ ”, Izumi Walker and Tomoko Utsumi seek

20

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

to dispel such negative views of memorization, citing in support research in cognitive psychology and SLA which sees memorization as a key step towards achieving automaticity and fluency in language production. They also report on an innovative sequence of role-play activities for the development of discourse competence, termed performative exercises. Fundamental to this pedagogical concept is the memorization of model dialogues, which are transferred subsequently to other similar situations and extended successively in the process. An evaluation study was conducted by Walker and Utsumi to explore students’ perceptions of the usefulness of memorizing dialogues and to gather feedback for the further development of their pedagogical concept. The study reveals 89% of the respondents believe that it was useful to memorize dialogues for the following reasons: 1) the dialogues provide a basis for communication; 2) the dialogues can be applied to similar real-life situations; 3) memorizing dialogues helps to develop fluency; and 4) memorizing dialogues helps in the understanding of grammar and structure. Walker and Utsumi conclude by pointing to the potential of performative exercises to help learners develop automaticity which will enable them to focus more on the processing of meaning. The place of literature in the foreign language classroom has been debated since more traditional methods like the grammar translation method have been displaced by situation-based and communicative approaches to language teaching (see e.g. Brumfit & Carter, 1986). However, while questions have been asked about the relevance of literary texts for the communicative needs of learners, literature continues to be a frequent source of texts for textbooks and other teaching materials. In Chapter 12, “The whole world communicates in English, do you? — Educational drama as an alternative approach to teaching English language in Japan”, Naoko Araki-Metcalfe discusses how a literary genre, drama, has been adapted for use in general education to provide students with the opportunity to use “the body in time and space to explore issues, questions, perspectives or ideas” (Ewing & Simons, 2004, p. 3). ArakiMetcalfe believes that educational drama, as this method and type of activity is called, can be applied to good effect to foreign language teaching and will allow learners to develop not just linguistic skills but communicative abilities in a broader sense, including kinaesthetic functions such as facial expressions, hand gestures and other body movements. Having herself tested this method in the Japanese primary school context, Araki-Metcalfe asserts that educational drama will help achieve the goals set out for English language teaching under the subject of Integrated Studies, namely: 1) developing a positive attitude among students toward communication with others; 2) enhancing their abili-

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

21

ties in self-expression; and 3) developing an interest in and understanding for the culture and lifestyle of other countries. As mentioned previously in this introduction, research into motivational factors, including students’ anxiety in learning and using foreign languages, has received much attention in recent years, as documented, for instance, by Zhou’s efforts in developing a theoretical model of foreign language anxiety (see Zhou, chap. 6 in this book). The last chapter of the book, Chapter 13, “From oral interview test to oral communication test: Alleviating student’s anxiety”, reports on a formative research project by Satomi Chiba and Yoko Morikawa to develop an oral test form which is intended to address the problem of anxiety and make a contribution towards achieving humanistic communication. Chiba and Morikawa devised the oral communication test and used this new test form over two semesters with the essentially same group of students in two successive beginning Japanese courses (Japanese 1 and Japanese 2). The new test format represents a departure from the traditional oneon-one test format involving just the examiner and the student. Instead, it allows students to prepare and play a conversation on a topic of their choice with a peer partner, and incorporates an element of self-evaluation by the students themselves. On the basis of students’ self-evaluative reports, teachers provide constructive feedback to guide students to improve on their oral performance. These self-evaluative reports as well as students’ comments and suggestions pertaining to the test format and video recordings of the test performances provided useful data for the authors to refine the test format, assessment criteria and rating scale. Their analysis of the data led them to the conclusion that students felt considerably less anxiety in the second semester than in the first, and that they seemed more prepared to pro-actively seek means of reducing their anxiety. References Arnold, J. (Ed.). (1999). Affect in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brophy, J., & Good, T.L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 328–375). New York: MacMillan. Brumfit, C.J., & Carter, R.A. (1986). Literature and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. Richards & R. Schimdt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2–27). London: Longman.

22

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2005). Discourse-based approaches: A new framework for second language teaching and learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 729–741). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chinese teaching to match nation's clout. (2005, July 20). People’s Daily Online. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from http://english.people.com.cn/200507/20/ eng20050720_197263. html Chun, D.M., & Plass, J.L. (2000). Networked multimedia environments for second language acquisition. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 151–170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cook, V. (1996). Second language learning and language teaching (2nd ed.). London: Arnold. Crystal, D. (1995). Die Cambridge Enzyklopädie der Sprache. Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus. Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Draper, J.B., & Hicks, J.H. (2002). Foreign language enrollments in public secondary schools, Fall 2000. Summary report. Alexandria, VA: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. European Council. (2000). Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March 2000. Presidency conclusions. Press Release: Lisbon (24-3-2000), Nr: 100/1/00. Brussels: European Council. Eurydice. (2002). Key competencies. A developing concept in general compulsory education. Brussels: Eurydice. Eurydice. (2005). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe. 2005 edition. Brussels: Eurydice. Ewing, R., & Simons, J. (2004). Beyond the script: Take two: Drama in classroom. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association.

Gage, N.L. (1978). The scientific basis of the art of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press. Government Information Office. (2005). The Republic of China yearbook 2005. Taipei: Government Information Office. Graddol, D. (2000). The future of English? A guide to forecasting the popularity of the English language in the 21st century. London: The British Council. (First published in 1997) Habermas, J. (1970). Toward a theory of communicative competence. Inquiry, 13, 360–375. Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E. Ingram (Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. 3–28). London: Academic Press.

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

23

Japan Foundation. (n.d.). Outline of the results of the "2003 overseas Japanese language education organization survey". Retrieved June 13, 2006, from http://www.jpf.go.jp/e/japan/ news/0407/07_01.html KF's support for Korean language. (2002). Retrieved June 24, 2006, from http://www.kf.or.kr:8080/eng/notice/newsView.jsp?boardIdx=166 Krashen, S.D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon. Krashen, S.D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman. Krashen, S.D., & Terrell, T.D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon. Lam, A.S.L. (2005). Language education in China. Policy and experience from 1949. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 567–587. Lee, J. (2006). Exploring the heritage status of Korean language learners. The International Journal of Language, Society and Culture, 16, Retrieved June 24, 2006, from http://www.educ.utas.edu.au/users/tle/JOURNAL/ARTICLES/2006/162.htm Leong, W.K. (2006, June 16). Chinese culture centre set to expand. The Straits Times. Retrieved June 18, 2006, from http://global.factiva.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/ha/ default.aspx MacIntyre, P.D. (1999). Language Anxiety: A review of the research for language teachers. In D.J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning (pp. 24–45). Boston: McGraw Hill. Major programs for 2005. (2005). Korea Foundation Newsletter, 14(1). Retrieved June 24, 2006, from http://newsletter.kf.or.kr/english/contents.asp?vol=51&no= 544&lang=English&key=korean%20language%20learners McKay, S.L. (2005). Sociolinguistics and second language learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 281–299). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Met, M. (n.d.). Improving students’ capacity in foreign languages. Retrieved June 13, 2006, from http://www.internationaled.org/PDKmet.htm Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development, South Korea. (n.d.). National basic curriculum. Retrieved June 21, 2006 from http://english.moe.go.kr/ html/education/?menuno=03 Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan. (2003). The course of study for foreign languages. Retrieved June 21, 2006, from http://www.mext.go.jp/english/shotou/030301.htm Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan. (n.d.). International exchange and cooperation. Promotion of Japanese language teaching for foreigners. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from http://www.mext.go.jp/english/ org/exchange/67a.htm Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan. (1998). Synopsis of the report on “National curriculum standards reform for kindergarten,

24

W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin & T. Suthiwan

elementary school, lower and upper secondary school and schools for the visually disabled, the hearing impaired and the otherwise disabled”. Retrieved June 23, 2006, from http://www.mext.go.jp/mews/1998/07/980712.htm Ministry of Education, People Republic of China. (2001). Yingyu kecheng biaozhun: shiyan gao [Standards for the English curriculum: Pilot version]. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press. Ministry of Education, Republic of China. (2003). Guomin zhongxiaoxue jiunian yiguan kecheng gangyao [General guidelines of elementary and junior high school curriculum for grades 1-9]. Retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/EJE/EDU5147002/9CC/9CC.html? TYPE=1&UNITID=225&CATEGORYID=0&FILEID=124759&open Ministry of Education, Republic of China. (n.d.). Gaozhong dierwaiyu banli chengxiao [Results of the implementation of the programme for the promotion of second foreign languages in senior high school]. Retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/ACCOUNTING/ EDUTING001/acc/HIGH-SCHOOL/money/ doc/unit93-002.doc Müller, K. (2000). Constructivism in education. In M. Wendt (Ed.), Konstruktion statt Instruktion. Neue Zugänge zu Sprache und Kultur im Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 43–54). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Murdoch, Y.D. (2002). Evaluation of the foreign language high school language programme in South Korea. Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of Birmingham, UK. Naiman, N., Fröhlich, M., Stern, H.H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Neuner, G., & Hunfeld, H. (1993). Methoden des fremdsprachlichen Deutschunterrichts. Eine Einführung. Berlin: Langenscheidt. Ornstein, A.C., & Lasley, T.J. (2000). Strategies for effective teaching (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill. Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can tell us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41–51. Rüschoff, B. (1999). Wissenskonstruktion als Grundlage fremdsprachlichen Lernens. Fremdsprachen lehren und lernen, 28, 32–43. Savignon, S.J. (2005). Communicative language teaching: Strategies and goals. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 635–651). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-231. Snow, M.A. (2005). A model of academic literacy for integrated language and content instruction. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 693–712). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Stern, H.H. (1975). What we can learn from the good language learner. Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 304–318. Stern, H.H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond: An Introduction to the Book

25

Tschirner, E. (2004). Breadth of vocabulary and advanced English study: An empirical investigation. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 27– 39. Retrieved June 25, 2006, from http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v1n12004/tschirner.htm U.S. Department of Education (2006). Teaching Language for National Security and American Competitiveness. Retrieved June 17, 2006, from http://www.ed.gov/ teachers/how/academic/foreign-language/teaching-language.html Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Welles, E. B. (2004). Foreign language enrollments in United States institutions of higher education, Fall 2002. ADFL Bulletin, 35(2–3). Retrieved from http://www.adfl.org/projects/index.htm Wendt, M. (2000). Konstruktion statt Instruktion. Neue Zugänge zu Sprache und Kultur im Fremdspachenunterricht. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Wesche, M.B., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative, task-based and content-based language instruction. In R.B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 207–228). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Weskamp, R. (2001). Fachdidaktik: Grundlagen und Konzepte. Berlin: Cornelsen. Wetzel, P.J. (2004). Keigo in modern Japan. Polite language from Meiji to the present. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Wolff, D. (1994). Der Konstruktivismus: Ein neues Paradigma in der Fremdsprachendidaktik? Die neueren Sprachen, 93, 407–429. Young, D.J. (Ed.). (1999). Affect in foreign language and second language learning. Boston: McGraw Hill.

PART 1 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION AND RESEARCH

2 PREPARING LANGUAGE TEACHERS TO TEACH LEARNING STRATEGIES

Anna Uhl Chamot

1 Introduction Learning strategies are thoughts and actions used by students to assist their own learning; they are techniques for accomplishing specific tasks. Learning strategies are usually explicit, conscious, and goal-driven, especially when learners are in the process of trying out a new strategy. Researchers in general education, special education, and second language acquisition have found that more expert learners are able to use various strategies flexibly and effectively when they wish to complete a challenging task. Learning strategies are sensitive to the learning context and to the learner’s understanding of the task. If learners perceive, for example, that a grammar task requires completing sentences with the correct verb form, they will likely decide to use a memorization strategy. Which memorization strategy they choose will depend on their understanding of their own learning processes and what strategies have been successful in the past. A different task, such as being able to understand a reading text will require strategies different from memorization — such as making predictions based on prior knowledge and making inferences about the author’s intended meaning. Learners’ strategies may also change as they develop greater proficiency in the language. Research into language learning strategies is important because less successful language learners can be taught new learning strategies, thus helping them become better language learners (Grenfell & Harris, 1999). Numerous descriptive studies have sought to identify differences in learning strategy use between more and less effective learners. However, there have been fewer studies focusing on attempts to teach language learning strategies in classroom settings.

30

A. U. Chamot

2 Identifying learners’ strategies Learning strategies are identified through various self-report procedures. Although self-report is always subject to error, no better way has yet been devised for identifying learners’ mental processes and techniques for completing a learning task. Learning strategies are for the most part unobservable, though some may be associated with an observable behavior. For example, a student reading an information text may use selective attention (unobservable) to focus on the main ideas and might then decide to take notes (observable) on these main ideas. The only way to find out whether students are using selective attention while reading is to ask them to describe their thinking processes. Self-reports have been made through retrospective interviews, stimulated recall interviews, questionnaires, written diaries and journals, and think-aloud protocols concurrent with a learning task. Each of these methods has limitations, but at the present time the only way to gain any insight at all into the unobservable mental learning strategies of learners is by asking them to reveal their thinking processes. 3 Descriptive studies Studies using these self-report methods have identified characteristics of good language learners and compared the strategies of more effective and less effective language learners. The identification and classification of language learners’ strategies have helped us understand how strategies are actually used in the learning process. This understanding has in turn guided instructional studies that have taught learning strategies to language learners. Language learning strategies research began in the 1970s with the seminal work of Joan Rubin, who suggested that a model of “the good language learner” could be identified by looking at special strategies used by students who were successful in their second language learning (Rubin, 1975). Other researchers followed with descriptions of learner characteristics and strategic techniques associated with effective second and foreign language learning (Hosenfeld, 1976; Naiman, Fröhlich, Stern & Todesco, 1978, 1996; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Stern, 1975). These studies identified the good language learner as one who is a mentally active learner, monitors language comprehension and production, practices communicating in the language, makes use of prior linguistic and general knowledge, uses various memorization techniques, and asks questions for clarification. Other studies comparing more and less effective language students have revealed a recurring finding that less successful learners do use learning strat-

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

31

egies, sometimes even as frequently as their more successful peers, but that the strategies are used differently (Abraham & Vann, 1987; Chamot, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Carbonaro & Robbins, 1993; Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999; Khaldieh, 2000; Vandergrift, 1997a, 1997b; Vann & Abraham, 1990). A recent Canadian study comparing the listening comprehension strategies of more and less skilled middle school students of French found that more skilled listeners used more metacognitive strategies, especially comprehension monitoring, than did their less skilled peers (Vandergrift, 2003). Another study of secondary students of French conducted in the United Kingdom found that less successful students did not seem to be aware of the potential role of learning strategies in improving their language performance (Graham, 2004). These studies confirmed that good language learners were skilled at matching strategies to the task they were working on, while the less successful language learners did not have the metacognitive knowledge about task requirements needed to select appropriate strategies. This trend was apparent with English-speaking children in foreign language immersion classrooms (Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999), high school ESL students (Chamot & Keatley, 2003), and American university students of Arabic (Keatley, Chamot, Spokane & Greenstreet, 2004). 4 Language learning strategy instruction Increasingly, researchers are turning to intervention studies in language learning strategy research in order to investigate the teachability of strategies and their effect on learners. The effects investigated include performance on language tests, increase in reported use of learning strategies, attitudes, motivation, and self-efficacy. Instructional studies have been experimental, quasi-experimental, and case and individual studies that focused on one or more modalities, including listening comprehension, reading, vocabulary, speaking, and writing. In general, these studies have shown that language learners can acquire new learning strategies and that these strategies can increase their achievement in the language class (Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Cohen, 1998; Grenfell & Harris, 1999; Macaro, 2001; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). For example, the listening comprehension strategies of students of English in a Japanese women’s college were first identified, then those used least frequently became the focus of strategy instruction (Ozeki, 2000). The sequence of instruction was as follows: a preparation stage in which students were ex-

32

A. U. Chamot

plicitly taught a new strategy and earlier strategies were reviewed; and a lesson stage in which students practiced the strategies with listening comprehension tasks. Pretest and posttest scores were compared to evaluate the effects of learning strategy instruction, and improvement in the treatment group was noted in the following dimensions: development of listening comprehension ability; increased use of learning strategies (including some not explicitly taught); positive attitudes towards strategy instruction; transfer of strategies to new tasks; and durability of strategy use after the completion of strategy instruction. Another recent study of learning strategy instruction investigated the listening comprehension strategies of French as a second language university students in Canada (Vandergrift, 2003). After being told the topic of the listening task, students completed a column on a worksheet in which they listed (in French and/or in English) their predictions about information they might hear. Then they listened to the text, checking off predictions and vocabulary they had anticipated and adding new information. Next, they worked in pairs to compare and discuss what they had understood. A second listening to the text allowed students to fill in additional information comprehended and this was followed by a class discussion in which students shared the strategies they had used to comprehend the text. After a third listening, students wrote a personal reflection on what they had learned about their own listening processes and what strategies they might use in future to improve their listening comprehension. Students’ written reflections revealed positive reactions to the strategies, increased motivation, and understanding of their own thinking processes during listening tasks. The speaking strategies of foreign language (French and Norwegian) students were investigated during ten weeks of instruction (Cohen, 1998; Cohen, Weaver & Li, 1998). The intervention groups received instruction in learning strategies for speaking tasks. Students were pre- and post-tested on speaking tasks and on the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) (Oxford, 1990). In addition, a sample of students provided think-aloud data as they were completing task checklists. The results indicated that integrating strategies instruction into the language course was beneficial to students, though the relationship of reported strategy use to performance was complex. A recent study investigated the English oral communication strategies of students at a Japanese women’s college (Nakatani, 2005). Students in the intervention group received metacognitive awareness-raising training and were taught communication strategies that could help students learn more of the language such as asking for clarification, checking for comprehension, and

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

33

paraphrasing, rather than communication strategies without a direct influence on learning, such as abandoning a message or reverting to the L1. Results showed that students taught to use strategies showed significant improvement on their oral proficiency tests. Instruction in reading comprehension strategies was studied with high school ESL students having low literacy in their native language (Chamot & Keatley, 2003). Approximately half of the teachers provided initial strategy instruction in the students’ L1, then asked students to use the same strategies when reading in English and these teachers reported success in having students use the strategies. However, the remaining teachers who attempted to teach the strategies only in English were less successful and in some cases abandoned the attempt. During think-aloud interviews with students, those who were more able to verbalize their thinking processes (in L1) displayed greater comprehension of the L2 text than those unable to describe their thoughts. Another recent study of reading comprehension investigated the effects of strategy instruction on lower and higher proficiency levels and also assessed students’ continuing use of strategies after the conclusion of instruction (Ikeda & Takeuchi, 2003). The experimental groups received explicit reading strategy instruction integrated into their regular class over an eight week period. The results indicated that the strategy instruction affected the frequency of students’ use of the strategies only for the high proficiency level group. The authors felt that this was likely due to the fact that most of the strategies taught involved top-down processing and that what the low proficiency group probably needed was a focus on bottom-up processing strategies. After the first post-test at the end of the instruction period, students were tested again three months and five months later to see to what degree they continued to use the instructed strategies. An encouraging finding was that students retained their use of learning strategies for reading five months after the conclusion of instruction. Another recently completed study built on Ikeda and Takeuchi’s (2003) work to further explore the effects of task difficulty in reading comprehension and use of strategies (Oxford et al., 2004). ESL college students completed two reading tasks (one easy, one difficult). There was little difference in strategy use on the easy readings between the two groups (high and low proficiency). However, for the more difficult reading, lower proficiency students used more strategies than their higher proficient peers. The authors attributed this finding to the fact that the “difficult” reading was actually not difficult for the higher proficiency students, and thus they did not need to use many learning

34

A. U. Chamot

strategies. This finding underlines the importance of selecting challenging tasks for learning strategy practice. A recent descriptive vocabulary study of Hong Kong university students learning English found important implications for strategy instruction (Fan, 2003). For example, when students perceived that a strategy was useful, they used it more often than strategies they did not perceive as useful. An implication is that students might use more learning strategies if teachers were to first convince them of their usefulness. This approach was taken in a series of case studies in the United Kingdom in which the researchers worked closely with five secondary teachers of modern languages as they experimented with learning strategy instruction for a variety of tasks (Grenfell & Harris, 1999). Three of the teachers focused on teaching memorization strategies for vocabulary. The instruction was generally explicit and students’ metacognition was developed through a variety of consciousness-raising activities. Most students were willing to adopt the new strategies and performance on tests indicated that the memorization strategies had been helpful for many in learning new vocabulary. A study of writing strategies instruction was recently conducted in the United Kingdom with six classes of secondary students of French (Macaro, 2001). In this Oxford Writing Project pre- and post-tests included questionnaires, writing tasks, and think-aloud interviews during a writing task. Students in the experimental groups received about five months of learning strategy instruction. At post-test, the experimental groups had made significant gains in the grammatical accuracy of their writing. In addition, they changed their approach to writing, becoming less reliant on the teacher, more selective in their use of the dictionary, and more careful about their written work. 5 Instructional models A number of models for teaching learning strategies in both first and second language contexts have been developed (see, for example, Chamot, Barnhardt, El-Dinary & Robbins, 1999; Cohen, 1998; Graham & Harris, 2000; Grenfell & Harris, 1999; Harris, 2003; Macaro, 2001; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990; Pressley, El-Dinary, Gaskins, Schuder, Bergman, Almasi & Brown, 1992). These instructional models share many features. All agree on the importance of developing students’ metacognitive understanding of the value of learning strategies and suggest that this is facilitated through teacher demonstration and modeling. All emphasize the importance of providing multiple practice opportunities with the strategies so that students can use them

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

35

autonomously. All suggest that students should evaluate how well a strategy has worked, choose strategies for a task, and actively transfer strategies to new tasks. The Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA) is one such model designed to increase the school achievement of students who are learning through the medium of a second language. The CALLA model fosters language and cognitive development by integrating content, language, and learning strategies instruction (Chamot, 2005, forthcoming; Chamot & O'Malley, 1994). School districts in the United States that have implemented the CALLA model have focused on preparing and encouraging teachers to teach learning strategies to their students. Learning strategy instruction should be scaffolded, beginning with extensive teacher support that is gradually lessened so that students eventually assume responsibility for using the strategies independently (Chamot et al., 1999). Early on in teaching a strategy, teachers provide more guidance in strategy use than they do as students become more adept at using a strategy. The teacher initially provides sufficient instructional supports to ensure that the students are learning to use the strategy effectively. 6 Issues in teaching language learning strategies A number of researchers have worked closely with teachers to guide them in incorporating learning strategy instruction into their language classes. Even with close collaboration, there have been differences in the degree to which teachers have been able to provide explicit learning strategy instruction (Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Grenfell & Harris, 1999; Macaro, 2001; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). Some of the factors that may explain why some teachers take to this innovation readily and others do not are the teacher’s teaching style and disposition, classroom organization, curriculum objectives, and language of instruction. The teacher’s personal approach can affect every aspect of instruction. For example, teachers who practice a transmission type of teaching may simply tell students to use certain strategies without investigating student preferences and prior knowledge about strategies. Some teachers may mention strategies but fail to teach them explicitly. Explicit instruction includes the development of students’ awareness of their strategies, teacher modeling of strategic thinking, identifying the strategies by name, and providing opportunities for practice and self-evaluation. Researchers in both first language contexts and second language acquisition agree that explicit instruction is far more effec-

36

A. U. Chamot

tive than simply asking students to use one or more strategies. Explicit instruction also fosters metacognition, students’ ability to understand their own thinking and learning processes (Anderson, 2005; Carrier, 2003; Chamot, 2004, 2005; Chamot et al., 1999; Cohen, 1998; Graham & Harris, 2000; National Reading Panel, 2000; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford & Leaver, 1996; Pressley, 2000; Shen, 2003). Finally, if teachers do not believe in learner autonomy, they will not be comfortable in having students take more responsibility for their own learning — a major goal of learning strategy instruction. Related to a teacher’s disposition is his or her type of classroom organization. Teacher-fronted classrooms provide few opportunities for students to work collaboratively to explore each others’ learning strategies. For effective learning strategy instruction, teachers need to provide time for students to experiment with different strategies and reflect on the results, eventually choosing their personal repertoire of strategies. The objectives of the curriculum may determine how much time teachers are willing to spend on learning strategy instruction. Curricula with very specific standards and high stakes assessments of these standards can make the teacher feel that there is no time to spare for “extras” like teaching learning strategies. In addition, the curriculum effectively dictates the types of tasks undertaken in the language classroom. Tasks differ depending on whether the context is a second language or foreign language setting and whether the learner’s goal is to acquire social or academic language or both (Chamot, 2004; Cohen, 2003; Cummins, 2000; Oxford et al., 2004). Differences in strategy use also vary according to proficiency level. Takeuchi’s (2003) multiple case studies of learner journals found that learners reported shifting their use of strategies as they advanced to higher proficiency levels. Similarly, a recent reading study found that perceived difficulty of the task impacted the use of learning strategies, which were used on more challenging tasks (Oxford et al., 2004). The learner’s goals, the context of the learning situation, and the cultural values of the learner’s society can be expected to have a strong influence on choice and acceptability of language learning strategies. For example, in a culture that prizes individual competition and has organized its educational system around competitive tasks, successful language learners may prefer strategies that allow them to work alone rather than social strategies that call for collaboration with others. Two descriptive learning strategy studies illustrate some of the learning strategy preferences reported by students in different cultural contexts. In a

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

37

study of ethnically Chinese, bilingual Singaporean university students studying a foreign language (French or Japanese), students reported a preference for social strategies and an unwillingness to use affective strategies (Wharton, 2000). Another study looked at the language learning strategies of students in a university advanced Spanish writing class and compared achievement on a writing sample between those students speaking Spanish as a first or heritage language and those learning Spanish as a foreign language (Olivares-Cuhat, 2002). As could be expected, students with a Spanish language background were graded higher on their writing samples than the other students, but they also showed a greater preference for affective and memory strategies and these latter were highly correlated with writing achievement. Preliminary findings of a current study of learning strategies used by university students of less commonly taught languages indicate that both heritage speakers of Arabic and students of Arabic as a foreign language share many of the same challenges and consequent learning strategies for learning Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), but also demonstrate differences (Keatley, Chamot, Spokane & Greenstreet, 2004). For instance, heritage speakers reported using metacognitive strategies to overcome interference from their Arabic dialects when they attempted to speak MSA, but, unlike the foreign language students, had no difficulty in discriminating Arabic sounds and hence did not report any learning strategies for listening comprehension. The implications for teaching are that language teachers need to find out what learning strategies students are already using for the different tasks they undertake in the language classroom. Exploring with students the reasons why they use particular strategies can help teachers understand cultural and contextual factors that may be influencing their students. This can lead to clarification of the task’s demands where there is a mismatch with students’ current learning strategies. By understanding the task more clearly, students will probably be more motivated to try new strategies. Finally, the language of instruction can pose a hurdle for many language teachers. This issue is particular to teaching learning strategies to language learners. In first language contexts, strategies are taught through a language medium in which students are proficient, but in second or foreign language contexts, this is not necessarily so. Beginning level students, in particular, do not have the L2 proficiency to understand explanations of why and how to use learning strategies, yet postponing learning strategy instruction until intermediate or advanced level courses deprives beginners of tools that can enhance their language learning and increase their motivation for further study. It is

38

A. U. Chamot

probably not possible to avoid using the first language during strategy instruction for beginning to low intermediate level students (Macaro, 2001). Suggestions have been made to initially teach the learning strategies in the students’ native language, assuming it is the same for all students and that the teacher knows the language; alternatively, teachers have been urged to give the strategy a target language name, explain how to use it in simple language, and model the strategy repeatedly (Chamot et al., 1999). This section has outlined some of the obstacles to teaching learning strategies in the language classroom. The next section suggests ways to overcome these obstacles. 7 Guidelines for teaching language learning strategies The first step in teaching learning strategies is to help students become aware of what strategies are and what strategies they are already using (Chamot, 2004; Chamot et al., 1999; Cohen, 1998; Grenfell & Harris, 1999; Macaro, 2001). This consciousness-raising helps students begin to think about their own learning processes. Teachers should also model how the strategy can be used for a particular task. Often the teacher modeling takes the form of the teacher thinking aloud while engaged in a language learning task. After modeling, teachers should name the strategy. Too often strategies are identified by describing an action such as, “When I’m reading I like to visualize what is happening in the story.” The teacher needs to add to this statement a further explanation such as, “Visualizing is a learning strategy. It helps me make sense of a story. If I visualize an event in the story that doesn’t make sense, then I know that I need to check what I just read, because I probably misread something” (Chamot, forthcoming). In this way, students can attach a name to a strategy and can understand when, why, and how it is used. In addition to frequent teacher modeling, students also need extensive practice opportunities. Learning strategies are part of procedural knowledge and thus need as much practice as any other procedure or skill. In the beginning stages of practice, teachers usually need to remind students to use the new strategies. However, as students become more familiar with the strategies, teachers need to fade their cues so that gradually the students themselves assume responsibility for using the strategies. After all, a learning strategy is truly a learning strategy only when the learner uses it independently!

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

39

8 A framework for teaching language learning strategies The instructional sequence devised for the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA) has proved to be a useful approach to teaching learning strategies for language as well as for content (Chamot, 2005; Chamot & O’Malley, 1994; Chamot et al., 1999). The framework developed for CALLA instruction is task-based and consists of five phases in a lesson or series of lessons. Each of the five phases combines the three components of content, language, and learning strategies. In the first phase of Preparation, teachers focus on eliciting students’ prior knowledge about the content and language needed, developing vocabulary, and assessing students’ current learning strategies for the particular type of task. This phase includes discussions about students’ current learning strategies, trials of a challenging task with and without strategies, diaries and learning logs, and think-aloud interviews with individual students in which the student describes his or her thoughts while working on a task. In the second phase, Presentation, teachers make new information and skills accessible and comprehensible to students through a variety of techniques, such as demonstrations, modeling, and visual support. In this phase teachers model a new learning strategy, give it a name in the target language, and explain when, why, and how to use it. The teacher also asks students to provide examples of when they have used the strategy and how it has worked for them. In other words, the teacher does not assume that any particular learning strategy is unknown to students. Some students might not know the strategy while others may already be using it. The focus is on naming the strategy and discussing how it can be used for language learning tasks. The Presentation phase is followed by or integrated with the third phase, Practice, in which students use the new information and skills (including learning strategies) in activities that involve collaboration, problem-solving, inquiry, and hands-on experiences. In practicing learning strategies, the teacher needs to choose a challenging task for students. If the task is too easy, students will be able to complete it without recourse to learning strategies; on the other hand, if the task is too difficult the learning strategies may not be effective, and students can become discouraged from using the strategies. The teacher should provide multiple practice opportunities, and should scaffold the instruction by gradually fading cues to use the strategies. The fourth phase of the CALLA instructional design sequence is Selfevaluation, in which students assess their own understanding and proficiency with the content, language, and learning strategies they have been practicing. Students may evaluate the learning strategies they have been practicing

40

A. U. Chamot

through class discussion, writing learning logs, completing checklists, or keeping a learning strategy diary. This phase is especially important in developing students’ ability to reflect on their own learning and metacognition. In the fifth phase, Expansion, students engage in activities that apply what they have learned to their own lives, including other classes at school, families and community, and their cultural and linguistic background. In this phase the learning strategy goal is to help students transfer the strategies they have been practicing to new tasks and situations. Teachers may ask students to use the strategies in a different class, to teach the strategies to a friend or sibling, and to develop a class book on learning strategy tips for other students. Finally, teachers assess what students have learned through a combination of formal and performance assessments tied directly to the content, language, and learning strategy objectives identified for the lesson or unit. Teachers need to assess whether students are actually using the instructed strategies and also try to ascertain whether the use of strategies is improving their achievement. The CALLA instructional framework emphasizes explicitness, metacognitive knowledge, and scaffolded support as the teacher and students work through these phases. The five phases are recursive, so that teachers can move between phases as needed to help students understand concepts and develop skills. The recursive nature of the CALLA instructional framework provides flexibility in planning language lessons that integrate content, language, and learning strategies that help students master both language and new content. 9 Directions for future research Future studies of language learning strategies will continue to identify the strategies used by different learners learning a variety of languages as researchers seek to understand different learner characteristics and the complex cognitive, social, and affective processes involved in processing language input and using the language for a variety of purposes. Likewise, language educators and methodologists will continue their quest for more effective instructional approaches, and, with the increasing emphasis on learner-centered instruction and learner empowerment in all areas of education, instruction in learning strategies will assume a greater role in teacher preparation and curriculum design. Classroom intervention studies could provide information about the effects of learning strategy instruction on achievement and language proficiency. Such studies need to be conducted with many different types of language stu-

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

41

dents, including children in foreign language immersion and non-immersion programs, school-aged students in bilingual and second language programs, older students with differing educational levels in their native languages, and students in learning contexts in a variety of countries and cultures. An important area for future research is in the development of language teacher expertise in learning strategy instruction. The evaluation of different models for teacher preparation in learning strategies instruction could lead to refining and improving current models. In addition, studies need to be undertaken to identify the relationship of effective learning strategy instruction to teacher characteristics such as teaching approach, attitude, and teacher beliefs, as it seems probable that effective learning strategy instruction is closely tied to specific teacher characteristics. In addition, the effectiveness of learning strategy instructional practice needs to be related to the amount and type of pre-service and/or in-service preparation in learning strategies instruction, and years of teaching experience and length of time teaching learning strategies. While the research to date has shown that language learning strategy instruction can contribute to the development of more effective language learning, additional research in specific language learning contexts is essential to realizing its potential to enhance second language acquisition and instruction. The research on developing language teacher expertise in learning strategy instruction is sparse and much remains to be done in this area. 10 Conclusion This chapter has provided a rationale for teaching learning strategies in the language classroom. A brief overview of research into the descriptive and intervention research on language learning strategies was followed by a discussion of instructional models and issues in the teaching of language learning strategies. Finally, guidelines and an instructional framework were provided to help language teachers incorporate explicit learning strategy instruction into their classrooms. References Abraham, R.G., & Vann, R.J. (1987). Strategies of two language learners: A case study. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning, pp. 85–102. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Anderson, N.J. (2005). L2 learning strategies. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Carrier, K.A. (2003). Improving high school English language learners’ second language listening through strategy instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 27, 383–408.

42

A. U. Chamot

Chamot, A.U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign language Teaching, 1(1), 12–25. Chamot, A.U. (2005). The Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA): An update. In P.A. Richard-Amato & M.A. Snow (Eds.), Academic success for English language learners: Strategies for K-12 mainstream teachers (pp. 87–101). White Plains, NY: Longman. Chamot, A.U. (Forthcoming). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman. Chamot, A.U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P.B., Carbonaro, G., & Robbins, J. (1993). Methods for teaching learning strategies in the foreign language classroom and assessment of language skills for instruction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED365157) Chamot, A.U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P.B., & Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman. Chamot, A.U., & El-Dinary, P.B. (1999). Children’s learning strategies in immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 319–341. Chamot, A.U., & Keatley, C.W. (2003). Learning strategies of adolescent low-literacy Hispanic ESL students. Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Chamot, A.U., & O'Malley, J.M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman. Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman. Cohen, A.D. (2003). The learner’s side of foreign language learning: Where do style, strategies, and tasks meet? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 41, 279–291. Cohen, A.D., Weaver, S., & Li, T-Y. (1998). The impact of strategies-based instruction on speaking a foreign language. In A.D. Cohen (Ed.), Strategies in learning and using a second language (pp. 107–156). London: Longman. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Fan, M.Y. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. Modern Language Journal, 87(ii), 222–241. Graham, S.J. (2004). Giving up on modern foreign languages? Students’ perceptions of learning French. Modern Language Journal, 33(ii), 171–191. Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (2000). The role of self-regulation and transcription skills in writing and writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 3–12. Grenfell, M., & Harris, V. (1999). Modern languages and learning strategies: In theory and practice. London: Routledge. Harris, V. (2003). Adapting classroom-based strategy instruction to a distance learning context. TESL-EJ, 7(2). Retrieved from http://cwp60.berkeley.edu:16080/TESL-EJ/ej26/al.html Hosenfeld, C. (1976). Learning about learning: Discovering our students' strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 9, 117–129. Ikeda, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2003). Can strategy instruction help EFL learners to improve their reading ability?: An empirical study. JACET Bulletin, 37, 49–60. Keatley, C., Chamot, A.U., Spokane, A., & Greenstreet, S. (2004). Learning strategies of students of Arabic. The Language Resource, 8(4). Retrieved from http://www.nclrc.org/nectfl04ls.pdf

Preparing Language Teachers to Teach Learning Strategies

43

Khaldieh, S.A. (2000). Learning strategies and writing processes of proficient vs. lessproficient learners of Arabic. Foreign Language Annals, 33(5), 522–533. Macaro, E. (2001). Learning strategies in foreign and second language classrooms. London: Continuum. Naiman, N., Fröhlich, M., Stern, H.H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Naiman, N., Fröhlich, M., Stern, H.H., & Todesco, A. (1996). The good language learner. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Nakatani, Y. (2005). The effects of awareness-raising training on oral communication strategy use. Modern Language Journal, 89(I), 76–91. National Reading Panel (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. Retrieved from http:/www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm Olivares-Cuhat, G. (2002). Learning strategies and achievement in the Spanish writing classroom: A case study. Foreign Language Annals, 35(5), 561–570. O’Malley, J.M., & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House. Oxford, R.L., Cho, Y., Leung, S., & Kim, H-J. (2004). Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use: An exploratory study. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 1–47. Oxford, R.L., & Leaver, B.L. (1996). A synthesis of strategy instruction for foreign language learners. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Crosscultural perspectives (pp. 227–246). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Ozeki, N. (2000). Listening strategy instruction for female EFL college students in Japan. Tokyo: Macmillan Language House. Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 545–561). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P.B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J.L., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. Elementary School Journal, 92(5), 513–555. Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41–51. Shen, H-J. (2003). The role of explicit instruction in ESL/EFL reading. Foreign Language Annals, 36(3), 424–433. Stern, H.H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 304–318. Takeuchi, O. (2003). What can we learn from good language learners: A qualitative study in the Japanese foreign language context. System, 31, 385–392. Vandergrift, L. (1997a). The comprehension strategies of second language (French) Listeners: A descriptive study. Foreign Language Annals, 30(3), 387–409. Vandergrift, L. (1997b). The Cinderella of communication strategies: Reception strategies in interactive listening. Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 494–505. Vandergrift, L. (2003). From prediction to reflection: Guiding students through the process of L2 listening. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 425–440.

44

A. U. Chamot

Vann, R.J., & Abraham, R.G. (1990). Strategies of unsuccessful language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 24(2), 177–198. Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning, 50(2), 203–243.

3 DISCOURSE POLITENESS THEORY AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 1

Mayumi Usami

1 Introduction In this chapter, I introduce a preliminary framework for a “Discourse Politeness Theory” (hereafter: DPT), which has been developed based on the results of a series of empirical studies on discourse behavior (for a review, see Usami, 1993d, 1998b, 2001a, 2002a, 2002b). This approach is an attempt to enable researchers to contrast politeness behavior in different languages with and without honorifics within the same framework while minimizing cultural biases and develop a more comprehensive universal theory of politeness at the discourse level. This proposal also aims to broaden politeness research to encompass the concept of “relative politeness” in addition to “absolute politeness”, which has thus far been studied within the field of pragmatics (e.g. Leech, 1983). This is because the notion of relative politeness permits the construction of a universal theory of “Discourse Politeness” (DP) as both a system of the principles of motivations that induce politeness strategies and a system of the interpretations of politeness in verbal interactions. The DPT and second language acquisition are closely related. This is because in cross-cultural interactions, language learners have to identify the “DP defaults” (see section 3.1.2) of the target language and culture and learn these in order to achieve smooth communication with others from the target language and culture. In this chapter, therefore, I will present a more detailed 1 This chapter is a revised version of the following paper, which is based on a plenary lecture at CLaSIC 2004, The Inaugural CLS International Conference, held at the National University of Singapore: Usami, M. (2004). Discourse politeness theory and second language acquisition. In Proceedings of CLaSIC 2004, The Inaugural CLS International Conference (pp. 719–737). Singapore: Centre for Language Studies. A similar version of this chapter, entitled “Discourse Politeness Theory and cross-cultural pragmatics” (Usami, 2006), is included in the following publication: Yoshitomi, A., Umino, T., & Negishi, J. (Eds.). (2006). Readings in second language pedagogy and second language acquisition: In Japanese context (UBLI Series No. 4). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

46

M. Usami

explanation of the relationship between the DPT and cross-cultural pragmatics by using examples from cross-cultural studies that can be explicated within the framework of the DPT. Finally, I will discuss the different ways in which this theory can contribute to finding solutions to problems created by the transfer of politeness strategies from one’s first language to one’s second language in actual cross-cultural exchanges and the manner in which language teachers can integrate the perspectives of the DPT into their teaching. 2 Basic definition In the following subsections, I will first define the terms that are crucial for a discussion on “politeness” and “politeness theory”. 2.1 Politeness Both Western politeness research and Japanese honorifics research have merely presented a vague definition of the term “politeness”; moreover, these research studies do not clearly differentiate politeness from other terms such as “deference”, “respect”, and “formality”, which are occasionally used interchangeably. In this chapter, the term “politeness” is understood in two contexts. In a broad context, it refers to all the different approaches and perspectives of the various theories of politeness. On the other hand, in a narrow or specific context, it refers to the politeness strategies defined by Brown and Levinson (1987) (hereafter: B&L), i.e. the choice of linguistic strategies to minimize the “Face Threat” of a particular act (for a review, see Usami, 2002a, 2002b). 2.2 Normative politeness and pragmatic politeness I also differentiate between the concepts of normative politeness, which refers to the traditional understanding of the degree of politeness intrinsic to “linguistic expressions”, and pragmatic politeness, which is defined as the “functions of language manipulation that work to maintain smooth human relationships” (Usami, 2001a, 2002a). In other words, pragmatic politeness not only comprises politeness resulting from linguistic forms and expressions (i.e. normative) but also comprises discourse behavior, such as topic initiation and the appropriate use of back-channels, speech-level shifts, incomplete utterances, context-dependent use of particles, appropriate frequency of the use of particles (Usami, 1992, 1993a, 1993b, 1993c, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c, 1995, 1996a, 1996b, 1998a, 1999c, 1999d, 2000a, 2000b, 2000c, 2000d), requestive

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

47

speech acts, such as prefacing before making a request (Kashiwazaki, 1995; Xie, 2000), compliment-reply discourses (Kim, 2000), utterances that do not possess linguistic politeness markers (Usami & Lee, 2003), metalanguage behavior (Sugito, 1983, 1993, 1998), and so on. Thus, in addition to the sentence-level politeness of linguistic forms, discourse-level phenomena also play an important role in pragmatic politeness. In this study, I primarily focus on pragmatic politeness, which can be understood as one of the effects of interactions on verbal behavior. 2.3 Language use according to social norms and strategic language use In this chapter, I employ the notion of “language behavior that conforms to sociolinguistic norms and conventions” to refer to all the literal, normative, and conventional language use that exist in the language of a society. In Japanese, these are not only limited to the use of honorifics, as mentioned in Ide (1982, 1989), but also include such behavior as the non-use of honorifics with close friends and the appropriate use of back-channels. Similarly, in English, it refers to the norms and conventions constraining linguistic behavior, such as the avoidance of slang in formal situations or the appropriate use of address terms. On the other hand, “strategic language use” refers to voluntary linguistic behavior based on individual choice that shows consideration toward positive and negative face, as defined by B&L (see section 3.3), irrespective of honorific system in the language concerned. For example, while communicating in Japanese, a speaker may strategically or unconsciously increase the frequency of the use of back-channels in order to indicate his/her interest (i.e. addressing positive face) in the interlocutor. In B&L’s politeness theory, the term “strategic language use” encompasses potentially unconscious language use, such as an increase in the frequency of the use of back-channels and speech-level shifts while communicating in Japanese, and such behavior as code-switching and the use of joking in both English and Japanese. 3 Discourse Politeness Theory In this section, I will introduce the six key concepts of a DPT, which has been developed on the basis of the results of a series of empirical studies on discourse behavior (for a review of previous studies on politeness theory, see Usami, 1993d, 1998b, 2001a, 2002a, 2002b).

48

M. Usami

3.1 Basic concepts Essentially, there are six key concepts in a DPT: (1) DP default, (2) marked and unmarked behavior, (3) marked and unmarked politeness, (4) discrepancy in the estimations of the degree of Face Threat (De value), (5) three types of politeness effects, and (6) relative and absolute politeness. Before explaining these concepts, I will first explain the term “Discourse Politeness.” 3.1.1 Discourse Politeness While there have been a number of researchers who have discussed discourselevel factors, such as metalanguage behavior or utterance organization (e.g. Blum-Kulka, 1990; Kasper, 1990; Leech, 1983; Sugito, 1983; Thomas, 1995), no actual attempts have been made to integrate these phenomena into a politeness theory. Therefore, according to the results of my previous empirical studies (Usami, 1993a, 1993b, 1993c, 1993d, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c, 1995, 1996a, 1996b, 1998a), in addition to the sentence-level politeness of linguistic forms, I introduce the concept of DP based on the opinion that discourse-level phenomena play an important role in pragmatic politeness. DP is defined as “the functional dynamic whole of factors of both linguistic forms and discourse-level phenomena that play a part in the pragmatic politeness of a discourse” (Usami, 1998b, 2001a, 2002a, 2002b, 2003). Basically, DP can be used in two ways. Its first use is when referring to “pragmatic politeness” that can only be interpreted at the discourse level. However, DP is also used to refer to the “DP default” (see section 3.1.2) of a certain discourse, which is understood to be the dynamic whole of the elements functioning for the pragmatic politeness of that particular discourse. The DPT involves language use that conforms to social norms and conventions and an individual speaker’s strategic language use as well as the interaction between these two. This applies to both honorific and non-honorific languages such as Japanese and English, respectively. I contend that the individual elements in DP, such as the frequency of topic initiation and speech-level shifts as well as DP itself as the functional dynamic whole of various elements are more appropriate focal points for studies that compare pragmatic politeness across languages with differing grammatical structures. Accordingly, the examination of these topics would contribute to the development of a comprehensive universal theory of politeness.

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

49

3.1.2 Discourse Politeness default The notion of “DP default” is fundamental to the DPT and can be illustrated with an example from the Japanese language: Focusing on speech levels in Japanese, any utterance is classified as containing polite forms (P), non-polite forms (N), or containing no politeness markers that are described as non-marked utterances (NM) (e.g. incomplete utterances and back-channels). By calculating the frequency of the occurrence of each speech level within a specific discourse, it is possible to determine the overall ratios of the speech levels. This indicates the DP default for the speech levels within that discourse, and the speech level with the highest frequency is referred to as the “dominant speech level”. For example, in a study of sentence-final speech levels (Usami, 2001b), the average ratio of P, N, and NM was 6:1:3. This can be concluded to be indicative of the DP default of the discourse in question. In this case, the P is the dominant or unmarked speech level (i.e. occurring in more than 50% of the utterances); therefore, using the N becomes marked behavior (see section 3.1.3) and gives rise to particular politeness effects, such as expressing empathy with the interlocutor(s), i.e. positive politeness. It is important to note that there exists a general “DP default of the discourse” that is “unmarked” in each specific discourse. Further, there are individual DP defaults for each individual element that contributes to DP in that discourse. In other words, there are two types of DP defaults: (1) the DP defaults of the discourse as a whole and (2) the DP defaults of individual elements within the discourse that constitute DP, such as speech levels and sentence-final particles. The DP defaults of the discourse as whole are considered as “unmarked discourse”, and the DP defaults of individual elements such as sentence-final particles are considered as “unmarked discourse elements”. The average frequency of the occurrence of various elements, such as speech-level shifts and back-channels, and the ratio of these elements relative to the structure of the discourse and their distribution within a particular discourse — which constitute a part of the DP of that discourse — are treated as one variable, i.e. as one of the DP defaults for the unmarked discourse elements. The concept of DP default as a dynamic whole is vital to the DPT. This is because it becomes a base parameter for calculating a relative politeness function, which is distinct from the politeness functions of its individual elements.

50

M. Usami

3.1.3 Marked and unmarked behavior In the DPT, identifying the DP defaults of specific types of discourses is the first step in understanding the relative nature of politeness. A systematic investigation of relative politeness can be conducted by examining the movements toward and away from those DP defaults. Linguistic behavior that is consistent with those DP defaults is termed as “unmarked behavior”, while that which deviates from those defaults is termed as “marked behavior”. Marked behavior does not necessarily give rise to marked politeness (see section 3.1.4) because both of these are distinct notions in the DPT. On the other hand, behavior consistent with DP defaults is always considered to be unmarked politeness. It is assumed that the elements comprising these DP defaults form DP as unmarked politeness, which is expected but unnoticed. However, if a hearer notices that something is either excessive or lacking with regard to these DP defaults, he/she might regard the speaker’s behavior as impolite (for further explanation, see section 3.1.4). 3.1.4 Marked and unmarked politeness In B&L’s politeness theory, politeness is understood as a strategy whereby one redresses “Face Threatening Acts” (FTAs), such as requests which infringe upon another person’s face. However, it has been pointed out that in this approach, one cannot adequately explain politeness that arises in ordinary conversations where FTAs do not seem to occur. In fact, a different type of politeness that does not involve redressing Face Threats can be found in an ordinary conversation. This type of politeness is associated with expected behavior, which is only noticed if it does not occur and generates perceptions of impoliteness. In the DPT, this is termed “unmarked politeness”. This type of politeness is contrasted with “marked politeness”, which encompasses B&L’s notion of politeness as linguistic strategies for redressing Face Threats. In the DPT, unmarked politeness refers to both the state of the discourse as a whole and the language behavior that is unconsciously expected. When those linguistic behaviors do not occur as expected, the discourse or utterance is considered impolite. When a speaker behaves according to implicit expectations or the DP default in a given situation, he/she displays unmarked behavior, which constitutes unmarked politeness. In contrast, unlike unmarked behavior, marked behavior that deviates from the expected norm or DP default does not necessarily give rise to marked politeness. Marked and un-

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

51

marked politeness can be distinguished in terms of the ways in which they are recognized. B&L’s politeness theory is considered to be a theory of marked politeness because it primarily focuses on linguistic politeness strategies that can be used to redress Face Threats in situations where one cannot help but commit an FTA. In general, politeness theory should systematically address both marked and unmarked politeness within a single framework, rather than merely focus on marked politeness, as is the case in B&L’s politeness theory (see Usami, 2001a, 2002a, 2002b). Although Fraser (1990) mentioned this type of unmarked politeness in his framework of “conversational contract” and Watts (1992) discussed the same type of behavior in a wider context of “politic behavior”, it can be said that neither of them fully developed a comprehensive theory of DP. The DPT attempts to systematically address both marked and unmarked politeness and consider both the speaker’s and the hearer’s points of view within a single framework. 3.1.5 Discrepancy in estimation value In the DPT, the “politeness strategy” is determined based on the speaker’s estimation of the degree of the Face Threat of his/her act, and the actual “politeness effect” is determined by the discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act from the hearer’s point of view. I term the latter “politeness effect” and distinguish it from the “politeness strategy” in B&L's politeness theory. The De value as an index of the actual politeness effect is calculated by comparing the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act. The “De value” is the value assigned to this discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat. A De value cannot be an absolute numerical value, but rather is represented symbolically as distributed along a scale from –1 to 1. This is illustrated in Fig. 1 below. For example, minus-politeness effects include so-called “polite insolence” (inginburei); here, the hearer experiences unpleasant feelings despite the speaker’s use of polite forms. In the DPT, from the hearer’s perspective, polite insolence — which has thus far received little attention in honorifics research in Japanese — can be regarded as the result of a speaker’s excessive use of polite expressions that extend beyond the acceptable variation (+Į) defined in the “De value scale” illustrated in Fig. 1. In other words, the linguistic

52

M. Usami

expressions employed by the speaker in a particular situation are excessively polite and go beyond the acceptable difference as compared with the hearer’s expectation regarding the appropriate linguistic behavior in that situation. -1

-Į

凢

+Į

+1

(De value scale)

Degree of discrepancy in estimations of the degree of the Face Threat (De value) Appropriateness of Behavior       

-1 䵐 De < 0 - Į

0 – Į 䵐 De 䵐 0 + Į

0 + Į 凮 De 䵐 + 1

Insufficient behavior Appropriate behavior Excessive behavior (impolite)  (polite) (polite insolence)

Politeness effects   Minus effects  Neutral effects

Plus effects

Minus effects

Discrepancy in estimations凬 De = Se – He De: The degree of discrepancy between speaker’s and hearer’s estimation of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act. Se: Speaker’s estimation of the degree of the Face Threat of his/her act; Expressed as a value between 0 and 1 He: Hearer’s estimation of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act; Expressed as a value between 0 and 1 Į凬 Acceptable difference between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimation of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act from the viewpoint of the hearer. Fig. 1. Discrepancy in estimations (De value), appropriateness of behavior and politeness effects

3.1.6 The three types of politeness effects In the DPT, face redressing acts are considered to be a type of marked behavior. Three types of effects can arise from marked behavior: (1) pluspoliteness effects, (2) neutral-politeness effects, and (3) minus-politeness effects. These effects essentially result in pleasantness, neutral effects (neither pleasant nor unpleasant), or unpleasantness, respectively. The neutralpoliteness effects at the discourse level are not addressed in B&L’s politeness theory, since a notion of unmarked politeness would be necessary in order to examine these effects. Moreover, B&L’s politeness theory does not systematically treat the minus-politeness effects, which are produced by either making

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

53

no effort to reduce the degree of threat to the hearer’s face or by using excessive polite forms. Thus, the DPT expanded B&L’s politeness theory in scope. This is because, in addition to plus-politeness effects, it encompasses the neutral- and minus-politeness effects within a unified theoretical framework. Moreover, the neutral- and minus-politeness effects are systematically explained by introducing the concept of the degree of discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat of the act in question. The discrepancy between these estimations, i.e. the De value, is represented by a symbolic numerical continuum, as explained above. Thus, the minuspoliteness effects (or unpleasantness), including both polite insolence and rudeness, can be explained by an integrated theory of politeness, namely the DPT. 3.1.7 Absolute and relative politeness A final distinction to be made with regard to the DPT is between “absolute” and “relative politeness”. The former involves labeling particular linguistic forms or strategies as being intrinsically more polite than others, for example, the Japanese honorific verb irassharu (“go-Hon”) is considered to be inherently more polite than its non-honorific equivalent iku (“go”). However, if one uses honorifics while conversing with someone with whom one usually speaks to rather casually (the DP default of that discourse is casual speech), it could be implied as sarcasm rather than politeness. Similarly, even if one uses non-polite expressions in situations where the DP default is polite forms, depending on the context, the effect could be an increase in the feeling of solidarity rather than an implication of impoliteness. Thus, in the DPT, politeness effects are considered to not be produced by merely using polite expressions in an absolute sense, but rather to be relatively produced by the “movement” toward and away from the DP defaults of the discourse in question. I term this type of politeness as “relative politeness”. It is important that the DPT includes both the concepts of De value (discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat) and DP default as a base parameter for calculating relative politeness effects. Thus, the DPT integrates the interactive and relative aspects of politeness effects by including the above-mentioned concept of “relative politeness”. It is important to include these three concepts within a theory of politeness; thus, these three constitute the fundamental aspects of the DPT.

54

M. Usami

3.2 Politeness effects arising from deviated behavior from the DP default: Examples from Japanese and English DP is defined as “the functional dynamic whole of factors of both linguistic forms and discourse-level phenomena that play a part in the pragmatic politeness of a discourse” (Usami, 1998c, 2001a, 2002a, 2002b, 2003). 3.2.1 Speech-level shifts in Japanese conversations Japanese conversations have numerous elements that constitute DP; however, for the sake of brevity, I will only focus on speech levels as an example of an element of DP. I will explain the relative nature of the politeness effects with the help of Fig. 2. In Fig. 2, the largest circle represents a set of functions of various elements in DP as a whole. The small circles inside the larger ones represent a set of functions of each element in DP, which is hypothesized to be factors such as the frequency of back-channels, topic introduction, and speech levels. The number of elements is not limited to five as shown in the large circles above. The circles from which the arrows are pointing outward represent the “unmarked speech levels” as the DP defaults of the respective discourses. In the example in Fig. 2, the speech level that deviates from the “unmarked dominant speech level” as the DP default becomes “marked behavior” at the utterance level (N in conversations between people meeting for the first time, and P in conversation between friends). As illustrated by the diagram on the left-hand side of the figure, in the case of a conversation between unacquainted people, P (polite forms) is the dominant, unmarked speech level as the DP default of the discourse. Therefore, the continued use of P maintains unmarked politeness, while the use of N (nonpolite forms) becomes marked, giving rise to certain special functions or effects, such as showing empathy and indicating a topic change (Usami, 1995). On the other hand, as illustrated on the right-hand side of the figure, in the case of a conversation between friends or married couples, the DP default or unmarked speech level is contrary to the previous case, i.e. N. Accordingly, in this discourse, the use of N constitutes the DP default as unmarked politeness and can be considered as sufficiently polite. Thus, the use of P in this discourse becomes marked behavior, and contrary to the view of politeness as the “politeness level of linguistic forms”, a failure to conform to the DP default by the use of a P may result in the minus-politeness effect, i.e., sarcasm or impoliteness. This might be understood intuitively in terms of everyday observations.

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

DP defaults of conversations between people meeting for the first time

DP defaults of conversations between friends or married couples

(Unmarked speech level = P: polite forms)

(Unmarked speech level = N: non-polite forms)

P

55

N N

P

Deviation from the unmarked speech level (marked behavior) Marked behavior gives rise to particular functions (“plus-politeness effects”, “neutral-politeness effects” or “minus-politeness effects”)

Fig. 2. DP defaults and marked behavior in specific activity types

According to the DPT, marked behavior gives rise to one of the following three types of politeness effects: (1) plus-politeness effects (e.g. expressions of familiarity or closeness), (2) neutral-politeness effects (e.g. changing topic), or (3) minus-politeness effects (e.g. sarcasm or impoliteness). Accordingly, we notice that P can be used either when arguing or to express sarcasm in conversations where N is the unmarked speech level of the discourse. In other words, in conversations where N is unmarked, the use of P, which constitutes marked behavior, can also give rise to the three effects mentioned above including minus-politeness effect, despite the fact that P itself is a “polite form”. These examples indicate that, essentially, it is the “dynamics” of language use — in a specific situation where the speaker deviates from and returns to the DP defaults as unmarked politeness — and not the absolute politeness level of the linguistic form that is responsible for occurrence of pragmatic politeness effects (Usami, 2001a, 2002a, 2002b).

56

M. Usami

3.2.2 The switching of the absolute politeness level of linguistic expressions in conversations between English-speaking couples The same phenomenon can be observed in English and can also be explained by using the notion of the DP default given in the DPT; this indicates that it is possible to interpret pragmatic politeness in different languages within the same framework. The following example is taken from Thomas (1995, p. 156). (1) [Taken from a short story by James Thurber]2 A married couple is trying to decide on a restaurant. The husband says: “You choose.”

Thomas maintains that although this utterance is a direct imperative, it would normally be seen as perfectly polite because the speech act is what Leech (1983, pp. 107–108) terms as “costly to the speaker” or (better in this case) “beneficial to the hearer” (Thomas, 1995, p. 156). This explanation is applicable to English; however, it cannot be used to explain a Japanese translation of this example (“Kimi, erabe yo”). Irrespective of the utterance’s “benefit to the hearer”, if the hearer is of a higher social status than the speaker or the hearer is someone the speaker has met for the first time, it is impossible for such an utterance to be understood as polite. The alternative translation “Erande kudasai” has the minimum appropriate amount of politeness; however, as compared with the original, it has a higher “politeness level” in terms of linguistic form. Further, it is not a direct imperative; it is in the form of a request. Therefore, Thomas’s argument does not hold for this example in Japanese, and we can conclude that one cannot translate the politeness effects in English directly into Japanese. What this example does show is that due to the strong influence of the various structures and characteristics of different languages, it is impossible to present a consistent explanation of politeness across languages at the utterance level. Thomas (1995) further discusses her claim that there is no necessary connection between the politeness level of linguistic forms and the politeness (effect) arising from those forms with the following example (p. 156) in which a married couple is becoming irritated with each another: 2 Thurber, J. (1963). A couple of hamburgers. In J. Thurber, Vintage Thurber: A collection, in two volumes, of the best writings and drawings of James Thurber with an introduction by Helen Thurber (p. 103). London: Hamilton.

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

57

(2) “Will you be kind enough to tell me what time it is?” [and later]: “If you’ll be kind enough to speed up a little.”

Thomas explains that in the context of an intimate relationship, these utterances “appear inappropriately indirect” (p. 156). However, while Leech’s politeness maxims can explain why the utterance in example (1) is regarded as polite, they cannot explain why the utterances in example (2) cannot be regarded as polite, despite the use of indirect expressions. Thomas comments that only “… in the context of an intimate relationship they appear inappropriately indirect …” (p. 156); however, she does not explain why one would interpret it in this way. In the DPT, both examples (1) and (2) can be interpreted by adopting a common principle. Direct expressions can be assumed to be the unmarked politeness or DP default between English-speaking couples. Therefore, the direct “You choose” in example (1) constitutes unmarked politeness and is thus sufficiently polite (or perhaps it would be more appropriate to suggest that it is not rude/impolite). On the other hand, in example (2), since direct expressions are the DP default, the wife’s use of so-called “polite expressions” became a marked behavior and produced a minus-politeness effect (i.e. sarcasm or impoliteness).

3.3 Determining DP defaults for research in cross-cultural pragmatics According to the DPT, after identifying the DP default as unmarked politeness for each individual conversation or discourse, one can examine the politeness effects arising from the marked behaviors in that discourse interaction. Accordingly, one can interpret the pragmatic politeness effects arising in a specific conversation in a relative manner, even if there are variations in the discourse content, use of linguistic forms, and relationships between the interlocutors in the absolute sense. The determination of the DP default of a discourse — which is an amalgamation of various elements — includes the determination of the DP default of the overall discourse and individual elements, such as speech level default, back-channel frequency default, default for the frequency of topic initiation by each interlocutor, default for the request sequence pattern, and so on. Thus, it is necessary to identify the elements that give rise to important functions in the DP of representative activity-types in various languages and cultures. It is

58

M. Usami

then necessary to identify the DP defaults of both the discourse as a whole and the crucial elements within the discourse. Identifying the DP defaults of each element in particular activity-types in different languages and cultures is a relatively simple starting point and is a topic of significant interest. However, strict adherence to the process of determining the DP default of the overall discourse and each activity-type within the discourse and then identifying the individual marked behaviors that deviate from these DP defaults using the newly collected data requires considerable time and effort. Thus, in order to simplify this process, one can use the approximate tendencies that emerged in similar activity-types from the results of previous studies as the DP defaults for a specific discourse or activity-type. For example, with regard to the discourse between married couples, there exists considerable data proving that “direct expressions” are unmarked in English. In this way, the abovementioned utterance (“Will you be kind enough to tell what time it is?”) in the conversation between the married couple can be interpreted to be an example of sarcasm rather than politeness. 3.4 The DPT and associated research A number of empirical research studies have pursued various interests in pragmatics from the perspective of DP. These studies have identified the DP defaults of crucial elements in the various activity-types of a discourse as the basis of the research. For example, the DP defaults for the frequency of topic initiation, distributions of speech levels, and frequency of the speech-level shift have been identified for conversations between Japanese adults meeting for the first time (Usami, 1996a, 1996b, 1998c, 2001a, 2002a). Otsuka (2004) has analyzed the effects of changes in speech style in TV debates utilizing the DPT framework. Case study findings have also identified tentative DP defaults for the use of back-channels at the beginning and the end of conversations between Japanese adults meeting for the first time (Usami, 1993a, 1993b, 1993c, 1993d, 1994a, 1995). DP defaults for the frequency of the use of the particle ne in casual conversation between colleagues and in meetings have also been examined (Usami, 1997). Kiyama (2005) has identified that there are different DP defaults for “substantive disagreement” and “courtesy disagreement” in Japanese conversations between friends and strangers. Xie (2000) has identified the DP defaults in Chinese and Japanese for sequence patterns in request discourses. Olivieri (1999) has identified the DP defaults of speech levels in conversations between Japanese and those between Japanese and Italians

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

59

meeting for the first time; Usami and Lee (2003) have identified the DP defaults of speech levels and their distribution in conversations between Japanese and those between Koreans. In addition, although not planned specifically from the perspective of DP, the ways in which the DP defaults for the Japanese with regard to the conversations between newly acquainted Japanese and Koreans changed over time were also investigated on four different occasions over a set period of time (Oyanagi, 2000). 4 The application of the DPT to cross-cultural pragmatics and second language acquisition In this section, I will first discuss the relationship between the DPT and crosscultural pragmatics research and second language acquisition. Then I will describe the implications of DPT for second language acquisition and intercultural communication by explaining some examples. 4.1 The relationship between the DPT and cross-cultural pragmatics research The DPT is intended to be a universal theory of politeness. However, at the same time, the theory integrates the factors that are related to cultural norms and customs in speech acts and discourse behaviors by introducing the concept of relative politeness, which is based on the DP default as unmarked politeness. Therefore, the first step in applying the DPT is to identify the main elements/factors that constitute DP defaults and conduct comparative studies on the defaults of these elements with regard to DP in various languages and cultures. The important constituents for DP may be different in each language and culture; moreover, even if the same constituents are important, the DP defaults of those constituents may differ for each language and culture. In this sense, although investigating the DP defaults for each main activity-type in various languages and cultures seems to be an investigation of the typology of linguistic behavior patterns, from the perspective of the DPT, it also means identifying the DP default as unmarked politeness in various languages and cultures in order to analyze the effects of marked behavior. For example, if the differences in request or refusal behaviors among various cultures are examined from the perspective of the DPT, the different DP defaults for request or refusal discourses in each culture can be regarded as the basis for identifying marked behaviors, which basically produce politeness

60

M. Usami

effects in each language and culture. Based on this, one can regard such studies as those that do not simply describe cultural differences from a crosscultural perspective, but rather identify the DP defaults of specific verbal behaviors in various languages and cultures from the perspective of the DPT. In this case, one can utilize the DP defaults as the basis for the different perceptions and impressions of specific verbal behaviors in each culture. Thus, the DPT can be applied to find ways to solve intercultural miscommunication. Furthermore, these findings allow a universal explanation of the motivations and mechanisms that give rise to politeness strategies and the effects that underlie the identified culture-specific behaviors in various languages and cultures. For example, Xie (2000) examined request discourse in Japanese and Chinese based on the data from the discourse completion tests (DCT) and the recordings of actual conversations. In the case of the former, an analysis of the utterance-level responses showed no differences between requests in Chinese and Japanese. However, in the case of the latter, she found that in Japanese it was common for there to be a sequence of (1) attention-getter, (2) checking the possibility of compliance, (3) supportive strategies (explanation for the request) etc., before the appearance of the request utterance itself. However, in Chinese, the request utterance followed immediately after the attentiongetter, thus suggesting a difference in sequence patterns between the two languages. If we interpret these results in terms of DP, we can observe that the DP default as unmarked politeness with regard to the request discourse is different in Japanese and Chinese. In Japanese, going through the elaborate sequence before making a request constitutes unmarked politeness; however, in Chinese, the short sequence, i.e. an attention-getter, followed by a request utterance constitutes unmarked politeness. Based on these results, if learners of Japanese who are native speakers of Chinese transfer the utterance sequence that constitutes unmarked politeness in Chinese to Japanese, their Japanese interlocutors may feel that their requests are either abrupt or rude. This might be the case even if the politeness level of the linguistic forms in their requests is appropriate at the utterance level. On the other hand, if one follows the Japanese request sequence pattern to make a request in Chinese, this marked behavior may be viewed as being cold and distant or as harboring some ulterior motive. Thus, if we consider the differences in the DP defaults across various languages and cultures, the identification of the DP defaults going beyond the utterance level for specific “activity-types” can be useful in facilitating smoother intercultural communication

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

61

and clarifying the causes of intercultural miscommunication with regard to politeness. Similarly, by analyzing the differences in the DP defaults of important speech acts in various languages and cultures, one can focus on the interactions between native and non-native speakers. This leads to a richer understanding of the reasons for intercultural miscommunication at the discourse level, moving beyond a focus on grammatical errors and the use of honorifics at the sentence/utterance level. Ultimately, this understanding may be applied to facilitate smoother intercultural communication. DPT and second language acquisition (language learning) are closely related. This is because in terms of cross-cultural interaction, language learners have to identify the DP defaults and learn them in order to achieve smooth communication with others in the target language and culture. Some studies have already begun to analyze natural conversation data and conversation teaching materials in order to compile language teaching materials with the view to utilize the framework of the DPT (Usami, 2005; Suzuki et al., 2005; Xie et al., 2003). 4.2 Implications for second language acquisition and intercultural communication In addition to bringing together discourse-level phenomena and politeness theory, the DPT draws on literature concerned with conversational strategies and the teaching of second or foreign languages. Hymes (1972) expanded on the notion of linguistic competence with his term “communicative competence”, meaning the speaker’s knowledge of the abstract rules of a language’s use. Since then, the importance of discourse phenomena has been emphasized in second language teaching. Many researchers have claimed that accuracy of grammar at the sentence level is not enough to enable one to speak a second language properly (Beebe, 1988; Brumfit & Johnson, 1979; Widdowson, 1978; Wolfson, 1989). “Conversational strategy”, including both communicative effectiveness and social appropriateness, is defined as “a verbal behavior that functions to facilitate a smooth, harmonious conversation” (Hata, 1988). However, the exact nature and the rules governing the appropriate use of conversational strategies in Japanese have not yet been clarified. “Politeness” is one aspect of language use that most reflects different cultural perspectives. Thus polite expressions in the first language may not simply translate to the second language, and so their use can be considered to be a

62

M. Usami

kind of conversational strategy. For example, in the Japanese culture, frequent “back-channels” are considered polite, since they indicate that the hearer is paying attention to the speaker. Failure to use back-channels often enough may cause the speaker anxiety and may even be considered impolite. Thus, speakers ensure they are being polite by using both sentence-level features (e.g. honorifics) and discourse-level features (e.g. back-channels and interruptions). Mizutani (1985) points out that the appropriate use of back-channels in Japanese is one of the most difficult things to acquire for most non-native speakers of Japanese. Americans use fewer back-channels than Japanese (Maynard, 1989), probably because American culture considers them interruptions. Japanese speakers, however, sometimes feel Americans are not listening to them because they are not hearing enough of the expected backchannels. Japanese speakers who are not aware that English typically uses fewer back-channels may think that the American speaker is impolite. This kind of misunderstanding, however, can be minimized if Japanese conversational strategies are systematically taught to international students. Appropriate language use in Japanese requires assessing factors such as the interlocutors’ social status, age and social distance as part of the social context. It is necessary for both control of honorifics and for conversational strategies such as topic management. For example, Japanese speakers must carefully consider the appropriate frequency of topic initiation, especially when talking with a superior. A younger person who initiates topics more frequently than an older one might be considered pushy and impolite. The situationally appropriate use of rules, such as those for topic management, downshifts of politeness level of linguistic form, and back-channeling, may be among the most difficult aspects of Japanese for non-native speakers to acquire. In addition, speakers must understand discourse-level phenomena. Such phenomena include rules for turn-taking, rules of topic initiation and development, and narrative structure, many of which cannot simply be transferred from the first to the second language. There is a need to teach socio-cultural aspects of language, such as “communicative effectiveness” and “social appropriateness”, which can be fully understood only by examining discourselevel practices (Brumfit, 1984; Corder, 1983; Hata, 1988; Okada, 1992; Omaggio, 1986; Snow, 1989). There are countless combinations of relationships among the factors “power”, “social distance” and “degree of imposition”, but it is almost impossible to manipulate one of these without affecting the others. However, a major

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

63

problem in Japanese language instruction has been the failure to try to sort out these complex factors. In the teaching of honorific use, it is emphasized that one should manipulate honorifics depending on the effects of the configuration of these three factors. It is clearly difficult for non-native speakers of Japanese to learn the appropriate use of honorifics based on such vague instruction. In order to incorporate the use of such conversational strategies into the teaching of second languages, it is necessary to examine three issues: (1) conversational strategies used in Japanese conversational discourse; (2) rules governing the appropriate use of conversational strategies; and (3) the relationship of conversational strategies to politeness. The DPT should help develop a set of rules for the appropriate use of discourse-politeness strategies, and thus contribute to the teaching of Japanese as a second language. 5 Future issues with regard to the DPT Future work on the DPT will focus both on validating its assumptions through empirical research and further development of the theory itself. Validating the DPT involves identifying the DP defaults as unmarked politeness for various activity-types or discourse in different languages. The DP defaults for a particular type of discourse are identified by examining the typical examples of that discourse. Thus, identifying these DP defaults is somewhat similar to clarifying the sociolinguistic norms and customs in language use at the discourse level. However, the aim of this research is not to establish model examples of discourse, as such, but rather to focus on the deviations from the DP defaults in order to develop a better understanding of the relative politeness phenomena associated with these DP defaults. Further, the theoretical development of the DPT will focus on predicting, interpreting, and explaining how politeness functions in human interactions. It is necessary to further clarify how the content of the utterances and the speaker’s intentions are related to their various effects, such as expressing empathy with others, picking fights, or simply emphasizing the prepositional content of the utterances. The issues that need to be further studied can be summarized under the following four main themes: (1) Systematizing the relationship of the interactional politeness effects between the utterance content and the politeness level of its linguistic forms. (2) Systematizing the process of identifying and predicting the polite-

64

M. Usami

ness effects (plus- , neutral- , and minus-politeness effects) arising from a marked behavior. (3) Systematizing the politeness effects associated with the utterance sequences. (4) Theorizing about the speaker’s “intentionality” of committing (or not committing) FTAs. 6 The DPT as a theory of interpersonal communication The ultimate aim of the DPT is to establish a universal theory to investigate and compare politeness effects in languages with and without honorifics, such as Japanese and English. The DPT has a number of innovative aspects including expanding the scope of research beyond that encompassed by B&L’s politeness theory to the discourse level and defining the term “politeness” operationally as a relative phenomenon involving the interaction from both the speaker’s and hearer’s perspectives. The DPT also introduces the notion of relative politeness by incorporating the notion of the DP defaults of particular activity-types or discourses as unmarked politeness; this enables the DP default to serve as the basis for an analysis through which deviations as marked behavior become apparent, thereby generating actual politeness effects. The DPT differs from B&L’s politeness theory, which emphasizes the speaker’s estimation of the degree of the Face Threat. In other words, when considering the actual politeness effects, the DPT incorporates not only the use of the speaker’s politeness strategies based on his/her estimation of the degree of the Face Threat of the act in question but also the discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act. Hence, as shown in Fig. 1, when the discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act is approximately zero or within acceptable variations (0 ± Į), it is regarded as appropriate behavior, regardless of the politeness level of the linguistic forms themselves. In other words, it is assumed that the actual politeness effects are assumed to arise from the discrepancy between the speaker’s and hearer’s estimations of the degree of the Face Threat of the speaker’s act 3 . Furthermore, in the DPT, the differences in their perceptions of the prototypical patterns or schemata of specific activity-types are also regarded as the DP defaults of those activity-types and assume an important role in the 3

It is assumed that the speaker acts on the basis of his/her own estimation of the degree of the Face Threat. Cases in which the speaker intentionally threatens the face of the hearer through linguistic behavior are treated separately.

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

65

overall theoretical focus. The above discussion implies that the hearer’s perspective and the discourse-based perceptions of both the speakers and hearers are given more weight in the explanation of pragmatic politeness. Thus, this approach incorporates the discourse-based relative perception of human interaction as a key aspect and is the first to systemize politeness at the discourse level. This is the primary reason for terming this framework the DPT. In the DPT, politeness is a general term encompassing not only absolute politeness, or the speaker’s politeness strategies, but also the relative politeness effects arising through deviated behaviors from the DP defaults of various activity-types of discourses. The aim of the DPT is to investigate the universality of the mechanisms underlying these types of discourse behaviors as well as culture-specific politeness strategies that arise out of the universal motivations for smooth human relations and interpersonal communication. In this sense, this theory can be regarded as a theory of interpersonal communication. 7 Conclusion In this chapter, I have discussed the key aspects of the DPT by focusing on the concept of relative politeness and the interactive and dynamic nature of politeness strategies and politeness effects. Several other issues are being examined within the framework of the DPT and its connection to second language acquisition. Further, there remain a number of unresolved issues that have been mentioned in this chapter. These issues, although related to the DPT, are also important aspects for future research in the fields of crosscultural pragmatics, interpersonal communication, and second language acquisition. In other words, all these issues are related to our approach to systematize the functions of interactivity, dynamics, and relativity in interpersonal communication. The further development of this theory will not only lead to a more comprehensive theory of politeness but may also contribute to the further development of theories of cross-cultural pragmatics and interpersonal communication as well as the application of this theory to second language acquisition. References Beebe, L. (1988). Issues in second language acquisition. New York: Newbury House Publishers. Blum-Kulka, S. (1990). You don’t touch lettuce with your fingers: Parental politeness in family discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 259–288.

66

M. Usami

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brumfit, C. (1984). Communicative methodology in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brumfit, C., & Johnson, K. (1979). The communicative approach to language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Corder, S.P. (1983). Strategies of communication. In C. Færch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 15–19). London; New York: Longman. Fraser, B. (1990). Perspective on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 1, 219–236. Hata, H. (1988). Gaikokujin no tame no nihongo kaiwa no strategy to sono kyoiku [Japanese conversational strategies for foreigners and teaching methods]. Nihongo gaku, 7, 100– 117. Hymes, D. (1972). Toward ethnographies of communication: The analysis of communicative events. In P. Giglioli (Ed.), Language and social context (pp. 21–43). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Ide, S. (1982). Japanese sociolinguistics: Politeness and women's language. Lingua, 57, 357– 385. Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. Multilingua, 8, 223–248. Kashiwazaki, H. (1995). Danwa level de toraeru teineisa — danwa tenkai ga teineido hyôtei ni ataeru eikyô [Politeness at the discourse level — the influence of discourse development on politeness level]. Nihon Bunka Kenkyûjo Kiyô, 1, 61–73. Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 193–218. Kim, K. (2000). Home ni taisuru hentô no nikkan taishô kenkyû [A comparative study of ‘return to compliments’ in Korean and Japanese]. Gengo Chiikibunka Kenkyû, 8, 179–196. Kiyama, S. (2005). Disagreement in the Japanese small talk — in respect to politeness. In Japanese Studies: Research and education annual report 9 (pp. 27–48). Tokyo: Department of Japanese studies and Student Exchange Division, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. New York: Longman. Maynard, S.K. (1989). Japanese conversation. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Mizutani, N. (1985). Hanashi kotoba no bunpo [Colloquial grammar]. Tokyo: Kurosio Shuppan. Okada, Y. (1992). Communication noryoku kaihatsu no tameno danwa-bunseki to kyoiku [Discourse analysis of the development of communication skills and teaching methods]. In R. Tajima & K. Niwa (Eds.), Nihongo Ronkyu 1: Gengogaku to sono shuhen (pp. 227–237). Tokyo: Izumi Shoin. Olivieri, C. (1999). Italia-jin gakushûsha no nihongo ni okeru speech-level shift [Speech-level shift in the Japanese of Italian learners]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Japan. Omaggio, A.C. (1986). Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Otsuka, Y. (2004). Terebi tôron bangumi ni okeru buntai kirikae no kôka [Effects of change in speech style in TV debates — In terms of politeness theory]. Gifu Shôtoku gakuen daigaku kiyô Gaikokugo gakubu, 43, 111–124.

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

67

Oyanagi, M. (2000). Nishakan kaiwa ni okeru kyori o chijimeru strategy [Distance minimizing strategies in dyadic conversation]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Japan. Snow, C.E. (1989). Understanding social interaction and language acquisition: Sentences are not enough. In M.H. Bornstein & J.S. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in human development (pp. 83–103). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum. Sugito, S. (1983). Taigû hyôgen to shite no gengo kôdô – “chûshaku” to iu shiten [Speech acts as “taigû hyôgen” – views on “notation”]. Nihongogaku 2(7), 32–42. Sugito, S. (1993). Keigo [Honorifics]. Kokubungaku 38(12), 38–42. Sugito, S. (1998). Meta-gengo kôdô hyôgen no kinô: taijinsei no mechanism [The function of meta-expressions of linguistic acts: The mechanism of interpersonal communication]. Nihongogaku — fukuzatsuka shakai no communication, 17(11), 168–177. Suzuki, T., Matsumoto, K., & Usami, M. (2005). An analysis of teaching materials based on New Zealand English conversation in natural settings: Implications for the development of conversation teaching materials. In Y. Kawaguchi, S. Zaima, T. Takagaki, K. Shibano & M. Usami (Eds.), Linguistic informatics — State of the art and the future (pp. 295– 315). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. New York: Longman. Thurber, J. (1963). Vintage Thurber: A collection, in two volumes, of the best writings and drawings of James Thurber with an introduction by Helen Thurber. London: Hamilton. Usami, M. (1992). Speech-level shift in Japanese discourse. In Proceedings of the conference of the Society for Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language (pp. 19–24). Tokyo: Society for Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language. Usami, M. (1993a). Shotaimen nishakan kaiwa ni okeru kaiwa no strategy no bunseki. [Analysis of discourse strategies in dyadic conversation between unacquainted people]. Gakuen, 647, 37–47. Usami, M. (1993b). Shotaimen nishakan no kaiwa no kôzô to washa ni yoru kaiwa no strategy. [Discourse structure and strategies in dyadic conversations between unacquainted people]. Human Communication Studies, 21, 25–39. Usami, M. (1993c). Politeness in Japanese dyadic conversations between unacquainted people: The influence of power asymmetry. Paper presented at the 10th World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 8–14 August 1993. Usami, M. (1993d). Danwa level kara mita “politeness”: “Politeness theory” no fuhenriron kakuritsu no tameni [“Politeness” in discourse: Towards the construction of a universal theory of “politeness”]. Kotoba, 14, 20–29. Usami, M. (1994a). Politeness and Japanese conversational strategies: Implications for the teaching of Japanese. Unpublished qualifying paper submitted to Harvard University. Usami, M. (1994b). Gengo-kôdô ni okeru “politeness” no nichibei hikaku [A comparative study of polite language behavior in Japan and the United States]. Speech Communication Education, 7, 30–41. Usami, Ma. (1994c). Seisa ka chikara no sa ka: shotaimen nishakan no kaiwa ni okeru wadaidônyû no hindo to keishiki no bunseki yori [Power or gender? From the analysis of frequencies and forms of topic initiations in dyadic conversations between unacquainted people]. Kotoba, 15, 53–69.

68

M. Usami

Usami, M. (1995). Danwa level kara mita keigo shiyô: speech-level shift seiki no jôken to kinô [Conditions for speech-level shift occurrence in Japanese discourse]. Gakuen, 662, 27– 42. Usami, M. (1996a). Discourse Politeness in Japanese conversation: From the results of speech-level shifts and topic management strategies. Paper presented in special sessions: Round table “Culture-specific behaviors and language teaching: Across disciplinary discussions”, at the 11th World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Jyvaskyla, Finland. Usami, M. (1996b). Shotaimen nishakan-kaiwa ni okeru wadai-dônyû no hindo to taiwa aite no nenrei, shakaitekichii, sei no kankei ni tsuite [The interrelationship between frequency of topic initiation and age, social status, and gender in dyadic conversations between newly acquainted people]. Kotoba, 17, 44–57. Usami, M. (1997). “Ne” no communication kinô to “Discourse Politeness” [“Discourse Politeness” and the communicative functions of the sentence-final particle “ne”]. In Gendai Nihongo Kenkyukai (Eds.), Josei no kotoba shokuba hen [Research on female speech in the workplace] (pp. 241–268). Tokyo: Hituzi Syobô. Usami, M. (1998a). “Discourse Politeness strategy” to shite no “speech-level shift” [Speechlevel shift as a Discourse Politeness strategy]. In Heisei 10 nendo, Nihongo kyôiku gakkai shûki taikai yokôshû [Proceedings of the Fall Conference of the Society for Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language], (p. 110–115). Tokyo: Society for Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language. Usami, M. (1998b). Politeness’ riron no tenkai: “Discourse Politeness” to iu toraekata [On the notion of “Discourse Politeness”: Towards the development of a universal theory of politeness]. Department of Japanese Studies annual report 1997, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, 49–61. Usami, M. (1998c). Shotaimen nishakan kaiwa ni okeru “Discourse Politeness” [Discourse Politeness in dyadic conversation between newly acquainted people]. Human Communication Studies, 26, 60–67. Usami, M. (1999a). Shiten to shite no nihongo kyôikugaku [Perspectives on Japanese pedagogy]. Gengo, 4, 19–24. Usami, M. (1999b). Danwa no teiryôteki bunseki: gengo-shakaishinrigaku-teki approach [Quantitative analysis of discourse: A social psychological approach]. Nihongogaku, 10, 40–56. Usami, M. (1999c). Discourse Politeness in Japanese conversation: Some implications for a Universal Theory of Politeness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Harvard University. Usami, M. (1999d). On the notion of “Discourse Politeness”: Based on the analyzes of Japanese conversations. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Linguistic Politeness: Theoretical Approaches and Intercultural Perspectives (ISLP 99). Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. Usami, M. (2000a). Topic management strategy in “Discourse Politeness”. Paper presented at the SIETAR Europe 10th Annual Congress, Brussels, Belgium. Usami, M. (2000b). Honorific use as a stylistic marker and speech-level shift as a Discourse Politeness strategy. Paper presented at the Sociolinguistics Symposium 2000, Bristol, England. Usami, M. (2000c). Discourse Politeness in Japanese conversation: Some implications for a Universal Theory of Politeness. Poster presented at the 7th International Pragmatics Association Conference, Budapest, Hungary.

Discourse Politeness Theory and Second Language Acquisition

69

Usami, M. (2000d). Functions of honorifics and topic management in “Discourse Politeness” as unmarked politeness: From the analysis of Japanese conversations. Poster presented at the 10th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Lyon, France. Usami, M. (2001a). Danwa no politeness: Politeness no danwa riron kôsô [Discourse Politeness: Discourse theory of politeness — A Preliminary Framework]. In Danwa no politeness (Dai 7 kai kokuritsu kokugo kenkyûjo kokusai symposium hôkokusho) [Discourse Politeness (Proceedings of the National Language Research Institute Seventh International Symposium)] (pp. 9–58). Bonjinsha: Kokuritsu Kokugo Kenkyûjo. Usami, M. (2001b). Discourse Politeness to iu kanten kara mita Keigo Shiyô no Kinô — Keigo Shiyô no atarashii toraekata ga Politeness no danwariron ni shisasuru koto [How manipulation of honorific use functions in “Discourse Politeness” in Japanese conversation: Some implications for a universal theory of Discourse Politeness]. Gogakukenkyûjo Ronshû, 6, 1–29,. Usami, M. (2002a). Discourse Politeness in Japanese conversation: Some implications for a Universal Theory of Politeness. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobô. Usami, M. (2002b). Politeness riron no tenkai (1–12) [Development of theories of politeness]. Gengo, 31, 1–5, 7–13.. Usami, M. (2003). Ibunka sesshoku to politeness: Discourse Politeness riron no kanten kara. [Cross cultural contact and politeness: From the viewpoint of Discourse Politeness Theory]. Japanese Linguistics, 54(3), 117–132. Usami, M. (2004). Discourse Politeness and second language acquisition. In Proceedings of CLaSIC 2004, The Inaugural CLS International Conference (pp. 719–737). Singapore: Centre for Language Studies. Usami, M. (2005). Why do we need to analyze natural conversation data in developing conversation teaching materials? — Some implications for developing TUFS language modules. In Y. Kawaguchi, S. Zaima, T. Takagaki, K. Shibano & M. Usami (Eds.), Linguistic informatics — State of the art and the future (pp. 279–294). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Usami, M. (2006). Discourse Politeness Theory and cross-cultural pragmatics. In A. Yoshitomi, T. Umino, & J. Negishi (Eds.), Readings in second language pedagogy and second language acquisition: In Japanese context (UBLI Series No. 4) (pp. 19–41). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Usami, M. & Lee, E.M. (2003). A comparative study of “utterances without politeness markers” in conversations in both Japanese and Korean between interactants meeting for the first time. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Japanese Language and Literature Association of Korea (pp. 99–106). Jeonju: The Japanese Language and Literature Association of Korea. Watts, R.C. (1992). Linguistic politeness politic verbal behavior: Reconsidering claims for universality. In R.J. Watts, S. Ide & K. Ehlich (Eds.), Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice (pp. 43–69). Berlin, New York: Mouton De Gruyter. Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. Cambridge, New York: Newbury House. Xie, Y. (2000). Irai kôi no nicchû taishô kenkyû [A contrastive study of Japanese and Chinese requests]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Japan.

70

M. Usami

Xie, Y., Kibayashi, R., Kiyama, S., Shih, H.-Y., Lee, E.M., Kim, K., Matsumoto, K., & Usami, M. (2003). A comparative analysis of discourse behaviors in Japanese natural conversation and the Japanese skits of the TUFS dialogue modules: Implications for the development of conversation teaching materials. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Linguistic Informatics (pp. 219–233). Tokyo: Center of Usage-Based Linguistic Informatics, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

4 INTEGRATING GENERAL PURPOSE AND VOCATIONALLY-ORIENTED LANGUAGE LEARNING (VOLL) – NEW GOALS FOR LANGUAGE AND TEACHER TRAINING

Christina Kuhn

1 Introduction The communicative requirements of the world of work have fundamentally changed. The use of information and communication technologies (ICT) has expanded to nearly all areas of the work world. The service and informationbased economy makes increasing demands on the language skills of workers, and the access to new technologies and media changes the cultural landscape. New communication technologies enable individuals to have regular exchanges with distant others. “Globalization”, which is one of the most discussed keywords in both academic and popular discourse of economy, technology, society and culture, has had an impact on language policies and practices around the world as well. Globalization is understood as “the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa” (Giddens, 1990, p. 64). Due to ICT-developments, language, rather than distance, has become an issue of importance. Language is the primary medium of human social interaction, and social relations are constructed and maintained through interaction. The intensification of worldwide social relations increases the need for members of the work world to develop competence in additional languages, and to master new ways of using the languages they already know. These developments have an effect on the conditions in which languages are learned and taught. This raises important questions about communication and the learning and teaching of languages, as well as how one learns to teach languages in a way which the world of work requires.

72

C. Kuhn

2 The communicative requirements of the working world Many studies show an increase in the need for foreign languages at all levels of companies (e.g. for Europe: Vandermeeren, 1998, p. 148) and employees are sometimes required to use their knowledge of a foreign language at their place of employment in order to advance in their careers. The following is an example of the communicative requirements of the working world: As an SAP 1 -consultant in a management consulting enterprise, a friend of mine is a “project-oriented” worker. This means that he works for a certain length of time in different places in Europe, as well as in various project teams. During the last five years these teams have become noticeably more and more international and now include specialists from Turkey, France and Germany. Depending on the current project, the team’s languages were German and/or English. When researching in the Internet, all team members must be able to read websites in German, English and French. Spanish is also sometimes needed for “small talk” with clients in certain situations. Are skills in speaking, reading and writing in more than one or two foreign languages the exception, or is this the avantgarde in the working world? Trade and exchange of goods and services, as well as knowledge and information, are based on social interaction. Language and communication are the basis for social interaction. During the last fifty years a necessary change has taken place in which more than one language is being used in communicative interactions. This change can be witnessed in at least the “globalized” parts of the world (cf. Rivière, 2003, p. 10; Scheer, 2003, p. 7). While much professional interaction still occurs within local networks, an increasing number of people participate in “global” networks. Digital communication technologies, such as e-mail or the Internet, allow individuals to participate in regular exchanges with others whom they have never met in person, or give them the chance to take part in social and cultural events in other countries, e.g. via satellite television (cf. Block & Cameron, 2002). Communication has not only increased in the virtual realm, but also in the physical realm. An example of this can be seen in the effort the European Union has made to create a common market. It has not only attempted to remove barriers between its member states to enable better mobility of goods and capital, but also to remove barriers in the area of service and labor as well. This has had an effect on vocational mobility which creates the need for foreign language and intercultural knowledge, including the ability to adapt to different cultural conditions. 1

SAP is a multinational corporation based in Germany, specializing in software development.

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

73

The knowledge of foreign languages now plays a vital role in career preparation, employment opportunities and job advancement. For example, working with various international groups or with different international clients increases the need to use the native language of potential customers. This is especially important in service areas such as consulting or in software development, as well as in sales. As members of the so-called “information society”, a growing number of employees use the Internet to search for information from various sources and they must be able to understand a variety of languages. The ability to analyze and pass on information in a foreign language is a key qualification which one should be able to employ in professional contexts. Globalization, computerization, economic and technological changes all have an increasing influence on the world of work. As job profiles rapidly change, one may also find oneself in periods of unemployment. Lifelong employment at one company will gradually become the exception. In the past, people have always learned languages for economic or professional reasons, but today the communication skills of workers at all levels, from “the gatekeeper to the top-management”, take on new importance, which means a new form of literacy (e.g. e-mail, SMS) becomes necessary due to new technologies. This means that qualified employees will now not only need a very high level of professional knowledge, but will also need certain key qualifications, such as the ability to work in teams, the competence to search for information from different sources, and communicative and intercultural competences in more than one language and culture. International mobility improves career chances. Professional success is becoming increasingly dependent upon qualities such as flexibility and adaptability. The purposeful use of learning strategies, as well as autonomous learning will help to meet the demands of one’s present and future jobs. These aspects should be taken into account while planning new language curricula and courses for adult learners. 3 Changes in curriculum and course design, lesson planning and initiating learning processes There is a growing need for languages in the work world (cf. Schöpper-Grabe & Weiß, 2000, p. 257). The knowledge of foreign languages can be a competitive advantage for employees, as well as for companies, in order to assist in their worldwide search for new clients and markets. A quick glance at a list of employment advertisements reveals that knowing a foreign language can in

74

C. Kuhn

some cases be an obligatory requirement. For example, in many job announcements employers consciously search for employees with knowledge of English, and knowledge of a second modern language 2 is of even more value. Because of this, there are a growing number of adult learners who are acquiring a foreign language for vocational purposes. This demand for knowledge of a foreign language in the work world is also becoming the most frequent reason students cite for learning a foreign language. 3.1 The learners Language courses for adults are often very heterogeneous in nature: e.g. vocational students are grouped together with job trainees or students of various professions attend the same language courses. Most of them are not typical “business language learners”. They belong to a wider category, and are more accurately referred to as “adult professional learners”. This category encompasses all learners who currently have, or expect to have, a job requiring a foreign language. For most of them it is useless to learn a language for a specific purpose because of four reasons: 1. Learning languages for the work world is often a form of “prospective” learning. Some learners may have yet to decide which specific profession they will choose. And in a rapidly changing world, the places of work, the employers, and the professions as well, might also be changing in the near future. These students need strong communicative competences, which will empower them in their interactions, as well as learning strategies. Such competences will prepare them to meet the future demands of different jobs in the areas of language and communication. 2. Language learning for specific or special academic purposes requires much time for the learning of technical terms which may become obsolete due the rapid changes in technology and research. 3. It is almost impossible to give specific reasons for the selection of specific vocabulary for a profession or target group. 4. Vocabulary for specific purposes plays a minor role in language production in comparison to the role it plays in language reception. For this reason, reading skills and vocabulary-deducing skills are more

2

Cf. http://www.arbeitsmarktforschung.ch/zusammenfassung.html. A research project of the University ETH Zurich discovered that the number of job announcements requiring the knowledge of foreign languages has grown remarkably between 1950 and 2000.

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

75

important than the accumulation of vocabulary for specific purposes, which may, in fact, never be used in future vocational situations. Designers of curricula and courses must take into consideration that competence in communication and key qualifications, such as information processing and the ability to work in teams, are becoming more and more essential in meeting the changing requirements of the work world. Figure 1 shows different goals oriented to the learners needs and relevant to their current or future vocational situation. pre-vocational preparation • vocationally-oriented contents in general FL-learning instruction for beginners (e.g. at schools, in private / public educational institutions )

simultaneous vocational preparation • language instruction which accompanies vocational training • on the job training

• language preparation for a concrete professional qualification or educational goal

• language instruction for the mastery of concrete occupational requirements

goal general language preparation for vocational requirements

vocational preparation for qualification / certification

goal improvement of different language requirements in a profession

goal completed requirements for professional certification

Fig. 1. The learners (source: Funk, 2003a, p. 176; translation by the author)

3.2 Curriculum and course design Although there is a growing number of adult learners acquiring a foreign language for vocational purposes, language courses are still divided into general purpose and vocationally-oriented courses. In most cases, at the beginning of a general purpose course, a learner will spend a large amount of time working on themes which have nothing to do with the work world. Such themes would include talking about activities done in their spare time, parties, holidays, celebrations and ceremonies. These beginning courses are usually a pre-requisite for vocationally-oriented courses attended by pre-employed or vocational students. This type of course design is based on the assumption that there is a special language for one’s work life and another for one’s private life. But this categorization neither corresponds to the special needs and motivation of adult

76

C. Kuhn

learners, nor to the principles of effectiveness and efficiency which learners expect from language courses. Adult professional language learners could be rapidly demotivated if the theme “working world” does not play any role in the language course. Learners may feel that they are losing precious time by first having to take general purpose courses which do not yet deal with communicative contents which would be more relevant to their situation. Instead, these learners need a language knowledge base which can be put into immediate, effective use in daily work contexts. They also need to know how to interact in a foreign language inside and outside work — e.g. for socializing or traveling. In addition, most of the communicative acts in professional everyday life consist of both (specifically) professional and general purpose elements of speech, e.g.: Table 1. Verbal requirements of the working world (examples) information participation

gathering, processing, presenting and exchanging argumentation, making one’s point of view clear to colleagues, looking after one’s own interests, convincing others leading a conversa- starting, keeping up and ending a conversation/discussion, tion summarizing the results (self-)evaluation thinking about one’s own action and behavior

The communicative competence of a foreign language learner is by definition indivisible, and using labels such as “general purpose” and “vocational purpose” to describe communicative competence is misleading. The world of work can and should be integrated into language courses for beginners from day one. It is not a matter of designing specialized courses, but rather gearing courses towards learners’ needs and motivation. In some instances, teachers will only need to partially modify some “traditional” contexts or situations to integrate vocational aspects. In the following are some examples. A language course almost always begins by teaching students how to greet others and introduce oneself in the context of a very “informal atmosphere”. This narrow view of how to greet someone in the target culture does not take into account the more formalized linguistic and cultural rituals used to greet someone or introduce oneself. An example of this would be the act of handing out a business card during an interaction in the work world. Textbooks for general purpose courses also seldom take into consideration such formalized acts. In “studio d”, an A1-textbook of German as a Foreign Language (GFL), we find an example for such a “modified” situation (see Fig.

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

77

2). Students learn to introduce themselves and exchange their own (handmade) business cards in class. Afterwards they make an intercultural comparison between different formalized forms of exchanging business cards (e.g. in Europe and in Asia). In most textbooks, there are examples of informal encounters which can lead to a theater or party visit, or even to a swimming date, but there are usually no examples of formal invitations to professional meetings or conferences. In both types of situations the speech acts used are nearly the same, but the setting of the first example does not fit the expectations and needs of the vocationally-oriented learners. If the majority of adult foreign language learners have a professional interest in using the language, it is essential to make them aware of how to use general purpose speech acts for vocational purposes right from the start. Using typical scenarios from the work world can also increase the student’s knowledge of other key elements of foreign language learning such as non-verbal communication or intercultural understanding or sensitivity, which are important parts of a rich language learning environment.

Fig. 2. Example: “Exchange of Business Cards”, GFL-Textbook “studio d A1” (Funk, Kuhn & Demme, 2005, p. 115)

Adults in language courses also need more skill training, e.g. in searching for, processing, presenting and exchanging information in the foreign language. Such themes for classroom discussions could be taken directly from the work world as well. This will help students develop an awareness of, for

78

C. Kuhn

example, how to bring certain topics into a (professional) discussion, how to properly contribute to a discussion and, finally, how to summarize the results. Thus, an integrated language learning program would not only include general language learning aspects but vocationally-oriented language aspects as well. This type of program is very pragmatic and learner-oriented as it takes into account the vocational needs and expectations of adult learners (cf. Funk, 2003a, p. 175). A needs analysis at the beginning of the course which considers the future vocational requirements in the foreign language can help teachers design curricula and plan lessons. An integrated program works with the communicative content of the work world, but it is not a type of specialized foreign language training. As such, it follows the state-of-the-art in language learning and teaching research and pedagogy (cf. Funk, 2003a, p. 175). 3.3 Lesson planning An integrated program includes vocationally-oriented language learning right at the beginning as well as scenarios and situations directly from the work world. Task-based and content-based, as well as action-oriented language learning are supported and fostered by using content that fits into a wide range of different types of work. Language teaching should be built upon students’ previous and (likely) future experiences (cf. Larsen-Freeman, 2003, p. 140) such as planning business travel, making appointments by phone, engaging in small talk, taking business partners to or from the airport, or descriptions of products or working processes. Although the integration of vocational aspects of language into courses may seem difficult, there are now new planning aids which could be very valuable for the language teacher. 3.3.1 New planning aids for language curricula, courses, lessons and materials Up until now there have only been incomplete and inconsistent ways of assessing language skills. Language trainers, and employers as well, could only guess from statements such as “English: fluent; French: written and spoken; German: very good” just how well the applicant would be able to cope with the language demands of his or her work environment. Today, the “Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching” (CEF), developed by The European Council for Cultural Cooperation (CDCC), provides a common basis for the planning and elaboration of language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, examinations, language courses, and learning materials across Europe. The CEF describes what language learners

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

79

must learn to do in order to use a language for communicative purposes and what knowledge and skills they must develop to act effectively, e.g. in the work world. The description also takes into account the cultural context in which the language is set and it defines levels of proficiency which allow learners’ progress to be measured at each stage of learning and on a life-long basis (CEF, chap. 1.1). 3.3.1.1 The Common European Framework of Reference For language learning and teaching in Europe, the CEF provides support for the planning of an integrated course as well as for quality management. It provides a basis for the mutual recognition of language qualifications to facilitate educational and occupational mobility. The CEF is designed as a descriptive framework, not as “a set of suggestions, recommendations, or guidelines” (Morrow, 2004, p. 7). It is an instrument to set up validation systems for language competences, using the description of six proficiency levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2) from “breakthrough” to “mastery”. It also uses a classification based mainly on the four language skills and language activities of interaction, reception, production and mediation. At all levels, language proficiency is formulated in terms of what the learners can do (“can do statements”). Figure 3 shows an example. C2 … …

B1

…

A1

Can summarize information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure etc. Can introduce him/herself and others and can ask and answer questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she has.

Fig 3. Common reference levels: Global scale (CEF, chap. 3.3)

80

C. Kuhn

The CEF defines language competences as “the sum of knowledge, skills and characteristics that allow a person to perform actions” (CEF, chap. 2.1) and it describes the competences necessary for communication, the related knowledge and skills as well as the situations and domains of communication. Its language approach is action-oriented, and the CEF views users and learners of a language “primarily as ‘social agents’, i.e. members of society who have tasks (not exclusively language-related) to accomplish in a given set of circumstances, in a specific environment and within a particular field of action” (CEF, chap. 2.1). Language users and learners as “social agents” “draw on the competences at their disposal in various contexts under various conditions and under various constraints to engage in language activities involving language processes to produce and/or receive texts in relation to themes in specific domains, activating those strategies which seem most appropriate for carrying out the tasks to be accomplished. The monitoring of these actions by the participants leads to the reinforcement or modification of their competences” (CEF, chap. 2.1). Language activities are contextualised within domains. The domains refer to the broad sectors of social life in which people operate as social agents. The CEF distinguishes between educational, occupational, public and personal domains. “The occupational domain embraces everything concerned with a person’s activities and relations in the exercise of his or her occupation” (CEF, chap. 2.1.4), whereas the public domain, for example, refers to everything connected with ordinary social interaction (business and administrative bodies, public services, cultural and leisure activities of a public nature, relations with the media etc.). With the acknowledgement of the occupational domain as an equally important sector of social life, the distinction between general purpose and vocationally-oriented language courses becomes obsolete. The CEF itself promotes an integrated learning and teaching program. By using the CEF to plan a course curriculum and language lessons, it is possible to build up a language profile for each learner depending on his or her occupational needs and expectations. The language needs can be related to the contents of the language course, thus making teaching and learning more work-related. If, for instance, a language learner wants to work as a sales representative, he/she must be able to understand written messages, to describe products or production processes, and to build up social relations with customers. The rules of business correspondence are less important for him/her than they would be for learners who want to work in the marketing department of a company. So some advantages of the CEF are its focus on situational and functional language (cf. Keddle,

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

81

2004, p. 43) and on the strategies learners need for general and occupational purposes, for example, interaction strategies like asking/giving clarification or identifying information/opinion gaps (CEF, chap. 4.4.3.5). 3.3.1.2 “CEF in Action”: The brochure “Working in Europe” The German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (GCIC), the Federal Association of German Private Schools and Weiterbildungs-Testsysteme GmbH (WBT), the examining body for The European Language Certificates, published the brochure “Working in Europe”. They intend to give examples of how the CEF can be used especially for the description and evaluation of communicative situations at work and for the assessment of the employees’ language competences. Therefore, the CEF descriptions “have been adapted to show how they fit in with language skills in work-related contexts” (Working in Europe, p. 3; see Table 2). By choosing typical situations at work (e.g. talking on the telephone, giving presentations, taking part in meetings) and relating them to the CEF levels and skills, the brochure offers another useful instrument for the course and lesson planning, and, in particular, for the arrangement of different work-related scenarios which the students could act out in class. Table 2. “Focus: Speaking” in “Working in Europe” (Working in Europe, p. 10) CEF A2

understand and complete simple information

presentation/ meeting/discussion Ask and answer simple questions about own area of work using familiar language structures

The employee can manage the following Can welcome colleagues/ customers and exchange simple forms of social chit-chat with them, e.g. as a reaction to invitations/apologies. Can make arrangements concerning meeting point/date/time and get information concerning arrival and departure […].

Make short and simple statements concerning persons/area of work using familiar language structures

Can use simple phrases and sentences to describe who he/she is and what his/her job is. Can ask and answer simple questions about own person/area of work, e.g. name, residence, location, products. Can react to instructions in the foreign language when they are given clearly and slowly […].

-basic userA1

82

C. Kuhn

3.3.1.3 “Profile deutsch” — a planning instrument for GFL-courses With the CD-ROM “Profile deutsch”, GFL teachers have been provided with another very useful and practical instrument for planning language curricula, courses and lessons, and for the development of learning and teaching materials. “Profile deutsch” presents a CEF-oriented collection of vocabulary, cando-statements and grammar descriptions for the six language levels. It specifies the global and detailed can-do-statements of the CEF and shows actionoriented examples of how the can-do-statements can be used in speech acts for different language purposes (see Fig. 4). The vocabulary is sub-divided according to themes (e.g. living, traveling and traffic, food, job and profession), speech acts (e.g. welcoming somebody, emotional expressions like apologies or astonishment) and general concepts (e.g. the concept of time). In addition, the CD-ROM presents a sample of different texts classified by formal, structural and linguistic aspects (e.g. letters, newspaper articles, reports, forms of greetings in a business letter). As a CD-ROM, “Profile deutsch” offers a useful tool for searching and combining language materials, situations and scenarios, oriented towards the levels of the CEF and the learners’ needs.

Fig. 4. “Profile deutsch“ — can-do-statements with VOLL-aspects, level A1, oral production

3.3.2 Initiating learning processes: Acting within a language scenario Scenarios can be defined as “predictable sequences of communication which acquire their coherence from shared schematic knowledge” (Mader, 1998, p. 23). They are using “real” language in socially and culturally conventiona-

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

83

lized sequences. Working in scenarios, students complete tasks and play specific roles in authentic contexts. However, such scenarios are closer to communicative reality than, for example, isolated speech acts or functions. Learning languages in a situation or scenario, taken, for example, from the work world, supports integrated and action-oriented learning from the beginning, and it especially meets the needs and expectations of adult learners. Using “real” tasks and contents within a scenario in the language classroom will take planning and preparation. Nodari’s integrated planning framework (1996, p. 8), which deduces different language skills and abilities from one speech act, could be useful as a model and a checklist for the planning of action-oriented and vocationallyoriented language lessons. The model concretely sets out the speech acts described in the CEF and in “Profile deutsch”. For example, the work-related scenario “business lunch” requires some key qualifications like communication, planning and cooperation. By acting within this special scenario, students plan and prepare a lunch for some foreign “business associates”. In the model in Fig. 5 are examples of different communicative acts for students to perform in class when preparing for a business lunch as well as various learning goals.

Fig. 5. Example “Business Lunch” (Nodari, 1996, p. 8; translation and examples by author)

84

C. Kuhn

In a scenario, the learners have the chance to act as themselves. They use different strategies, skills and their language knowledge to solve tasks and problems which occur while acting out the scene. This initiates learning processes which go far beyond the language classroom and which will be helpful in coping with the changing requirements of the world of work. The integration of scenarios in the language classroom offers a wide range of vocationally-oriented training possibilities, but it also requires strong planning competence on the part of the language teacher. Important aspects of a teacher’s scenario planning for different language classes are: selection of a scenario

• participants • vocational relevance/ framework of action • plurilingual/ pluricultural competences • time

progression

definition of learning goals

• degree of difficulty • language for occupational a) pre-vocational purposes b) in service • for special • subject-oriented purposes • language-oriented • general • key qualie.g. a) making an appointment over the fications

communi- learning/ cative com- teaching petencies material

• receptive • different • productive kinds of • mediative authentic • oral oral / • written written texts

phone and making a note in a diary b) written confirmation of an oral appointment

Fig. 6. Planning of scenarios

4 Professional competencies and qualifications of teachers of an integrated course First and foremost, teachers of an integrated course are language teachers (cf. Funk, 2003a, p. 175) who need all the language competences, teaching and (strategy) training methods which teachers of a general language course would need. But, because of the heterogeneous nature of the learners with their various expectations, needs and previous experiences in different vocational areas, and possible knowledge of other foreign languages, teachers in an integrated course also need strong diagnostic and analytical abilities. In order to make informed decisions regarding a needs-oriented and subjectoriented course and for lesson planning, they should carry out a needs analysis

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

85

before, or at the start of, the language course. Therefore, teachers should choose suitable instruments, e.g. questionnaires (cf. Weber, Becker & Laue, 2000, p. 51) and/or interviews, and they must analyze this information gathered from the learners. Furthermore, a needs-oriented course design and the development of learning and teaching materials require competence in planning and developing different course subjects, and in planning language progression and learning sequences (cf. Woodward, 2001). They need competence in the use of planning and (quality) assessment instruments like the CEF as well. Unmediated input is often incomprehensible to learners, because it does not function as “intake” and, therefore, it does not result in learning. The mediation and presentation of new materials in an effective, learner-oriented and motivating way is one of the most important key qualifications of a teacher (cf. Hedge, 2002; Ur, 1996). Furthermore, he or she needs competence in learning management in order to initiate and support (social) learning processes. Another very important qualification is a strong media competence. This would not only include the ability to use different kinds of media for learning and teaching purposes, but also to aid the instruction of the learners in order to promote their own media competence. This can be accomplished by using different types of media in the classroom which would also be relevant in the work world. Examples include: use of the Internet for research or using email to contact others beyond the classroom. Learners in compact courses may especially need special guidance as to how they can continue their autonomous language learning. The teacher’s ability to guide learners would not only be helpful in finding suitable ways for them to learn autonomously, but could also be helpful in assisting the learner to define learning goals, and to choose learning strategies, activities and media (cf. Brammerts & Kleppin, 2001). And finally, Funk emphasizes the ability to cooperate with learners and with other teachers as another key qualification for language teachers (2003b, p. 177). Table 3. Teacher qualifications planning

diagnosis / analysis

guidance counseling

learning management

integrated language program: teacher qualifications presentation

quality management

media

cooperation

86

C. Kuhn

In view of these qualifications, teacher training for integrated courses requires not only knowledge-based training in learning and teaching processes or work-related topics, but practical training to achieve these teacher qualifications as well. Up until now, teacher training at the university level in Germany — if existent at all — has been more or less a philologically-oriented course of study, combining linguistic and literary aspects. It has focused more on preparing teachers for language teaching in schools, with the introduction of some pedagogical, psychological and sociological aspects. In most teacher training curricula, vocationally-oriented language learning plays a minor role. However, most language teachers are not prepared for the growing market of vocationally-oriented language teaching for adult learners, e.g. at private language schools or in companies with their own language departments. To increase the employment prospects of language students at universities, it would be worthwhile considering integrating vocationally-oriented teaching aspects in the teacher education curricula. VOLL aspects could also be part of in-service training for teachers who work with adult learners. The use of the Internet for further teacher education also offers new learning possibilities. 5 Integrating aspects of vocationally-oriented language learning (VOLL) in an online/offline language teacher training programme — some implications There are still conflicting views as to how much specialized and/or workrelated knowledge teachers would need for an integrated course which takes into account general and vocationally-oriented requirements. First and foremost, a language teacher should teach the foreign language. It is not the goal here to turn language teachers into experts in a professional field. The emphasis of the training is on language teaching, rather than special content in a professional field. Thus, developing a teacher’s general knowledge of the changing world of work and especially of the related communicative requirements is a very important aspect of a teacher training program. The teaching approach in integrated courses is a communicative and learner-centered one. The teacher is the language expert, but the students bring their professional expertise — at whatever level this may be — to the class. Their level of professional expertise could very well be superior to that of the teacher. It is important that course design is based on the present and future needs of the learners. Thus, the importance of taking into account the needs of the

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

87

learners must be emphasized throughout the teacher training programme. Teachers of integrated courses should be able to take this information and develop language profiles for the learners. Therefore, they need to be able to utilize different kinds of needs analysis and planning aids, as mentioned above, as a basis for course planning and material development. Teachers should also be introduced to the concept of work-related communicative “core areas”. These areas consist of skills and activities which are important in most professions. They are therefore useful for the majority of language learners, regardless of the special career areas in which they (will) work and apply the foreign language. These areas would include e.g. strategies to infer the meaning of vocabulary in texts, the management of information, telephoning or aspects of socializing. Socializing is an especially important aspect because learners also need the foreign language in contexts of a less professional and more social nature, e.g. when they apologize, ask for or confirm information, or engage in small talk. When learners have an immediate application for the foreign language, they will need to practice using the language in meaningful and realistic contexts. It should be communicated to teacher trainees that they need to create activities for learners to practice the language. These activities range from controlled language practice to role plays or acting within scenarios, where learners take part in real-life professional situations. Such situations might include e.g. applying for a job, being in charge of a group of visitors, or organizing business travel. Teachers should also be able to build up a repertoire of different types of activities which can be used in integrated courses, and they should be familiar with how to change general language purpose scenarios, techniques and activities to fit work-related requirements. Special modules which address a particular situation, e.g. in-company classes or one-on-one training, can be added to the program for teachers who want to work within these classes or special teaching situations. Thus, during the course of their university studies, prospective teachers will already be able to build up a teaching profile of their own. The role that cultural differences may play in the world of work should be a recurring theme throughout the whole training program. Above all, the acquisition of the above-mentioned qualifications for teachers requires practice and reflection. There are certain advantages in presenting most of the course content in modules and via the Internet. Modules are variable and can be a part of foreign language teacher education at universities, as well as a training supple-

88

C. Kuhn

ment for in-field educators. The combination of online learning on a learning platform via the Internet with face-to-face learning in part-time seminars would help future teachers to learn to work at their own pace (with online tutoring where appropriate), and would also take into consideration the “human factor” in learning (for an example, see Fig. 7). By studying the content of a VOLL-course in different online-modules, teacher trainees will also have the chance to build up their own “blend” of learning materials and of vocationally-oriented knowledge. seminar: introduction, competence training

online: knowledge

seminar:

online: knowledge

competence training

modules (examples)

working in a world of change

adult learners: experiences, needs and expectations needs analysis and course planning

learning processes, autonomy …

material development and presentation

working with authentic written texts in an integrated language course

intercultural learning for VOLL

working with authentic oral texts in an integrated language course

…

seminar : competence training, assessment

…

basics

general

advanced

Fig. 7. Model of a modularized VOLL teacher training

Because the content is presented in different digital forms, e.g. DVD, videotapes, powerpoint presentations or hypertexts, teacher trainees are able to benefit from a wide range of media, which will be tailored to their own learning styles and will strengthen their media competence. The challenge for teacher trainers and software developers is to make products and services available which can be used to teach future teachers and meet their needs effectively. It is essential to include a social experience, including a “human factor” in the online aspect as well. This can be achieved by initiating cooperative tele-learning, working in learning groups via the Internet or working together in virtual classrooms. Online learning could play a very powerful role in the future of teacher training but it should not be seen as an alternative to face-to-face interaction or to various other methods. The use of rich media content in a learning environment through forms of e-learning will likely enrich the learning expe-

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

89

rience. It can also be used as a resource for teacher trainees and in-service teachers for individual learning, e.g. in the area of knowledge. Building up knowledge via the Internet could provide more time in face-to-face seminars for an intensive training of the different competences and key qualifications teachers need. 6 Conclusion Due to globalization and developments in ICT, the communicative requirements of the world of work have changed fundamentally. A growing number of adult learners are acquiring a foreign language for vocational purposes. Due to this fact, there needs to be a course design which eliminates the division between general purpose and vocationally-oriented courses. Such integrated course design would address the needs and motivation of learners better and adhere to the principles of effectiveness and efficiency. In order to make informed decisions with regard to needs-oriented and subject-oriented course and curriculum planning, language teachers of integrated courses should be able to carry out a needs analysis before, or right at the beginning, of the language course. In doing so, they will be able to analyze learner issues and develop language profiles for the learners. Furthermore, a needs-oriented course design, as well as the development of learning and teaching materials, requires a keen competence in the planning and developing of different course subjects, language progression and learning sequences, and in the use of planning and (quality) assessment instruments like the CEF. Therefore, teacher training at the university level should integrate a special key qualifications training, as well as VOLL aspects, with an emphasis on language teaching, rather than on the special contents of a professional field. A modularized blended learning program would meet to the needs of future language teachers in integrated courses especially well and provide support in building up a teaching profile of their own. References Block, D., & Cameron, D. (Eds.). (2002). Globalization and language teaching. London: Routledge. Brammerts, H., & Kleppin, K. (2001). Selbstgesteuertes Sprachenlernen im Tandem. Ein Handbuch. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (2000). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved October 25, 2004, from

90

C. Kuhn

http://culture2.coe.int/portfolio/inc.asp?L=E&M=$t/208-1-0-1/main_pages/../documents_ intro/common_framework.html. Funk, H. (2003a). Berufsbezogener Fremdsprachenunterricht. In K.-R. Bausch, H. Christ, H.J. Krumm (Eds.), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht (4th ed.). Tübingen & Basel: Franke, pp. 175–179. Funk, H. (2003b). Deutsch als Fremdsprache — Berufsbezogen lernen und studieren. In G. Schneider & M. Clalüna (Eds.), MehrSprache — mehrsprachig mit Deutsch. Didaktische und politische Perspektiven. München: Iudicium, pp. 165–180. Funk, H., Kuhn, C., & Demme, S. (2005). studio d — A1 Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Kurs- und Übungsbuch. Berlin: Cornelsen. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. Glaboniat, M., Müller, M., Rusch, P., Schmitz, H., & Wertenschlag, L. (2002). Profile deutsch. Gemeinsamer europäischer Referenzrahmen — Lernzielbestimmungen, Kannbeschreibungen, Kommunikative Mittel — Niveau A1, A2, B1, B2. Berlin: Langenscheidt. Hedge, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in the language classroom (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Keddle, J.S. (2004). The CEF and the secondary school syllabus. In K. Morrow (Ed.), Insights from the Common European Framework (pp. 43–54). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Techniques and principles in language teaching (7th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mader, J. (Ed.). (1998). Learning objectives and test format. Frankfurt am Main: WBT Weiterbildungs-Testsysteme GmbH. Morrow, K. (2004). Background to the CEF. In K. Morrow (Ed.), Insights from the Common European Framework (pp. 3–11). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nodari, C. (1996). Autonomie und Fremdsprachenlernen. Fremdsprache Deutsch, Sondernummer 1996, 4–10. Rivière, P. (2003). Vernetzte Welt im Kommunikationszeitalter. In Le Monde diplomatique (Ed.), Atlas der Globalisierung (pp. 10–11). Berlin: Le Monde diplomatique/taz. Scheer, H. (2003). Globalisierung. Zur ideologischen Transformation eines Schlüsselbegriffs. In Le Monde diplomatique (Ed.), Atlas der Globalisierung (pp. 6–8). Berlin: Le Monde diplomatique/taz. Schöpper-Grabe, S., & Weiß, R. (2000). Lernziel: Internationale Kommunikation — Fremdsprachentraining in der betrieblichen Aus- und Weiterbildung. In K.D. Baumann, H. Kalverkämper & K. Steinberg-Rahal (Eds.), Sprachen im Beruf. Stand — Probleme — Perspektiven (pp. 255-–282). Tübingen: G. Narr. Universität/ETH Zürich (2000). Wandel der Arbeitswelt im Spiegel von Stelleninseraten von 1950 bis zum Jahre 2000. Retrieved October 25, 2004, from http://www.arbeitsmarktforschung.ch/zusammenfassung.html. Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vandermeeren, S. (1998). Fremdsprachen in europäischen Unternehmen. Untersuchungen zu Bestand und Bedarf im Geschäftsalltag mit Empfehlungen für Sprachenpolitik und Sprachunterricht. Waldsteinberg: Heidrun Popp. Weber, H., Becker, M., & Laue, B. (2000). Fremdsprachen im Beruf. Diskursorientierte Bedarfsanalysen und ihre Didaktisierung. Aachen: Shaker.

Integrating General Purpose and Vocationally-Oriented Language Learning

91

Woodward, T. (2001). Planning lessons and courses. Designing sequences of work for the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Working in Europe. A new means of assessing professional language competence. A common European framework of reference for language learning and teaching (CEF). (2002). Berlin: Deutscher Industrie- und Handelskammertag.

5 PRAGMATICS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING: REFLECTIONS ON THE TEACHING OF CHINESE IN CHINA

Hong Wang

1 Introduction It is recognized, at least among some scholars, that the acquisition of a second language necessarily involves gaining mastery over the sociolinguistic and pragmatic rules of the target language (Canale & Swain, 1980; Paulston, 1975; among others). For learners of a foreign language, while linguistic forms are important aspects of learning, functional abilities in the target language in real-life communication are the ultimate goals. However, the general situation of language teaching in China does not seem to reflect this recognition. In this chapter I will review the situation. Focusing on the teaching of the Chinese language to foreign learners (henceforth TCFL), we find that distressingly little has been done in the teaching of the pragmatics of the language. Not only is its teaching neglected, research on the pragmatics of the Chinese language is also found to be at low priority in China. This is apparently in aberrance with the daily-increasing demands of the learning of the language for practical purposes. Now, tens of thousands of people come to China every year to learn the language, mainly for communicative needs. Teaching the language while ignoring its pragmatics creates a big mismatch with the demands of the current student population. As a good sign, some authors have since pointed out that the teaching of pragmatics is a new area and a new challenge in TCFL (Chen, 1997; Lin, 1996; Lü, 1994; among others). In practice, some teachers also attempted the discussion of the rules of language use with specific communicative functions (e.g. Chen, 1997; Cui, 1997; Lin, 1996; Lü, 1994). Even form-centered teaching began to gain aspects of pragmatics (e.g. Chen, 1997; Cui, 1997; Lin, 1996; Lü, 1994). However, the overall situation is still far from satisfactory. Not only has the teaching of pragmatics fallen behind, the research on the so-

94

H. Wang

ciopragmatics of Chinese per se is neglected by Chinese linguists, the majority of whom are interested in the analyses of classic writings or the formal categories of grammar. This chapter hopes to add to the advocacy of researching and teaching of the pragmatics of the Chinese language. The chapter is divided into the following three parts: a) pragmatics and the teaching and learning of a foreign language, b) an overview of TCFL in China, and c) the need to raise the awareness of pragmatics in China. 2 Pragmatics and the teaching and learning of a foreign language Pragmatics is defined by Leech (1983) as including “pragmalinguistics” and “sociopragmatics”. Pragmalinguistics is related to grammar and is concerned with “the particular resources which a given language provides for conveying particular illocutions” (Leech, 1983, pp. 10–11). Sociopragmatics, on the other hand, is “sociological interface of pragmatics” (Leech, 1983, pp. 10–11). Two examples are given below to illustrate the two different types of pragmatic content respectively. The first example shows some pragmalinguistic differences between two languages, in this case, between English and Chinese. It is a contextuallyconfined bit of grammar. For the question Haven’t you been to Shanghai? an English speaker would answer No, I haven’t (in the case that he/she has not been there); or Yes, I have (in the case that he/she has been there). For the Chinese equivalent of the question Ni mei quguo Shanghai ba?” (Haven’t you been to Shanghai ?), the answer to it would be Dui (yes), wo mei quguo (I haven’t been (there)) meaning No, I haven’t; while the meaning of Yes, I have is expressed by Budui (no), wo quguole (I have been (there)), with the negative interjection used at the beginning of the sentence. Apparently this can cause confusion for learners of either language. A common error for a Chinese learner of English would be to say Yes while meaning No, (I haven’t); and an error for an English learner of Chinese would be to say Bu (no) while an affirmative form is expected. In essence, the negation in English refers to the content of the statement (the referential meaning), while in Chinese an interjection at the beginning of the sentence is a metalinguistic comment to the content of the rest of the sentence (whether it is a statement of a positive or negative assertion). The above would be defined by Leech as a pragmalinguistic problem. It should be dealt with in language learning and teaching. The use of a wrong pragmalinguistic form is commonly regarded as a grammatical error, although

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

95

it is not about the well-formedness of sentences1. However, sometimes we have problems which do not stem from any part of grammar, but originate with how the grammatically error-free utterances are used in communication. It has to do with communicative conventions of specific speech communities. In the speech community, certain linguistic forms are associated with given communicative conventions. In such case, the misuse of forms results not because the linguistic forms themselves are wrong (whether contextuallydefined or not), but because it is socially inappropriate. This leads us to “sociopragmatics”. Sociopragmatics is also called “the pragmatic competence” in the field of second language acquisition (Kasper, 1997; Rose, 1997). As such, it is among the abilities that students are expected to develop with the help of instruction. Although the term “pragmatic competence” has not been used widely, similar ideas are entertained by many language teachers. In their teaching practice they follow intuitively the idea that appropriate linguistic behavior in a given context or culture should be learned and, importantly, be taught, too. As Thomas (1983) observes, non-native speakers are often perceived to display inappropriate language behaviors and are often not even aware that they do. She cautions that sociopragmatic failures lead to violations of cultural norms, communication breakdowns, and the stereotyping of non-native speakers. Hence, instruction on the sociolinguistic and pragmatic rules seems to be essential if language students are to become competent social interactants in a second or foreign culture. Sociopragmatic failures happen when pragmatic and sociolinguistic rules are not shared between participants of an interaction. An often quoted example is the misunderstanding of a given Chinese way of greeting. In many parts of China, when two people meet, one would ask the other “Chi le ma?” (Have you eaten?/Have you had your lunch/supper?). This is a form of greeting and it functions quite similarly as the English greeting “How are you?”. For the Chinese greeting question, it would not matter whether the answer is “yes” or “no” and a brief answer is normally expected. After the short exchange, the two persons would part with no further intentions. But for many English speakers, the question in its form would be construed to an invitation. When they are asked the question and are not invited to meals, they may get the im1

An anonymous reviewer of this chapter points out rightly that the line between grammar and pragmatics is somehow obscured here. The phenomenon may fall in the intermediate area between the purely context-free grammatical rules and the social rules of language use. Although it is somewhat arbitrary, we follow Leech and the reviewer and regard it basically as belonging to pragmatics.

96

H. Wang

pression that the Chinese persons are rude or insincere. This may happen in two ways: Chinese learners of English misuse the Chinese type of greeting in English communication; and English learners of Chinese misunderstand the Chinese greeting. To overcome pragmatic misinterpretation, applied linguists and teachers have made efforts in the research and teaching of pragmatic competence (Kasper, 1997; Rose, 1994, 1995, 1997). For instance, Judd (1999) introduced certain techniques for developing pragmatic awareness in the language classroom. He proposed a framework for the teaching of speech acts. The teaching would prepare the students to avoid pitfalls and possible negative consequences that can result from inappropriate pragmalinguistic forms or sociopragmatic failures. There will be further discussion of Judd’s techniques in section 4. 3 An overview of TCFL in China 3.1 A brief history of Chinese language teaching According to historical records, the earliest practice of Chinese teaching to foreigners can be traced as far back as 2,500–2,600 years ago. Ever since the Dynasty of East Han (25–220 A.D), there has been a continuous flow of foreigners coming to learn the Chinese language for various purposes. The prosperous periods of Chinese language teaching to foreigners extended to the Dynasties of Tang (618–907 A.D.), Ming (1368–1644) and Qing (1644– 1911). However, the TCFL became a university subject in China only in the 1950s (Zhang, 2000). According to Zhang (2000), TCFL in the People’s Republic of China can be roughly divided into two periods. The first period is from the 1950s to the 1970s, during which a tertiary educational institution, Beijing Language College, was set up specifically for the purpose of teaching Chinese to international students. Subsequently the faculty of TCFL found its way into the Chinese Departments of over a dozen of universities across the county. During that period, some 5,000~6,000 students came in batches from Vietnam, Africa and some Eastern European countries to study Chinese, mainly for political purposes. One case of the language study involved a construction project in two African countries. During that time, China helped to build the railway that linked Tanzania to Zambia. It was for this purpose that several hundreds of African youth came to learn the Chinese language ahead of their technical training in railway engineering by the Chinese staff.

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

97

The second period of TCFL started in 1980s when the Chinese government implemented the policies of economic reform and opening up for foreign investment and international trade. With the rapid economic development in the ensuing years, its entry into WTO, and its rising importance in all fronts of international affairs, China is now attracting the attention of the world more than ever before. There has been an increasing demand to know about China and to communicate with its nationals. This has boosted TCFL. From 1991 to 2002, the number of international students in China increased from 10,000 in to 80,000, among which 60,000 majored in the Chinese language (Lu, 2004). During the same time we saw the expansion of teaching facilities and faculties for TCFL. From only one college specializing in TCFL (Beijing Language University) in the 1960s it has increased now to nearly 400 colleges and universities offering the major across the country (Lu, 2004). By now TCFL has developed into a major industry in the field of education in China. It also plays an important role in China’s connections with the world. Therefore, it is of significance to scrutinize its content and to evaluate its effectiveness. 3.2 The debate over what to teach The teaching and learning of grammar became the preoccupation of the teachers and learners of TCFL in China since the 1950s. Traditionally, Chinese education was conceived mainly as literacy; and language and script tended to be regarded as inseparable entities. Consequently, it was believed that the teaching and learning of Chinese characters was first and foremost in the teaching of the Chinese language. However, when TCFL was made a university subject, the old notion was severely criticized. Among the critics was Zhou Zumo, an influential Chinese linguist, who pointed out as early as in 1953 that the basic principle of Chinese language teaching was the teaching of vocabulary and grammar if learners wanted to have a full command of the Chinese language (Zhou, 2000). Zhou’s advocacy has had a great impact on TCFL up to today. On the official website of TCFL run by the government agency at the national level, Zhou’s words on the content of TCFL are still displayed prominently. The emphasis on the content of teaching is also reflected in the compilation of teaching materials. The first set of teaching materials for TCFL was Hanyu Jiaokeshu (Chinese Language Teaching Course Book) which was published in 1958 by Shidai Chubanshe (Times Press). The compilation of the textbook was guided by Zhou’s (1953) viewpoints, which are summarized in

98

H. Wang

the article entitled Jiao Feihanyu Xuesheng Xuexi Hanyu de Yixie Wenti (Some Issues in Teaching Chinese to Non-Han Nationality Students). In the article, Zhou pointed out that grammatical elements must be sequentially organized, and then imparted to language learners. Moreover, the teaching contents were to be strictly arranged around linguistic forms. The emphasis on grammar teaching in TCFL has also resisted the influence from some newer theories of language teaching. From the 1960s onwards, many Western theories of language learning and teaching have been introduced in China and have influenced language teaching practices in foreign language education to Chinese students. In the teaching of English and other foreign languages, the grammar-focused teaching current at that time was then mingled with elements from Direct Method, Audio-lingual Method and Functional Method. However, this has not made much impact on TCFL in China. For instance, a new textbook Hanyu Jiaocheng (Chinese Course for Freshman), which started to be used by Beijing Language University as late as in 2000, still emphasizes that teaching should be focused on grammatical structures. Generally speaking, grammatical structure has always occupied a central position in textbook compilation in TCFL. Meanwhile the textbook compilers have been reluctant to absorb new research results in grammatical studies. Lü Wenhua (1994) points out that practically all the textbooks then adopted the aspectual system established by Hanyu Jiaokeshu (Chinese Language Teaching Course Book) in 1958, ignoring a great wealth of research results accumulated on the aspectual systems of Chinese over the decades. Similarly, Wang (2003) points out that most of the teaching materials share some common weaknesses: uninteresting texts; exercises without variety; lack of creativity in organizing and sequencing the teaching content. Zhao (1998) also states that there are two major complaints for present teaching materials: one is the uninteresting content; the other is the excessively large vocabulary2. Leading authorities in the field have never been ambivalent about the content of teaching. Lu Jianmin, who is currently the President of the Internation2 While this paper concentrates on TCFL in China, the textbook situation in Chinese teaching outside of China is not much better. In 2002, an international conference of Chinese teaching development was held in Beijing. Chinese language experts from 34 universities in 15 countries came and talked about their perplexity over the teaching materials. They believed that the textbooks had become hurdles for the development of Chinese language teaching. The books they had been using were published in the 1930s–40s with outdated vocabulary and contexts which scared away many beginners who had previously been enthusiastic about learning the language (Li, 2002).

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

99

al Society for Chinese Language Teaching and a very influential figure in the field of TCFL, makes explicit statements about the content of TCFL (Lu, 1998). He affirms that vocabulary is the most important aspect of the five components of the language teaching, which include phonetics, characters, vocabulary, grammar and culture. Lu notes that at the elementary level, grammar should not be over-emphasized and grammatical rules should not be taught directly, and that at the advanced level culture teaching should not be over-emphasized (Lu, 1998). In a more recent article, he (Lu, 2004) suggests 14 aspects of the content of TCFL, most of which still focus on the forms of the language. Under these guidelines advocated by authorities in the field, language forms naturally become the major concern of Chinese language teachers and researchers. To summarize, while there have been enduring debates over what to teach and what to put into the teaching materials, the issues are mainly around the emphases on different aspects of language forms. Apart from this main line of debate, we see some undercurrents in TCFL: some scholars raise the question of cultural context of teaching and learning, which is the topic of next section. 3.3 The awareness about cultural content in TCFL As early as in 1980, Lü Shuxiang (1904–1998), a well-known Chinese linguist, pointed out that language learners should be taught language use instead of only language forms. Referring to TCFL, Lü said that both learners and teachers knew that language was a tool for communication. However, Lü added, in the classroom teachers tended to teach only about the components of this tool, not how to use the tool (Lü, S., 1980). Lü’s metaphor made a vivid description of the language teaching situation in China. Similarly, Lü Bisong, a TCFL specialist, who is also a former president of Beijing Language University, also remarked that the purpose of teaching language forms was not the ultimate goal. He emphasized that the teaching and learning of grammar in TCFL was totally different from linguistics studies of Chinese (Lü, B., 1992). However, the efforts of putting the above thinking into practice were late in coming. Research papers on the relation between culture and language only began to appear in language teaching journals in the 1990s. Among them, Zhang and Bi (1991) proposed a model of introducing cultural elements in Chinese language teaching. Wei and Bian (1992) suggested a teaching program of cultural contents. Lin (1996) classified 21 different kinds of Chinese thinking and national psychology. In classroom practice, some teachers attempted discussing and introducing the rules of language use related to com-

100

H. Wang

municative functions such as addressing, greeting and leave-taking. The formcentered teaching was also gaining some aspects of pragmatics. For instance, the proper usage of yes-no questions, demonstrative pronouns as communicative strategies in interactions, words showing respect and modesty, appropriate compliments and the reactions to compliments, expressions of gratitude and apologies etc. were introduced in textbooks and classrooms (Chui, 1997; Lü, W., 1994). However, these researchers and teachers constituted but a small voice in the academic and teaching field in China. A bigger voice was heard that cultural factors should not be over-emphasized in TCFL (Lu, 1998). Therefore, it is said that the teaching of pragmatic competence meant a new orientation as well as a big challenge in the TCFL (Lü, W., 1994). Criticism has been directed at the existing textbooks also in the cultural perspective. It is observed that in the textbooks many of the expressions and concepts included have no parallels in other cultures and that the texts are “too dull” and contain “too many new words” (Zhao, 1998, p. 10). The guideline for material selection was different from the communicative teaching principles. The concept of material authenticity has not been fully understood. For instance, in EFL/ESL, authentic materials refer to the materials written for native speakers to read, or spoken for native speakers to comprehend (Gu, 1998, p. 66). In other words, the teaching materials should come from real life communication in the target language. In TCFL, it should come from the everyday life of the common people in China, not from some linguists’ wild imagination or deliberate grammatical arrangement. The reality of TCFL has just been the opposite (Guo, 1998, p. 21–22; Lü, W., 2002, p. 86; Zhao, 1998, p. 6). To summarize, in the academic field there have been discussions on the purpose of teaching and learning a language. Some agreement seemed to have been reached in China that language teaching was to facilitate students’ learning of language skills for the purpose of communication (Guo, 1998, p. 20; Lü, B., 1992; Lü, S., 1980; Lü, W., 1999; among others). However, little has been done in research and teaching to reach the goal. 4 The need to raise awareness of pragmatics in language teaching 4.1 The lack of pragmatics competence If the teaching materials are one of the obstacles of learning, the teaching itself may be another reason for students to withdraw from the language course. An often-observed situation in Chinese language learning was that many freshmen were enthusiastic about learning the language but soon dropped out

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

101

when they found the learning was too difficult and the teaching was ineffective (Bian, 1999). The over-emphasis on the academic and form-oriented content does not match learners’ goal of learning a practical skill. In other words, what learners learn in class does not help them function efficiently and appropriately in everyday communication. An investigation of the pragmatic competence of Chinese as a Second Language (CSL) learners was carried out at Peking University (Liu & Tian, 1999). Among the findings of the investigation, the following three should alert us on the missing link in TCFL: Firstly, students’ linguistic competence alone cannot guarantee their pragmatic competence. In other words, socially appropriate use of language requires specific instructions. Secondly, for many who participated in the investigation, the learners’ first language pragmatic reaction would often be transferred to the target language, which echoes Thomas’ (1983, 1984) observation that pragmalinguistic errors occur when word semantics are transferred from one language to another while communicative functions of the speech act are distinct in the two languages. Thirdly, some learners who have a moderate command of the pragmatic rules in Chinese language tend to be confused when those rules are to be applied in the communicative situations somewhat different from what they are familiar with. The results of the investigation show that the CSL learners lacked the pragmatic competence in Chinese in one way or the other. The motivation and purpose of the learners of Chinese have changed greatly over time. In the past, people came to learn Chinese because of their interests in the ancient Chinese language, the Chinese literature and the several thousand year-old Chinese culture. At present, the reasons for learning the language are varied and are mostly practically oriented. The ability to read and analyze classical Chinese literature or appreciate Chinese calligraphy is no longer the priority of the majority of the present language learners. They want to acquire pragmatic skills to communicate with the people for trade, business, friendship or various aspects of cultural exchanges. To help these learners, Chinese language teachers must “develop ways of heightening and refining students’ metapragmatic awareness, so that they are able to express themselves as they choose” (Thomas, 1983, p. 91). Without the help needed, pragmatic competence is slow to develop. Protracted learning of the language without the gratification of using it effectively in communication is disheartening. This becomes more distressing when the learners find themselves in the seas of communication in the natural environment of the language, i.e. while living in the country of the target language. It is thus no wonder that many long-term learners of the language develop nega-

102

H. Wang

tive attitudes towards the language in comparison to the mid-term learners, including among them those who came to China after some term of learning in their home countries (Ni, Wang, Wang & Jiang, 2004). 4.2 Pragmatics in China In the field of TCFL, the teaching of pragmatics has not received the attention it should have from researchers and language teachers. To this day, formcentered teaching dominates the nation’s classrooms. Not surprisingly, the research on TCFL is also dominated by the so-called “noumenon research”. In the most recent academic conference for TCFL at the highest level in the country, “The Academic Conference on the Teaching of Chinese as a Foreign Language”, held in Beijing in November 2004, the conference themes were: 1. Research on language noumenon to teach Chinese as a foreign language: phonetics, characters, semantics and grammar; 2. Second language acquisition and cognition research on the Chinese language; 3. Research on teaching Chinese as a second language: teaching materials compiling, methods of teaching language items and Chinese language testing theories; 4. Research on and application of modern educational technology used in Chinese language teaching. Nowhere is the research on the teaching of pragmatics mentioned. By emphasizing that research on TCFL is research on the “noumenon” of the Chinese language, the acquisition and learning aspects of language, as well as teaching methodology, are marginalized. Moreover, language use becomes totally out of place in the research of TCFL. This is also evidenced by the 2004 Annual Report of the Research Center on Teaching Chinese as a Second/Foreign Language, Beijing Language University, which includes practically only studies of linguistic forms and none on their use. Pragmatics as an academic discipline has been introduced to China for over twenty years. It has made little impact on TCFL, while there has been some impact on the teaching of foreign languages to Chinese students. Pragmatics study in China has two streams. One is with the foreign language faculty, and the other with the Chinese language faculty. The foreign language faculty plays an important role in introducing the concepts and theories of pragmatics, and attends to its relations and implications for foreign language teaching and learning. In contrast, Chinese language faculty whose research interests involve pragmatics concentrates more on pragmalinguistics and pays little attention to language teaching. In the field of applied linguistics, Chinese linguists make use of concepts from the western theories of pragmatics in the analyses of syntax and semantics (Yan & Gao, 2003). The grammar-oriented

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

103

pragmatics studies were well-represented at “The 8th Pragmatics conference of China”, held in Guangzhou in 2003. Of the 186 papers presented at the conference, 12 papers were from the Chinese language faculty and naturally they addressed issues in the pragmatics of the Chinese language. However, none of them touches on aspects of language teaching. Pragmatics occupies a very small place in Chinese linguistics as a whole. Four Chinese linguistics journals are examined in the following paragraphs for their pragmatics content. These are among the most prestigious journals in Chinese linguistics circles. They are: Zhongguo Yuwen (Chinese Language), Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue (Teaching Chinese in the World), Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies) and Yuyan Wenzi Yinyong (Applied Linguistics). All the articles published in the journals in 2003 were counted. Zhongguo Yuwen (Chinese Language) is the most prestigious journal among the Chinese language faculty. In the 2003 index, there were in total 92 articles, under sections classified as grammar, phonetics, dialects, word semantics and “sociolinguistics and applied linguistics”. Among them, 36 papers are about grammar and 25 are about word semantics. No paper was published on pragmatics or its relevance to language teaching. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue (Teaching Chinese in the World) is a journal dedicated to TCFL. There were 72 papers published in 2003. Among them, 30 articles were about grammar, word semantics and Chinese characters, six articles were on Chinese language teaching methodology but pragmatics teaching was not mentioned. However, there was one article on cross-cultural competence and the teaching of culture. Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies) is published by Beijing Language University, the only university for TCFL. Of the 61 papers listed in its 2003 index, 19 were on teaching Chinese to speakers of other languages. None gave any consideration to pragmatics in language teaching. In Yuyan Wenzi Yinyong’s (Applied Linguistics) 2003 index, there were 83 papers listed and arranged in 15 sections of linguistics and “Chinese language teaching”. The special feature of this journal is that it includes Yuyong Yanjiu (Pragmatics Research) as a separate section. This section includes 10 papers of pragmatic analysis of the Chinese language. All of them are of a pragmalinguistic nature. Sociopragmatics was not addressed in any of them. To summarize, while pragmatics as a whole is marginalized in Chinese linguistics, sociopragmatics is completely ignored by pragmatics researchers in China. Consequently, it cannot be expected to be applied in TCFL.

H. Wang

104

4.3 What is to be done It is beyond the scope of this chapter to present an overall solution to the lack of awareness of pragmatics in language teaching in China. In fact it is impossible for any individual researcher to reverse the trends in TCFL in China. The modest attempt of the present author is no more than to point out the general neglect of pragmatics in TCFL in China, which is generally unacknowledged in China, and the situation is also little known out of China. While the first step is to acknowledge the fact and to know the problem, some suggestions for its resolution may aid in the understanding of the nature of the problem as well as in raising hopes of making progress. As mentioned above, there has been some research in TCFL in the right directions. For instance, there has been research on cultural elements in Chinese language teaching. Specific cultural items were identified and culturallydefined speech acts were classified, and there were even descriptions of national psychological notions (Chen 1997; Lin 1996; Wei & Bian, 1992; among others). Apart from the above, conscientious attempts at directly promoting pragmatic awareness in language learning have also been made. Although this did not come from the teaching of Chinese, it may well be introduced to the field. Rose (1999), in particular, creates a pragmatic consciousness-raising method in a language classroom with university students in Hong Kong. In Rose’s class, students became the pragmatic rule finders. They collected data on the possible pragmatic focuses of learning from their mother tongue. In analyzing the data they collected, students discovered the essence of certain pragmatic rules so that the awareness was raised in the learning of the corresponding rules in the target language. Being inspired by Rose’s practice, and modeling on Judd’s (1999) framework for the teaching of speech acts, I propose the following set of procedures for the TCFL classroom: (1) Speech act identification. Teacher identifies a particular speech act in Chinese and explains its functions. At the same time learners’ attention can be drawn on the social traits of the speakers like age, gender, social status, and the social relationships between the speakers. Learners will also be asked to perform this speech act in their mother tongue so that a comparison could be made between languages. (2) Analysis of the speech act. Teacher presents materials concerning the speech act and explains the examples. By analyzing the formal structure of the speech act, teachers help learners to develop an under-

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

105

standing of the linguistic components as well as their pragmatic features. (3) Conscious learning of the Chinese speech act. Learners are asked to identify the particular Chinese speech act among others by comparing different pieces of authentic materials of language use. Learners study and analyze the linguistic differences among the different examples for pragmatic consequences and sociolinguistic subtleties. Clips from Chinese films, radio and television programs can be collected and brought into the classroom for the purpose. (4) Controlled Practice. Teacher uses cloze exercises, cued dialogues or role plays to consolidate learners’ mastery of the taught speech act. Authentic materials of this speech act are presented to the learners to practice with and learners practice under Teacher’s guidance. (5) Free practice. Social activities are arranged in and out of the classroom with Chinese cultural events. Learners attend different social functions during a term period. In these activities learners are expected to employ the learnt speech acts in social interactions. At this stage Teacher recedes to the background but provides help when necessary while learners step forward and perform the speech acts as required by their social roles. The above tentative proposal represents not more than one suggestion among the many possible routes towards the teaching and fostering of pragmatic competence for foreign language students. More substantial research on the pragmatics of the Chinese language as well as its application to teaching in TCFL has to be done before the situation can improve. 4.4 Summary Although the teaching of pragmatics rules in the target language has made substantial progress in the international scene, the teaching of Chinese to foreign learners in China has been devoid of such content. Initial attempts have been made to introduce it in the classroom, but the predominant advocacy in the field of Chinese teaching as a foreign language has been the emphasis on accuracy in producing linguistic forms in classroom settings. This methodology in teaching does not meet the demands of students who are now in China to learn to use the language for communication, mostly for non-academic purposes. To address the situation, first and foremost, Chinese linguists and applied linguists must realize the importance of pragmatics in language use and realize that the teaching of language is mainly the teaching of language use.

106

H. Wang

References Bian, J. (1999). Hanzi jiaoxue: jiaoshenme? zhenme jiao? [Teaching Chinese characters: What to teach? How to teach?]. Yuyan Wenzi Yingyong, 29(1), 71–76. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. Chen, G. (1997). Guanyu duiwai hanyukezhong de wenhua jiaoxue wenti [On issues of culture teaching in teaching Chinese to speakers of other languages]. Yuyan Wenzi Yingyong, 21(1), 23–26. Cui, Y. (1997). Cihui, wenzi yanjiu yu duiwai hanyu jiaoxue [Research on vocabulary, characters and teaching Chinese to foreign learners]. Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press. Gu, Y. (1998). English language teaching methodology (Part 1). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Guo, Z. (1998). Duiwai hanyu jiaoxuezhong de jige wenti [Some issues in teaching Chinese to speakers of other languages]. Yuyan Wenzi Yingyong, 28(4), 20–23. Judd, Elliot L. (1999). Some issues in the teaching of pragmatic competence. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp. 152–166). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press. Leech, G. (1983). The principles of pragmatics. London: Longman. Li, W. (2002, August 1). Laokeben xiapao guigu laowai, laowai xuehanyu jixu xinjiaocai [Old textbooks scared away foreign learners; Learners of Chinese language need new teaching materials urgently]. Zhongguo Qinnian Bao. Retrieved from http://www.cyol.net/gb/zqb/ 2002-08/01/content_503343.htm. Lin, G. (1996). Duiwai hanyu jiaoxuezhong wenhua yinsu de dingxing, dingwei yu dingliang wenti chuyi [A tentative attempt on cultural factors in teaching Chinese to speakers of other languages: the issues of quality, quantity and orientation in teaching these factors]. Yuyan Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 67(1), 100–107. Liu, S, & Tian, J. (1999). Liuxuesheng hanyu yuyong diaocha [An analysis of an investigation of CSL learners’ pragmatic competence]. Yuyan Wenzi Yingyong, 29(1), 85–92. Lu, J. (1998). Duiwai hanyu jiaoxuezhong jingchang yao sikao de wenti [Questions frequently considered in teaching Chinese as a foreign language — Why? What? How?]. Yuyan Wenzi Yingyong, 28(4), 5–13. Lu, J. (2004). Zhenqiang xueke yishi, fazhan duiwai hanyu jiaoxue [Enhance subject awareness; Develop Chinese language teaching as a second language]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue, 68(1), 7–12. Lü, Bisong. (1992). Huayu jiaoxue jiangxi [Lectures on Chinese language teaching]. Beijing: Beijing Language Institute Press. Lü, Shuxiang. (1980). Yuyan zuowei yizhong shehui xianxiang [Language as a social phenomenon]. Dushu, 13(4). Lü, Wenhua. (1994). Duiwai hanyu jiaoxue yufa tansuo [Grammar exploration in Chinese language teaching]. Beijing: Chinese Language Press. Lü, Wenhua. (2002). Duiwai hanyu jiaocai yufa xiangmu paixu de yuanze ji chelue [Principles and strategy for arranging grammar items in Chinese textbooks]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue, 62(4).

Pragmatics in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

107

Ni, C., Wang, Z., Wang, J., & Jiang, M. (2004). Waiguo liuxuesheng de hanyu taidu diaocha [Investigation of the attitudes towards Chinese of foreign students learning Chinese as a second language]. Yuyan Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 108(4). Paulston, C. (1975). Linguistic and communicative competence in the ESOL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 8(3), 347–362. Rose, K. (1994). Pragmatic consciousness-raising in an EFL context. In L.F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (pp. 2–63). Urbanana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Rose, K. (1995). Nonnative-speaking teachers and the teaching of pragmatics. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Teacher Education in Second Language Teaching, City University of Hong Kong, March. Rose, K. (1997). Pragmatics in the classroom: Theoretical concerns and practical possibilities. In L.F. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (pp. 267–295). Urbana- Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Rose, K. (1999). Teachers and students learning about requests in Hong Kong. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp. 167–180). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press. Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 91–112. Thomas, J. (1984). Cross-cultural discourse as “unequal encounter”: Toward a pragmatic analysis. Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 226–235. Wang, H. (2003). Zhongguo dalu hanyu jiaocai chuban de chengjiu yu buzu [The achievements and weaknesses of Chinese language teaching materials published in China]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue, 63(1), 100–106+6. Wei, C. & Bian, J. (1992). Jichu hanyu jiaoxue jieduan wenhua daoru neirong chutan [Cultural contents in fundamental Chinese language teaching]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue, 19(1). Yan, C., & Gao, H. (2003). Yuyongxue zai zhongguo ershinian [Pragmatics in China — a twenty-year overview]. Paper presented at the 8th pragmatic conference of China, Guangzhou Foreign Language and Foreign Trade University, December. Zhang, Z., & Bi, J. (1991). Ruhe lijie he jieshi duiwai hanyu jiaoxuezhong de wenhua yinsu [How to understand and reveal the cultural factors in teaching Chinese to speakers of other languages]. Yuyan Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 50(4). Zhang, D. (2000). Duiwai hanyu jiaoxue wushinian — shijizhijiao de huimo yu sikao [Five decades of Chinese teaching as a foreign language — review and thoughts at the transit of the century]. Yuyan wenzi yingyong, 33(1), 51–61. Zhao, J. (1998). Lun duiwai hanyu jiaocai pinggu [Evaluation on the Chinese language teaching materials]. Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu, 77(3), 4–19. Zhou, S. (2000). Zhou Zumo yuyan wenzi lunji [Collection of Zhou Zumo’s works on language and characters]. Beijing: Beijing People’s Education Press. Zhou, Z. (1953). Jiao feihanyu xuesheng xuexi hanyu de yixie wenti [Some issues in teaching Chinese to non-Han nationality students]. Zhongguo Yuwen, 13(7).

DEVELOPMENT OF A FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANXIETY MODEL

Yujia Zhou

1 Introduction In the last two decades, many studies have reported that students in foreign language classrooms experience a considerable amount of foreign language anxiety compared with other classes. Language anxiety that has developed from an unpleasant learning experience affects language learning in various ways. Many anxious students achieve lower grades (Aida, 1994), engage in over-study without better results (Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope, 1986), and have more trouble taking in information in the foreign language, processing that information, and displaying their L2 abilities (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991). Moreover, language anxiety influences language students’ participation in classroom activities (Ely, 1986) and their willingness to communicate (MacIntyre & Charos, 1996), and influences the quality of performance tasks (Steinberg & Horwitz, 1986). Therefore, in the days when communicative competence has become a common goal of language teaching, greater effort is needed to further our understanding of sources of language anxiety in order to help learners feel less stressed about engaging in communication in class. Young (1991) summarized the sources of language anxiety in the classroom into six categories: personal and interpersonal anxieties, learner beliefs about language learning, instructor beliefs about language learning, instructorlearner interactions, classroom procedures, and testing. Of theses sources, Young argued that personal issues have been the most cited ones. Similarly, Aida (1994) emphasized the need for more studies examining the relationship between anxiety and learner characteristics. She concluded that “these studies would help us increase our understanding of language learning from the learner’s perspective and provide a wider range of insights” (p. 165). Methodologically, most evidence of personal sources has been cited from qualitative studies mainly based on a small number of subjects. Only a few

110

Y. Zhou

research studies have used quantitative research methods. The results of these studies gave supportive evidence for qualitative studies. However they provided little information about the associations among the examined factors and language anxiety. How personal variables are interrelated in arousing foreign language anxiety is still unknown. Therefore, the current study is an attempt to investigate interrelationships between language anxiety and selected potential personal sources during speaking activities in the foreign language classroom. The personal variables addressed in the present study are self-esteem in language learning, selfperception of speaking ability, and learners’ beliefs about language learning. 2 Literature review 2.1 Foreign language anxiety Foreign language anxiety is a complex, multi-dimensional phenomenon (Young, 1991). Horwitz et al. (1986) defined foreign language anxiety as “a distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings and behaviors related to classroom language learning arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process” (p. 31). In their theory of conceptualization of foreign language anxiety, three kinds of related anxiety are included, namely: 1) communication apprehension, 2) fear of negative evaluation, and 3) test anxiety. McCroskey (1977) defined communication apprehension as “an individual’s level of fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication” (p. 78). MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) argue that foreign language learners feel communication apprehension, due to their metacognitive awareness that they will have certain difficulty understanding others and making themselves understood. The fear of negative evaluation involves apprehension about others’ evaluation, avoidance of evaluative situations, and the expectation that others will evaluate oneself negatively (Watson & Friend, 1969). In a foreign language class, the students are constantly put on the spot and evaluated. Teachers and peers seem to be ready to correct every mistake in the speakers’ utterances (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991). According to Horwitz et al. (1986), both real and imagined critical evaluation by either the teacher or peers can provoke anxious feelings. Sarason (1978) defined test anxiety as “the tendency to view with alarm the consequences of inadequate performance in an evaluative situation” (p. 214). Horwitz et al. posited that learning a foreign language in an academic setting might evoke test anxiety as evaluation is an ongoing process in the classroom.

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

111

Based on this theory, Horwitz et al. (1986) developed the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) to capture the multi-dimensional nature of language anxiety. The three-factor structure of language anxiety has been validated by Horwitz (1986), which found significant correlations between the total score of FLCAS and general scales in these three factors. It is also worthwhile to note that through factor analysis of FLCAS, Aida (1994) found that fear of negative evaluation and communication apprehension seem to be more related to language anxiety. 2.2 Personal sources of foreign language anxiety 2.2.1 Self-esteem in language learning Similar to anxiety, self-esteem is also a multi-dimensional term. Heyde (1983) examined three kinds of self-esteem: global self-esteem, task self-esteem, and specific self-esteem. She defined specific self-esteem in language learning as “evaluations subjects consciously make of their worthiness in situations where they are using foreign language and evaluations they make of individual aspects of self-esteem such as language learning ability, educational selfesteem, and intellectual self-esteem” (p. 176). In general psychology, Greenberg et al. (1992) posited a terror management theory to the effect that people with high self-esteem are less likely to be anxious and that threats to self-esteem cause anxiety. Horwitz et al. (1986) were concerned that foreign language learning can deprive learners of their normal means of communication, their freedom to make errors, and their ability to behave like normal people, which may lead to lower self-esteem. In an interview with Young (1992), Krashen indicated that people with low selfesteem worry about what their peers think and they are concerned with pleasing others, which has a great deal to do with anxiety. So far no empirical study has directly examined the relationship between language anxiety and the construct of self-esteem in language learning. However, evidence can be found in Onwuegbuzie, Bailey and Daley (1999), who investigated perceived scholastic competence and perceived self-worth along with other factors in predicting foreign language anxiety for 210 university students. Their results showed significant correlation for perceived intellectual ability (r=-.36) and perceived scholastic competence (r=-.39). Furthermore, multiple regression analysis indicated that both were predictors of language anxiety, explaining 5% of the variance respectively. That is, when students who were good at other subjects could not work well in the subject of English,

112

Y. Zhou

their self-satisfaction in learning and intellectual ability could be affected, which may cause learner to feel anxiety when they use the foreign language. 2.2.2 Self-perception of speaking proficiency Self-perception of speaking proficiency refers to self-judgment about speaking ability level compared with others. Young (1991) considered that students who start out with a self-perceived low ability level in a foreign language or second language are the most likely to be anxious in the classroom. Similarly, Foss and Reitzel (1988) discussed the need for an anxiety model that includes learners’ self-perception. In her interviews with ten anxious French learners in college courses, Price (1991) found that many of her anxious participants believed that other students were better at learning foreign languages. This study also showed that foreign language learners compared their ability in the target language with that of native speakers of the target language. Specifically, the students who were afraid of making errors believed that they were not pronouncing words as native speakers would and felt embarrassed by their inability to pronounce correctly. Kitano (2001) investigated the relationship between self-perception of Japanese speaking ability and language anxiety with 212 university students in Japanese courses. This study found that the lower students perceived their ability to be, in comparison to their peers and native speakers, the greater was their level of anxiety, measured with a revised version of FLCAS (Horwitz et al., 1986). For the measure of self-perception of Japanese speaking ability, this study used three separate ratings, namely: self-rating for the current level of study, self-rating expected perception by Japanese, and self-rating can-do scale. Significant correlations with language anxiety were found for selfrating for the current level of study (r=-.509) and the self-rating expected perception by Japanese (r=-.389). Through regression analysis, Kitano attributed the non-significant correlation between self-rating can-do scale to the unequal numbers of male and female students, and the low score of one specific group of students. 2.2.3 Learners’ beliefs about language learning Learners’ beliefs about language learning refer to students’ opinions and perceptions on various issues related to language learning. Horwitz (1987) developed the Belief About Language Learning Inventory (BALLI), in which learners’ beliefs about language learning are categorized into five major areas: 1) difficulty of language learning, 2) foreign language aptitude, 3) nature of

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

113

language learning, 4) learning and communication strategies, and 5) motivations and expectations. The first three aspects seem to be most related to language anxiety. Price (1991) revealed through interviews that the majority of ten anxious students with high levels of foreign language anxiety found their language course difficult. Many subjects complained that, compared with their other classes, they could not do well in their language classes even though they worked hard. Furthermore, the highly anxious subjects in Price’s study believed that learning a foreign language required a special aptitude that they did not possess. Peacock (1998) found through a questionnaire that 71% of students believed in the existence of foreign language aptitude, though only 14% believed that they had that aptitude. Also, anxious students tended to consider the nature of language learning in terms of pronunciation, and overemphasized the accuracy. Price’s subjects were concerned that they were not pronouncing words like a native French speaker and expressed great embarrassment at their unsatisfactory pronunciation. Some learners seemed to believe that the target language should not be attempted unless accuracy was maintained, and that they should not guess an unknown foreign language word (Horwitz, 1988). All the above beliefs about language learning are unrealistic to some extent and are very likely to increase learners’ anxiety level when they clash with reality. Wang (2005) provided empirical support for the negative influence of learners’ beliefs on language anxiety. She administered FLCAS and BALLI to 175 Chinese EFL university learners to investigate the relationship between language anxiety and their beliefs about language learning. Two BALLI factors that were found to be significantly correlated with foreign language anxiety were the difficulty of language learning (r = .54), and beliefs about foreign language aptitude (r = -.26). This suggested that Chinese EFL students who believed English was a difficult language and perceived themselves as having lower language aptitude in language learning tended to have higher levels of language anxiety 2.2.4 The mediational role of self-esteem in language learning During the process of arousing language anxiety, the relationship between the three personal variables and language anxiety might not be straightforward. They are likely to be interrelated with each other. Self-esteem seems to mediate the influence of the other two personal sources, learners’ beliefs on language learning and self-perception of their speaking ability on language anxiety.

114

Y. Zhou

Oh (1996) found that American university Japanese learners were quite anxious about speaking Japanese in the classroom. However, the results did not indicate that the level of language anxiety was strongly related to language learning beliefs. In conclusion, she suggested that certain beliefs might affect language learners’ self-esteem, which in turn, affects the levels of anxiety students experience in the classroom. She explained this further by stating that belief in the difficulty of learning Japanese language may evoke insecurities about their language learning ability, which in turn intensifies anxious feelings. That is to say, apart from engendering anxious feeling in language learners directly, learners’ language learning beliefs are also likely to affect language anxiety indirectly through mediation of self-esteem in language learning. It is also possible that self-perception of speaking proficiency influences language anxiety indirectly by affecting self-esteem in language learning, which in turn has a direct influence on language anxiety. In general psychology, Marsh (1986) developed the internal/external frame of reference (I/E) model in attempting to explain the distinction between the construct of math self-concept and the construct of verbal self-concept. According to the I/E model, math and verbal self-concept are influenced both by external and internal comparisons. The external frame of reference involves comparing the students’ perceived academic ability with the abilities of other students in a specific environment (e.g. school, peer group). The internal frame of reference refers to the students’ comparison of perceived ability in one subject domain with their perceived ability in another subject domain. Considering that the concept of self-esteem is very similar to that of self-concept, self-esteem in language learning might be influenced by a subject’s self-perceived speaking competence when compared with classmates and native speakers in a foreign language learning context. In summary, during classroom activities involving speaking in the target language, self-esteem in language learning, self-perception of speaking proficiency, and learners’ beliefs about language learning seem to be explanatory factors of language anxiety. However, research examining only their direct relationship has not always been able to get the consistent results. It is also likely that instead of straightforward relationships, these factors might be interrelated, with self-esteem as the mediator. Students’ lower level of selfperception compared with classmates or native speakers and stronger beliefs in certain aspects of language learning tend to lower their self-esteem in language learning, which in turn leads to a higher level of language anxiety.

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

115

2.3 Significance of structural equation modeling for the present study So far, in the few quantitative studies that have investigated the relationship between personal sources and language anxiety, most (Kitano, 2001; Onwuegbuzie et al., 1999; Wang, 2005) have used simple correlation in data analysis. While only Onwuegbuzie et al. used multi-regression approach, the researchers did not explore further the interaction among the variables examined. These approaches were not able to reveal the indirect effects, which might exist among the personal factors in the complex process. Furthermore, the personal variables in question, as well as the construct of language anxiety, are multi-dimensional in nature. However, the previous studies treated the sub-dimensions of personal sources separately in investigating their influence on language anxiety. Therefore, more complex multivariate modeling is needed to address this problem by examining latent variables with several sub-dimensions simultaneously. To overcome the limitations of the correlation and multiple regression approach in modeling research, the present study uses the structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to examine the interrelationships between the explanatory and the dependent variables. SEM uses multiple indicators, which adequately represent such multi-faceted, abstract and theoretical constructs as language anxiety and its personal sources. Moreover, SEM allows a separate estimation of the direct and indirect effects of the explanatory variables on the dependent variable. Since the early 1980s, the field of applied linguistics has witnessed a substantial increase in the use of structural equation modeling. For example, SEM has been used in research to investigate the influence of affective individual differences, such as motivation, aptitude and attitude, on second language acquisition (Ely, 1986; Gardner, 1988; Yashima, 2002). 3 Development of proposed models A review of literature on foreign language anxiety revealed that self-esteem in language learning, self-perception of speaking proficiency, and learners’ beliefs about language learning are not only potential predictors of language anxiety, but are also interrelated during this prediction process. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to test these hypotheses and to examine the relative importance of these factors in influencing language anxiety, and the nature of their effects. In order to achieve the research objective, four models are proposed. All the proposed models are made up of four latent constructs. Language anxiety is represented by (a) communication anxiety and (b) fear of negative evalua-

116

Y. Zhou

tion. Self-esteem in language learning includes two dimensions: (a) language self-esteem and (b) learning self-esteem. Self-perception of speaking proficiency is represented by two types of comparison: (a) self-perceived speaking proficiency, compared with classmates, and (b) self-perceived speaking proficiency, compared with native speakers. Finally, learners’ beliefs about language learning include three types of language learning beliefs: (a) learners’ beliefs about foreign language aptitude, (b) learners’ beliefs about the difficulty of language learning and (c) learners’ beliefs about the nature of language learning. Each proposed model incorporates specific hypotheses concerning the causal relations among the above four constructs. Model 1 (see Fig. 1) represents a model in which each of the three personal sources is specified to be directly associated with language anxiety. Furthermore, self-perception of speaking proficiency and learners’ beliefs about language learning also affect language anxiety indirectly through mediation of language learning selfesteem. It is proposed that students would feel a higher level of language anxiety when they experience lower self-confidence in language learning, when they perceive their speaking competence as poor, compared with classmates or native speakers, and when they hold certain stronger beliefs about language learning. It is further proposed that students who have lower perception of their own speaking ability or hold certain stronger beliefs about language learning would also feel lower levels of self-esteem in language learning. Figure 2 depicts Model 2, in which self-perception of speaking proficiency and learners’ beliefs about language learning are specified to have direct effects on self-esteem in language learning, which in turn influences language anxiety. Model 3 in Figure 3 posits that the relationships between selfperception of speaking proficiency, learners’ beliefs about language learning, and language anxiety are mediated by self-esteem in language learning. Furthermore, a direct effect would presumably exist between self-perception of speaking proficiency and language anxiety. Finally, in Model 4 (see Fig. 4), self-esteem in language learning affects language anxiety directly and also mediates the influences of self-perception of speaking proficiency and learners’ beliefs about language learning on language anxiety. In addition, a direct link is also hypothesized to exist between learners’ beliefs about language learning and language anxiety.

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

117

Self-perception of speaking proficiency

Self-esteem in language learning

Language anxiety

Learners’ beliefs about language learning

Fig. 1. Proposed Model 1 Self-perception of speaking proficiency

Self-esteem in language learning

Language anxiety

Learners’ beliefs about language learning

Fig. 2. Proposed Model 2 Self-perception of speaking proficiency

Self-esteem in language learning

Language anxiety

Learners’ beliefs about language learning

Fig. 3. Proposed Model 3 Self-perception of speaking proficiency

Self-esteem in language learning Learners’ beliefs about language learning

Fig. 4. Proposed Model 4

Language anxiety

118

Y. Zhou

4 Method 4.1 Participants The participants in this study consisted of 253 EFL university students in northeastern China. The students had studied English as a school subject for six years at junior and senior high schools. For structural equation modeling, data from 230 students with no missing values were used. There were 124 male students (53.9%) and 106 female students (46.1%). A total of 59 (25.7%) students were in their first year and 171 (74.3%) students were in their second year. The students are major students of Public Administration (28.7%), Information Administration (34.8%), Finance (13.0%) and International Economy (23.5%). 4.2 Procedure Questionnaires in Chinese translated from an English version by the researcher were administered to the participants. These contain questions on demographic measures and measures of language anxiety, self-esteem in language learning, self-perception of speaking proficiency, and learners’ beliefs about language learning. Participating in the study involved completing the questionnaire after class and returning it to the instructors. 4.3 Measures Appendix A shows the measurement for each latent variable, which are described in this section in detail. A language anxiety scale was created for this study to measure students’ anxiety level during oral practice in the foreign language class. Items in this scale were adapted from the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (Horwitz et al., 1986) and grouped into two subscales. The first subscale with four items measured students’ degree of fear of negative evaluation from teacher and classmates (e.g. “I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak English in my English class”). The second subscale with four items was designed to assess students’ level of communication apprehension in English class (e.g. “I get nervous when I know that I’m going to be called on in my English class”). Students indicated their anxiety level on a 5point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly disagree) for each item. The reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) of the language anxiety scale was .86.

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

119

A language learning self-esteem scale was developed for this study to evaluate students’ level of self-esteem in language learning as defined by Heyde (1983). It is composed of three items on language self-esteem and three items on learning self-esteem. Included in the language self-esteem measures are two life situation statements pertaining to language use and one statement related to language ability. Included in learning self-esteem are two statements related to intellectual ability, and one related to educational ability. Examples are: “I have the language learning ability” for language self-esteem and “I am an intelligent person” for learning self-esteem. Students were to evaluate their language learning self-esteem on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The alpha reliability of this scale was .73. A self-perception of speaking proficiency scale was modified from the Self-Rating Speaking Proficiency measure developed in Kitano (2001). It measured judgment of participants’ speaking proficiency by themselves in the areas of pronunciation, fluency, grammatical accuracy, and overall speaking ability respectively. Four indicators reflected students’ self-perception of these aspects compared with classmates (e.g. “For my current level of study in English, compared with my classmates, I think my English pronunciation is”) and four indicators for comparison with native speakers (e.g. “if I were to go to an English-speaking country, I think my English fluency would be perceived by a native speaker as”). Students rated their self-perception of specific aspects of speaking proficiency on a 5-point scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good). The alpha reliability of the self-perception of speaking proficiency scale was .87. The measure of learners’ beliefs about language learning was adapted from Horwitz’s (1987) Beliefs About Language Learning Inventory (BALLI). The scale with a total of 11 items assesses students’ orientation toward some beliefs about language learning in three subscales. The first subscale including three items measures learners’ beliefs about the importance of foreign language aptitude (e.g. “someone is born with a special ability for learning foreign languages”). The second subscale including five items was designed to measure learners’ beliefs about the difficulty of language learning (e.g. “English grammatical rules are very complex and confusing”). The third subscale including three items assessed learners’ beliefs about the nature of language learning (e.g. “You should not say anything in English until you can say it correctly”). All these items, except X30, were to be rated on 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Item X30 was assessed from 1 (less than 1 year) to 5 (more than 10 years). The alpha reliability of the self-perception of speaking proficiency scale of eight items was .66, which is

120

Y. Zhou

not quite satisfactory but considered to be at an acceptable level. This construct was thought to be different from the other three in that it was designed to measure learners’ beliefs about general language learning rather than to evaluate their own feelings as the other three constructs did. Therefore, composite scores were to be calculated for the items representing each subscale. 4.4 Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations, skewness, and kurtosis were examined for the normality of score distribution of each variable. Two confirmatory factor analyses were performed to assess the measurement model with Amos 4.0 (Arbuckle, 1995). The first confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to choose three items with large path coefficient values for three latent variables of language anxiety, self-esteem in language learning, and self-perception of speaking proficiency respectively. Then a second confirmatory factor analysis was run to evaluate the adequacy of the proposed four factor measurement model with nine items obtained from the first confirmatory factor analysis and three composite scores for each subscale of learners’ beliefs about language learning. To evaluate the fitness of the measurement model with a total of 12 indicators, chi-square value (Ȥ2), Goodness of Fitness (GFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and Residue Mean Square Error Approximation (RMSEA) were used as fit indices. A non-significant chi-square value indicates that the model is an adequate representation of the sample data. However, because the chi-square statistic is a poor estimate when the sample is large (Toyoda, 1998), as in this study, the ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom (Ȥ2/df) was used, for which value of 5 or lower is considered adequate (Wheaton, Muthen, Alwin & Summers, 1977). For GFI and CFI, values of .90 or greater were considered adequate. For RMSEA, values of approximately .08 or less indicate adequate model fit (Brown & Cudeck, 1989). Once the measurement model was confirmed, the four proposed models were tested with structural equation modeling (maximum likelihood method) with Amos 4.0. To evaluate the overall fit of a particular model with the sample data, five types of fit indices were used: the chi-square statistic, Ȥ2/df, GFI, CFI, and RMSEA. The criteria for the acceptable values of these fit indices were the same as those of confirmatory factor analysis described in the preceding section. The criterion for choosing one model over another was based on the difference of fit indices, particularly the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) value, for which the smaller one indicates a better model (Toyoda,

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

121

1998). Finally, only those models that contained significant path should be considered appropriate. 5 Results 5.1 Preliminary analyses Table 1 describes the descriptive statistics of all the 33 items, which revealed that the data were normally distributed with values for the skewness and kurtosis within an acceptable range of -1 to +1, except item 33, which had skewness of -1.60 and kurtosis of 3.06. For this reason, X33 was excluded from further analysis. Appendix B shows all correlations among all the observed variables. Table 1. Descriptive statistics No. X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10 X11 X12 X13 X14 X15 X16 X17 X18 X19 X20 X21 X22 X23 X24 X25 X26 X27 X28 X29 X30 X31 X32 X33

M 2.83 2.53 3.13 2.12 2.60 3.03 3.26 3.15 3.07 3.15 2.94 3.01 2.77 3.33 3.15 2.90 2.89 2.88 2.71 2.44 2.73 2.58 3.57 3.04 2.80 2.59 2.65 3.65 3.07 2.39 2.67 3.53 4.25

SD 0.99 1.10 1.09 0.99 1.01 1.03 1.07 1.02 0.98 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.80 0.92 0.95 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.98 0.86 0.95 0.90 1.01 1.07 1.08 1.01 1.09 0.96 1.07 1.12 1.04 1.07 0.89

Skewness Kurtosis 0.16 -0.97 0.26 -0.97 -0.43 -0.75 0.79 0.11 0.31 -0.74 -0.18 -0.64 -0.53 -0.62 -0.40 -0.74 0.25 -0.57 0.08 -0.62 0.25 -0.09 0.19 -0.33 0.29 0.22 0.09 -0.12 0.06 -0.33 0.32 -0.22 -0.03 -0.17 0.27 -0.14 0.24 -0.34 0.47 0.08 0.15 -0.48 0.29 -0.07 -0.65 -0.11 -0.07 -0.56 0.16 -0.70 0.41 -0.51 0.31 -0.55 -0.82 0.50 0.16 -0.87 0.63 -0.22 0.30 -0.92 -0.52 -0.53 -1.60 3.06

Y. Zhou

122

5.2 Measurement model From the first confirmatory factor analysis conducted with all the measures of language anxiety, self-esteem in language learning, and self-perception of speaking proficiency, the following indicators with large path coefficient values were obtained for each of the three latent variables. The indicators of X6 with path coefficient value of 0.72, X7 (0.72), and X2 (0.68) were the three best ones for language anxiety; X18 (0.77), X17 (0.64), and X19 (0.62) were best for self-esteem in language learning; X10 (0.79), X16 (0.78), and X12 (0.78) were best for self-perception of speaking proficiency. They were all found to be statistically significant. Table 2. Standardized path coefficients from confirmatory factor analysis with 12 observed variables Latent variables and observed variables Language Anxiety V1 I am afraid that the other students will language at me when I speak English in my English class. V2 I get nervous when I know that I' m going to be called on in my English class. V3 I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in my English class. Self-Esteem in Language Learning V4 I have the language learning ability. V5 I have confidence in using English in my English class. V6 I am confident to communicate with others in English outside of the calss. Self-Perception of Speaking Proficiency V7 If I were to go to an English-speaking country (such as U.S.A), I think my overall speaking ability would be perceived by the native speaker as: V8 For my current level of study in English compared with my classmates, I think my English fluency is: V9 For my current level of study in English compared with my classmates, I think my overall speaking ability is: Learners' Belief about Language Learning V10 The importance of foreign language aptitude V11 The difficulty of language learning V12 Nature of language learning

Path coefficient**

No.

0.66

X2

0.72

X6

0.73

X7

0.61 0.65 0.74

X11 X9 X10

0.72

X22

0.80

X16

0.81

X18

0.39 0.59 0.55

X23-X25 X26-X30 X31-X32

Note. **p <.01

Another confirmatory factor analysis with the nine indicators obtained above and three indicators for subscales of learners’ beliefs about language learning was conducted to assess the adequacy of the proposed four-factor measurement model. Each indicator was constrained to load only on the factor

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

123

that it was designed to measure. Each of the 12 indicators had a factor loading that was statistically significant and large enough (see Table 2). Furthermore, the fit of the measurement of the model was good, Ȥ2 (48, N = 230) = 99.84, p < .01, Ȥ2/df = 2.08, GFI = .93, CFI = .94, and RMSEA = .069. These results indicated that the data were consistent with a four-factor structure and the 12 observed variables were good reflectors of their respective latent constructs. In Table 2, these 12 observed variables are given new numbers for the ease of description. 5.3 Structural equation modeling The four proposed models predicting language anxiety were estimated using structural equation modeling (the maximum likelihood estimation method) to test the fit of each model to the empirical data. Table 3 presents all the fit indices and path coefficients for the four proposed models. Model 1 fitted the data well. Although the chi-square was significant, Ȥ2 (48, N = 230) = 99.13, p < .01, other fit indices were satisfactory, Ȥ2/df = 2.08, GFI = .93, CFI = .94, RMSEA = .068, and AIC = 159.13. However, Model 1 contained two nonsignificant structural paths: the paths of self-perception of speaking proficiency toward language anxiety and self-esteem in language learning toward language anxiety. Model 2 did not show a proper fit to the data. Although the chi-square was acceptable, Ȥ2 (50, N = 230) = 146.04, p < .01, and Ȥ2/df = 2.92,  the other fit indices were not very satisfactory, GFI = .91, CFI = .89, RMSEA = .092, and AIC = 202.04. All the three paths in this model were significant. Model 3 fitted the data adequately, Ȥ2 (49, N = 230) = 102.73, p < .01, Ȥ2/df = 2.10, GFI = .93, CFI = .94, RMSEA = .069, and AIC = 160.73. All the paths in the model were significant. The magnitude of the path of self-perception and self-esteem to language anxiety were not quite acceptable, probably due to the error estimation. Model 4 also showed a good fit to the data, as indicated by the fit indices, Ȥ2 (49, N = 230) = 100.56, p < .01, Ȥ2/df = 2.05, GFI = .93, CFI = .94, RMSEA = .068, and AIC = 158.55. All the hypothesized paths were significant. According to the above analysis, all the proposed models except Model 2 showed a good fit to the present data. Since Model 3 is nested in Model 1, a comparison between them would indicate whether a path from learners’ beliefs about language learning to language anxiety exists. Similarly, a comparison between Model 4 and Model 1 could show whether the path from selfperception of speaking proficiency to language anxiety exists.

Y. Zhou

124

Table 3. Summary of fit indices for structural models and path coefficient Fit indexes Models

X2

df P

X2/df GFI CFI RMSEA

99.84

48 .00 2.08

.93 .94

.069

99.13 Model 1 self-esteemЍlanguage anxiety self-perceptionЍlanguage anxiety

48 .00 2.08

.93 .94

.680

Measurement model

AIC

Path coefficient

150.13 -0.74 0.32

learners' beliefЍlanguage anxiety self-perceptionЍself-esteem

0.59**

learners' beliefЍself-esteem

-0.22**

Model 2 self-esteemЍlanguage anxiety self-perceptionЍself-esteem

0.86** 146.04 50 .00 2.92

.91 .89

.920

202.04 0.67** 0.79** 0.38**

learners' beliefЍself-esteem 102.73 49 .00 Model 3 self-esteemЍlanguage anxiety self-perceptionЍlanguage anxiety

2.1

.93 .94

.069

160.73 -3.00** 2.42** 0.91**

self-perceptionЍself-esteem learners' beliefЍself-esteem 100.56 49 .00 2.05 Model 4 self-esteemЍlanguage anxiety learners' beliefЍlanguage anxiety self-perceptionЍself-esteem learners' beliefЍself-esteem

-0.25** .93 .94

.068

158.55 -0.40** 0.68** 0.85** -0.25**

Note . GFI = Goodness-of-Fit Index; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA = Residual Mean Squared Error Approximation; AIC = Akaike Information Criterion. ** p < .01.

The value of GFI, CFI and RMSEA of these three models did not show much difference. As a result of comparison, the value of AIC (159.13) of Model 1 was smaller than that of Model 3 (160.73), which means that Model 1 was better than Model 3 for the present data and a direct link between learners’ language learning belief and language anxiety did exist. A comparison of AIC between Model 1 (159.13) and Model 4 (158.55) indicates that Model 4 with smaller AIC was better than Model 1. The analyses of structural equation modeling indicated that Model 4 had satisfactory fit indices and a smaller value of AIC than the other proposed models. Furthermore, given that the paths in Model 4 were all significant and of acceptable magnitude (see Fig. 5), Model 4 seems to be the model with best fit for the present data among the four proposed models. Specifically, in this model, a positive direct link exists between self-perception of speaking profi-

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

125

ciency and self-esteem in language learning. The association between language anxiety and learners’ beliefs about language learning includes a positive direct link and an indirect link through the mediation of self-esteem in language learning. Finally, self-esteem in language learning seems to link to language anxiety negatively and directly. V7

V8 0.72

V9

0.8

0.8

Self-perception of speaking proficiency 0.85**

V4 -0.15

0.66 V1

0.61 0.65

V5

0.74

Self-esteem in language learning

-0.40**

Language anxiety

V6 -0.25**

V10

V11

V2

0.73 V3

Learners’ࠉ beliefs about language learning 0.38 0.55

0.71

0.68**

0.54

V12

Fig. 5. Final structural model (Model 4) with standardized estimates for the relations among the latent variables and observed variables (** p < .01)

6 Discussion and implications 6.1 Self-perception of speaking proficiency and self-esteem in language learning The final model implies that a direct association between self-perception of speaking proficiency and language learning self-esteem might exist. This finding is consistent with the theory of Marsh (1986), which implies that an unsatisfactory result of students’ external comparisons, with peers or native speakers, when applied to the context of foreign language learning, may lead to a decrease of self-confidence in students’ language learning abilities. Although self-perception of language competence has been hypothesized and validated to be a critical personal source of language anxiety, this study is the first to examine and corroborate the possibility of the mediational role of self-esteem between self-perception of speaking proficiency and language

126

Y. Zhou

anxiety. However, it is worth noting that the measures of self-perception of speaking proficiency and language self-esteem used in the final analysis bear a certain similarity. This might be responsible for the high path coefficient value between these two variables in the final model. Consequently, this made the nature of the association between self-perception and language anxiety a little difficult to evaluate. Nevertheless, the indirect effect of self-judgment of speaking competence on language anxiety through the mediation of selfesteem as found in the present study seems to provide new insights into the relation between self-perception and foreign language anxiety. In future studies, it would be interesting to include measures of internal comparison with idealized self-image or accomplishments in other school subjects to examine their relationship with self-esteem and also language anxiety. In the classroom, teachers should help learners evaluate their speaking proficiency objectively instead of comparing themselves with others. They could achieve this by setting realistic goals for students and helping them realistically assess their performance against their own goals. Besides, reducing the competition present in the classroom also seems to be an effective way. For example, teachers may incorporate classroom practices such as pair work and group activities into most class periods. In these activities, students would not be forced to be competitive and individual differences in performance would not be too noticeable. Also, teachers should strive to create a warm and cooperative classroom atmosphere in which students can support each other regardless of differences in ability. In helping learners avoid unrealistic comparison with native speakers, teachers may give learners more exposure to speakers whose proficiency is not necessarily native or near-native, yet who function well in the target language environment. 6.2 Learners’ beliefs about language learning and self-esteem in language learning This study revealed that a negative link might exist between learners’ beliefs about language learning and self-esteem in the final model. This implies that students who hold certain stronger language learning beliefs are likely to develop a lower level of self-satisfaction in their language learning ability. This link verified the postulation made by Peacock (1998) and Oh (1996) that certain beliefs such as the importance of foreign language aptitude and the difficulty of language learning may affect language learners’ self-esteem, which in turn affects levels of learners’ language anxiety.

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

127

6.3 Learners’ beliefs about language learning and language anxiety A significant path was also obtained between learners’ beliefs about language learning and language anxiety. That is to say, students who bear certain irrational language learning beliefs are likely to feel a higher level of language anxiety during foreign language classroom oral activities. This result seems to support the suggestion made by Young (1991) and Oxford (1999) that learners’ beliefs about language anxiety are a source of language anxiety. It is also consistent with the negative relationship between language anxiety and learners’ language learning beliefs found in the qualitative study of Price (1991) and the quantitative study of Wang (2005). Furthermore, this variable was the biggest predictor of foreign language anxiety. This lends support to a study by Ganschow and Sparks (1991), who found that students’ perceptions of the ease of learning a foreign language are the foremost identifiers of their propensity to experience foreign language learning problems. As to the implications for the classroom, language teachers should assess learners’ beliefs about language learning through discussion or by administering questionnaires periodically. Once irrational beliefs are found, teachers should take measures to replace these beliefs with valid ones. Specifically, it is important for teachers to provide learners with opportunities to discuss the process of learning a foreign language openly and to help them recognize their irrational and anxiety-maintaining beliefs. As Horwitz (1988) suggested, students’ beliefs about language learning are formed based on limited knowledge, which may never be challenged. Thus, it is the responsibility of teachers to confront erroneous beliefs with new information. For example, instructors should remind students that mistakes are a natural part of language learning and encourage students to make mistakes. As an effective classroom practice, Crookall and Oxford (1991) suggested that teachers should try to shift the main communication pattern between students and teachers to one between students with the emphasis on conveying meaning rather than underscoring mistakes. As to the misconception about pronunciation, it should be made clear to students that they are not expected to achieve native-like pronunciation and fluency, and that communicating the idea is more important than excellence of pronunciation. 6.4 Self-esteem in language learning and language anxiety According to the final model, the relationship between self-esteem in language learning and language anxiety seems to be a direct and negative one. The results indicate that learner’s level of language anxiety might decrease in

128

Y. Zhou

inverse proportion to their level of language learning self-esteem. This finding confirms the theory of Greenberg et al. (1992) when applied to the language learning context. In this study, language learning self-esteem seems not only to have a direct impact on foreign language anxiety level, but also mediate the influence of the other two personal variables: self-perceived speaking proficiency and language learning beliefs. Its important role in the development of learners’ anxiety over speaking in the target language seems to support the particular nature of language learning distinct from other subjects. That is to say, as many researchers have suggested, a strong association exists between ego and language. It is a pity that indicators of learning self-esteem were all excluded from the structural equation modeling analysis due to their low factor loadings on the latent variable of language learning self-esteem. In managing self-esteem as an important source of language anxiety, teachers could build students’ confidence and self-esteem in their foreign language ability through encouragement, reassurance and empathy. Furthermore, they could enhance learners’ self-esteem by providing many opportunities for classroom success in the language. Also, teachers should be careful in their manner of error correction, in that correcting errors too harshly in the presence of other students might hurt learners’ language learning self-esteem and intensify their anxiety. 7 Conclusion This study used SEM analytic approach in examining the influence of three personal variables on language anxiety and their interrelationships. The results show that self-esteem in language learning and learners’ beliefs about language learning might affect foreign language anxiety directly. In addition, self-esteem in language learning also seems to mediate the influence of learners’ beliefs about language learning and self-perception of speaking proficiency on language anxiety. This study has several limitations that should be kept in mind when interpreting the findings. Firstly, the participants in the study were first and second year university students in the northern part of China. Any generalization should be made with caution before the results are validated with different gender groups and across social contexts. Given that significant gender differences were found in Aida (1994), and foreign language anxiety was suggested to be closely related to culture (Ando, 1997), the causal structure of foreign language anxiety might also be distinct due to these differences. Concerning

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

129

structural equation modeling analysis, only three indicators are adopted for representing each latent variable. Consequently the indicators of some latent variable subscales might be excluded from analysis, which might endanger their construct validity. In addition, due to time constraints, all the items for the latent variables in the questionnaire did not go through back translation and pilot study. Also, the relative low reliabilities of some latent variables scales might affect the reliability of the measures. As to future studies, a longitudinal study is clearly called for to understand more about cause-effect relationships between the examined variables this study suggests, since there may be reciprocal effects between the latent variables. For example, language anxiety is likely to bias learners’ selfperceived language competence (MacIntyre, Nowels & Clement, 1997). Moreover, given the multi-dimensional nature of the construct of language anxiety, future research should integrate other related personal variables, such as competitiveness. According to Bailey (1983), learners with higher competitiveness are more likely to compare themselves with classmates and an unsatisfactory result of this comparison might lower their self-esteem, which in turn would cause language anxiety. Finally, future research could include qualitative studies, such as interviews and a diary study to provide supportive evidence from the learners’ perspective and corroborate the model obtained through quantitative analyses in this study. In spite of its limitations, this study has demonstrated that the SEM seems to be an effective method in exploring the causal structure of language anxiety. It might shed light on understanding how the related personal variables function in arousing anxious feelings in learners during foreign language classroom oral activities. It is hoped that through the final model adopted in this study, language teachers may gain a better understanding of the ways in which the development of language anxiety might be controlled. It is also hoped that this might motivate teachers to take action to provide a supportive learning environment for learners, and help them alleviate language anxiety. Acknowledgements This article is based on the author’s MA thesis completed at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies in 2003. This author is indebted to Dr Masashi Negishi and Dr Asako Yoshitomi for their continuous guidance and support; and to Dr Ichikawa Masanori for his constructive advice on data analysis.

130

Y. Zhou

References Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope’s construct of foreign language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. Modern Language Journal, 78, 155–168. Ando, M. (1997). Anxiety and foreign/second language learning: Research in the past, present and future. MeiSei EiBei BunGaku, 12, 129–162. Arbuckle, J.L. (1995). AMOS user’s guide. Chicago: Smallwaters. Bailey, K. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult SLA: Looking at and through the diary studies. In H.G. Selinger & M.H. Long (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 67–102). Rowley, Mass: Newbury House. Brown, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445–455. Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1991). Dealing with anxiety: Some practical activities for language learners and teacher trainees. In E.K. Horwitz & D.J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 141-150). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ely, C.M. (1986). An analysis of discomfort, risk-taking, sociability, and motivation in the L2 classroom. Language Learning, 36, 1–25. Foss, K.A., & Reitzel, A.C. (1988). A relational model for managing second language anxiety. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 437–454. Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. (1991). A screening instrument for the identification of foreign language learning problems. Foreign language Annals, 24, 383–398. Gardner, R.C. (1988). The socio-educational model of second language learning: Assumptions, findings and issues. Language Learning, 38, 101–126. Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., Rosenblatt, A., Burling, J., Lyon, D., Simon, L., & Pinel, E. (1992). Why do people need self-esteem? Converging evidence that self-esteem serves an anxiety buffering function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 913–922. Heyde, A.W. (1983). Self-esteem and the acquisition of French. In K.M. Bailey, M.H. Long & S. Peck (Eds.), Second language acquisition studies (pp. 175-187). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Horwitz, E.K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a foreign language anxiety scale. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 559–562. Horwitz, E.K. (1987). Surveying student beliefs about language learning. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 119-129). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Horwitz, E.K. (1988). The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. Modern Language Journal, 72, 283–294. Horwitz, E.K., Horwitz, M.B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125–132. Horwitz, E.K., & Young, D.J. (Eds.). (1991). Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the college Japanese language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 85, 549–566. MacIntyre, P.D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3–26.

Development of a Foreign Language Anxiety Model

131

MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1991). Methods and results in the study of anxiety and language learning: A review of the literature. Language Learning, 41, 85–117. MacIntyre, P.D., Nowels, K.A., & Clement, R. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language Learning, 47, 265–287. Marsh, H.W. (1986). Global self-esteem: Its relation to specific facets of self-concept and their importance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1224–1236. McCroskey, J.C. (1977). Oral communication apprehension: A summary of recent theory and research. Human Communication Research, 4, 78–96. Oh, M.T. (1996). Beliefs about language learning and foreign language anxiety: A study of American university students learning Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin. Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Bailey, P., & Daley, C.E. (1999). Factors associated with foreign language anxiety. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20, 217–239. Oxford, R.L. (1999). Anxiety and the language learner: New insights. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 58–67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peacock, M. (1998). The links between learner beliefs, teacher beliefs, and EFL proficiency. Perspectives: Working Papers, 10, 125–159. Price, M.L. (1991). The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety: Interviews with highly anxious students. In E.K. Horwitz & D.J. Young (Eds.), Language Anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 101–108). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Sarason, I.G. (1978). The Test Anxiety Scale: Concept and research. In C.D. Spielberger & I.G. Sarason (Eds.), Stress and anxiety: Vol. 5 (pp. 193-216). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Steinberg, F.S., & Horwitz, E.K. (1986). The effect of induced anxiety on the denotative and interpretive content of second language speech. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 131–136. Toyoda, H. (1998). Introduction to structural equation modeling. Tokyo: Asakura Publication. Wang, N. (2005). Beliefs about language learning and foreign language anxiety: A study of university students learning English as a foreign language in Mainland China. Paper presented at the Connections 2005 Conference, University of Victoria, Canada. Watson, D., & Friend, R. (1969). Measurement of social evaluative anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 33, 448–457. Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D., & Summers, G. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. In D.R. Heise (Ed.), Sociological Methodology (pp. 84–136). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 54–66. Young, D.J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language anxiety research suggest? Modern Language Journal, 75, 426–439. Young, D.J. (1992). Language anxiety from the foreign language specialist's perspective: Interviews with Krashen, Omaggio Hadley, Terrell, and Rardin. Foreign Language Annals, 25, 157–172.

132

Y. Zhou

Appendix A: Measures of latent variables Language Anxiety Fear of negat ive evaluation from peers and teacher X1 I don’t worry about making mistakes in my English class. X2 I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I speak English in my English class. X3 It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my English class. X4 I am afraid that my English teacher will laugh at me when I speak English in my English class. Communication apprehension X5 I feel very self-conscious about speaking English in front of other students. X6 I get nervous when I know that I’m going to be called on in my English class. X7 I start to panic when I have to speak without preparation in my English class. X8 I can feel my heart-pounding when I’m going to be called on in my English class. Self-Esteem in Language Learning Language self-esteem X9 I have confidence in using English in my English class. X10 I am confident to communicate with others in English outside of the class X11 I have the language lea rning ability. Learning self-esteem X12 I am good at learning. X13 I can always get good academic results. X14 I am an intelligent person. Self-Perception of Speaking Proficiency Self-perceived competence, compared with classmates X15 For my current level of study in English compared with my classmates, I think my English pronunciation is: X16 For my current level of study in English compared with my classmates, I think my English fluency is: X17 For my current level of study in English compared with my classmates, I think my grammatical accuracy in spoken English is: X18 For my current level of study in English compared with my classmates, I think my overall speaking ability in English is: Self-perceived competence, compared with native speakers X19 If I were to go to an English-speaking country (such as USA), I think my English pronunciation would be perceived by the native speakers (American) as: X20 If I were to go to an English-speaking country ( such as USA), I think my English fluency would be perceived by the native speakers (American) as: X21 If I were to go to an English-speaking country ( such as USA), I think the grammatical accuracy of my English would be perceived by the native speakers (American) as: X22 If I were to go to an English-speaking country ( such as USA), I think my overall speaking ability would be perceived by the native speakers (American) as Learners' Belief about Language Learning Foreign language aptitude X23 Someone is born with a special ability for learning foreign languages. X24 A special aptitude is necessary for learning a foreign language. X25 A special aptitude is necessary to speak good English. The difficulty of language learning X26 English sounds are difficult to make. X27 There are too many English words to remember. X28 English grammatical rules are very complex and confusing. X29 English is difficult to learn than other subjects. X30 If someone spend one hour a day learning a language, how long would it take them to speak the language very well? Nature of language learning X31 You shouldn’t say anything in English until you can say it correctly. X32 It is important to speak English with a native-like pronunciation. X33 It is important to speak English with an excellent pronunciation.

1.000

0.345

0.456

0.427

0.153

0.311

0.301

X17 -0.361 -0.379 -0.323 -0.336 -0.380 -0.362 -0.346 -0.332

X18 -0.397 -0.332 -0.354 -0.236 -0.383 -0.339 -0.329 -0.197

X19 -0.237 -0.213 -0.207 -0.214 -0.245 -0.235 -0.270 -0.187

X20 -0.174 -0.146 -0.085 -0.079 -0.037 -0.174 -0.169 -0.140

X21 -0.160 -0.108 -0.030 -0.047 -0.033 -0.066 -0.048 -0.108

0.013 -0.040 -0.090 -0.034 -0.056

0.095

X22 -0.157 -0.018

X23

0.121

0.193

X24 -0.014

0.127

0.157

0.118

0.245

X25

X26

X27

X28

0.350

0.143

0.029

0.237

X33 -0.086

X31

X32 -0.052

0.136

0.117

0.065

0.052

X29

X30

0.239

0.257

0.383

0.175

0.105

0.178

0.091

0.261

0.104

0.063

0.272

0.175

0.205

0.231

0.092

0.332

0.088

0.221

0.374

0.244

0.292

0.152

0.042

0.169

0.098 -0.035

0.312

0.088

0.183

0.206

0.303

0.475

0.169

0.120

0.034

0.030 -0.030 -0.027

0.113

0.297

0.067

0.215

0.182

0.343

0.349

0.261

0.073

0.153

0.052

0.180

0.304

0.102

0.290

0.329

0.205

0.184

0.232

0.055

0.172

0.314

0.299

0.172

0.423

0.564

0.451

0.541

0.371

0.568

0.487

0.656

0.360

1.000

X10

0.043

0.182

0.016

0.138

0.159

0.138

0.105

0.414

0.432

0.247

0.563

0.367

0.576

1.000

X13

0.164

0.213

0.107

0.343

0.460

0.284

0.700

0.445

1.000

X14

0.087

0.124 0.147

0.186 0.075

0.074

0.076 -0.003 -0.003

0.198

0.315

0.261

0.512

0.509

0.371

0.588

0.341

0.549

0.471

1.000

X12

0.006 -0.218 -0.275 -0.090

0.074

0.095

0.114

0.075

0.095

0.118

0.314

0.202

0.113

0.282

0.551

0.311

0.220

0.342

1.000

X11

0.244

0.246

0.237

0.431

0.485

0.413

1.000

X16

0.152

0.287

0.180

0.397

0.500

1.000

X17

0.263

0.325

0.318

0.413

1.000

X18

0.080 -0.032

0.055 -0.040 -0.118

0.109

0.015 -0.049

0.026

0.093

0.082

0.082

0.147

1.000

X22

0.007 -0.167 -0.025

0.008

0.116

0.067

0.154

0.024 0.157

0.075 0.158

0.082 0.102

0.115 0.010

0.052

0.038

0.073 -0.103 -0.013

0.075

0.052

0.130

0.020

0.151

0.155

0.251 -0.024 -0.062 -0.105 -0.111 -0.076 -0.123 -0.089 -0.070 -0.114 -0.203 -0.143

0.044

X25

0.643 1.000

1.000

X24

0.072 -0.004 0.123

0.423

0.339

1.000

X23

0.016

0.058

0.025

0.133 0.110

0.056

0.038 -0.057

0.102 0.186

0.108

0.120

0.148

0.025

0.185

0.016

0.140

0.311

0.175

0.242

0.153

0.360

1.000

X26

X28

X29

X30

X31

0.274 0.107 0.217 0.171 1.000

0.117 0.050 0.105 1.000

0.381 0.279 1.000

0.178 1.000

1.000

X27

X32

X33

0.218 0.099 -0.041 -0.225 0.122 0.101 0.003 0.018 0.294 1.000

0.296 0.314 -0.016 -0.069 0.009 0.090 0.159 0.008 1.000

0.114 0.173

0.120 0.229

0.081 0.111

0.044 0.163

0.015 -0.078 -0.012 -0.033 -0.006 0.158

0.017 -0.075 -0.092 -0.125 -0.043 -0.032

0.087 -0.060 -0.124 -0.087 -0.094 -0.219 -0.127

0.007 -0.112 -0.434 -0.058 -0.052 -0.091 -0.262

0.097 -0.106 -0.011

0.054

0.300

1.000

X21

0.041 -0.097 -0.219 -0.058 -0.151 -0.123 -0.117 -0.127 -0.181 -0.096 -0.153 -0.097 -0.105 -0.074 -0.085

0.191

0.328

0.031

0.254

0.515

1.000

X20

0.105 -0.056 -0.009

0.176

0.317

0.208

0.239

1.000

X19

0.040 -0.087 -0.254 -0.198 -0.210 -0.042 -0.037

0.096

0.084

0.043 -0.030 -0.084 -0.116

0.176

0.229

0.199

0.233

0.289

0.207

0.532

1.000

X15

0.212 -0.227 -0.207 -0.220 -0.188 -0.184 -0.122 -0.175 -0.058 -0.238 -0.149 -0.326

0.319 -0.309 -0.165

0.218

0.126

0.223 -0.013 -0.035

0.007

0.423

X16 -0.232 -0.252 -0.277 -0.182 -0.123 -0.260 -0.290 -0.164

0.020 -0.076 -0.062 -0.170 -0.201

0.215

0.000

0.003 -0.153 -0.272 -0.076

1.000

X15 -0.173 -0.090 -0.076 -0.063

0.509

0.346

0.650

X14 -0.240 -0.202 -0.267 -0.095 -0.126 -0.234 -0.262 -0.085

0.374

1.000

0.562

0.596

0.375

0.353

X13 -0.225 -0.165 -0.079 -0.103 -0.217 -0.139 -0.146 -0.018

0.406

0.461

1.000

0.302

0.584

X9

0.358

0.496

0.466

0.418

X9

X12 -0.182 -0.252 -0.235 -0.234 -0.209 -0.204 -0.209 -0.099

0.396

X8

0.430

0.426

1.000

X8

0.177

0.466

X7

0.471

0.395

0.430

X7

0.004

0.453

X6

0.508

1.000

X6

X11 -0.156

0.354

X5

0.620

0.431

X5

1.000

0.351

X4

1.000

X4

0.602

0.292

X3

X3

X10 -0.294 -0.209 -0.239 -0.228 -0.243 -0.226 -0.312 -0.148

0.313

X2

X2

-0.247 -0.234 -0.083 -0.197 -0.155 -0.140 -0.112 -0.037

1.000

X1

X1

Appendix B: Correlation among all the items

FACILITATING STUDENTS’ UNDERSTANDING OF ENGLISH NEWS: PEER SCAFFOLDING IN AN EFL LISTENING CLASSROOM

Danli Li

1 Introduction The central issue of sociocultural theory, Vygotsky’s concept of scaffolding has been used in conjunction with the notion of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) to serve as the theoretical basis for the study of peer collaboration in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) listening classroom in China. The study altered the typical novice-expert scaffolding by bringing together eight novice learners in an English News comprehension task. In particular, the study observes the framework of peer scaffolding and its contribution to the process of language learning when learners are working in their respective ZPDs. A microgenetic approach — one in which moment-to-moment changes in the participants’ behaviours are noted and examined — was used in order to analyze the interactions generated by eight intermediate EFL college students as they worked collaboratively in comprehending five pieces of English News. The chapter explains briefly the theoretical background and reports on the aims and methodology of the study. Then it presents the microgenetic analysis of the classroom discourse from the data. Finally, it suggests some pedagogical conclusions. 2 Background A sociocultural theory of mind, based on the work of the Soviet developmental psychologist L. S. Vygotsky (1978) in the 1930s, offers a view that social interaction provides a genuine means in the learning process. It focuses on the social processes that contribute to cognitive development. Vygotsky (1978) argues that learning and cognitive development are interrelated in how cognition develops as a result of social interaction in which the child (or learner)

136

D. Li

learns how to complete a task by sharing responsibility for that task with an expert or a more competent peer. In particular, the development of higher forms of thinking and the acquisition of certain complex skills are thought to be initiated and shaped by social interaction. Learning is a dynamic social process in which the dialogue between expert and learner fosters the development of higher cognitive processes. In this way, social interaction mediates learning. In other words, learning occurs in highly contextualized activities that often take place during collaboration (Swain, 1995). Ellis (2000) points out that one of the central claims of sociocultural theory is that participants always co-construct the activity they engage in, in accordance with their own socio-history and locally determined goals. Since Vygotsky’s sociocultural theories of child development have become increasingly influential, they have been taken up and promoted by psychologists and child development theories such as those of Jerome Bruner (1985), James Wertsch (1985) and Barbara Rogoff (1990), and applied in language classroom studies by many educational researchers (Donato, 1994; Edwards & Mercer, 1987; Mercer, 1995). Sociocultural theory emphasizes the dialogic processes (such as scaffolding) that arise in task performance and how these shape language use and learning. Scaffolding and the zone of proximal development (ZPD) are two essential concepts of sociocultural theory. 2.1 The metaphor of scaffolding The term scaffolding is a metaphor used to describe the temporary but essential nature of supportive interaction from which novices (e.g. apprentice learners) assisted by experts (e.g. teachers, parents or other mentors) or other peers to develop new skills, concepts or higher levels of understanding (Maybin, Mercer & Stierer, 1992). Scaffolding is also defined as “… the dialogic process by which one speaker assists another in performing a function that he or she cannot perform alone” (Ellis, 2003, pp. 180–181). It is future-oriented (Vygostsky, 1978). The support enables learners to perform tasks independently that they could perform only with the assistance of the teacher or other capable peers previously. In other words, learners first succeed in performing a new function with the assistance of another person and then internalize this function so that they can perform it unassisted. Scaffolding involves attending to both the cognitive demands of a task and the affective states of the person attempting the task. According to Wood et al. (1976), a teacher or another learner may offer scaffolded help by actively participating in the following functions:

Facilitating Students’ Understanding of English News: Peer Scaffolding

137

(1) (2) (3) (4)

recruiting interest in the task; simplifying the task; maintaining pursuit of the goal; marking critical features and discrepancies between what has been produced and the ideal solution; (5) controlling frustration during problem solving; (6) demonstrating an idealized version of the act to be performed. 2.2 Zone of proximal development (ZPD) Such scaffolding is said to be helpful only when it is appropriate to the learner’s current and potential level of development — the learner’s zone of proximal development (ZPD). In Vygotskian terms, the ZPD (Vygostsky, 1978) refers to the distance or the cognitive gap between what learners can do unaided and what they can do in collaboration with a more competent other. It is also defined as “the layer of skill or knowledge that is just beyond that with which the learner is currently capable of coping” (Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 40). As Donato (1994) puts it, “scaffolding performance is a dialogically constituted interpsychological mechanism that promotes the novice’s internalization of knowledge co-constructed in shared activity” (p. 41). Besides, he also points out that the concept of scaffolding in language learning is founded on the idea that “a knowledgeable participant can create, by means of speech, supportive conditions in which the novice can participate in, and extend current skills and knowledge to higher levels of competence” (p. 40). These supportive conditions do not necessarily have to be created by a native speaker, or even by a teacher. Scaffolding can be jointly accomplished by students as well. Several scholars have called for a broader understanding of the scope of the ZPD to include more than just expert-novice interaction (Engeström & Middleton, 1996; Kuutti, 1996; Swain & Lapkin, 1998; Wells, 1996). 2.3 Scaffolding from a second language perspective Researchers have begun to look at mechanisms of scaffolded help in the ZPD within second language scenarios by attempting to establish connections between classroom interaction and second language development. Ohta (1995) defined the ZPD concept in second language acquisition as the difference between the learner’s developmental level as determined by independent language use, and the higher level of potential development as determined by

138

D. Li

how language is used in collaboration with a more capable interlocutor. Scaffolding in language learning would thus consist of those supportive behaviors, adopted by the more expert partner in collaboration with the learner, which may facilitate the learner’s progress to a higher level of language development. Whereas studies on scaffolding have traditionally examined expert-novice situations (Lantolf & Appel, 1994; Maybin, Mercer & Stierer, 1992; Van Lier, 1996), Donato (1994) explored the notion of mutual scaffolding among language learners by observing to what extent three novice students of French, working collaboratively on a task, could positively influence each other’s development in the foreign language. Consequently, other researchers (Anton & DiCamilla, 1998; Bailey, 2001; Dobinson, 2001; Donato, 2000; Ellis, 2003; Gibbons, 2002, 2003; Guerrero & Villamil, 2000; Ko, Schallert & Walters, 2003; Lantolf, 2000; McCormick & Donato, 2000; Ohta, 1995; Samuda, 2001) also studied peer scaffolding in the ZPD. 3 The study In those second language scaffolding studies researched by Donato (1994), Lantolf (1994), Ohta (1995), Anton & DiCamilla (1998), Guerrero & Villamil (2000), they use a microgenetic approach, i.e. “one in which moment-tomoment changes in the participants’ behaviour were noted and examined” (Guerrero & Villamil, 2000, p. 54), to interpret the interactive data on second language instruction that allows the observation of language development at the very moment it is thought to occur. For Vygotsky (1978), a thorough, minute analysis of psychological processes is essential in the study of development. This study adopted a microgenetic approach in order to analyze the interaction produced by eight intermediate college students as they worked collaboratively in comprehending five pieces of English news. In short, the study attempted to address two main aims and had three related research questions: 3.1 Aims The aim of the study was to investigate: (1) The features of peer scaffolding; (2) What scaffolding contributes to learning. The research questions were:

the

process of

language

Facilitating Students’ Understanding of English News: Peer Scaffolding

139

(1) What takes place during peer scaffolding in natural classroom learning? (2) How does peer scaffolding affect language learning in the negotiation of meaning? (3) How does peer scaffolding affect linguistic choice in the process of comprehension? 3.2 Methodology 3.2.1 Context The article reports on some classroom research I conducted on my students’ learning and the interaction among them. The data were collected from students’ discourse of a semester-long listening skills EFL class in a university setting. One of the objectives of the course is to get students to understand daily English news from English Language broadcasting, such as British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) or Voice of America (VOA). Students are first-year undergraduates in a university in China. They have learned English for seven to eight years in China before college so that they are at an intermediate stage of language proficiency development. Eight subjects, forming two groups, were chosen randomly in classroom group work at one lesson. 3.2.2 Class material The material for the lesson was a series of Morning News of Standard English on 5 February, 2002, downloaded from the website of BBC with recording and the text version. The text version was only available to the teacher. The task required students to tell the main idea of the news to a group after they listened to the recordings twice. Two groups listened to five piece of news twice at the same time. They could take notes while listening. Students’ interaction was in English as directed by the teacher. The analysis of the students’ interaction, in five episodes, follows in the next section. Some have undergone deletion of non-essential parts. 3.3 Microgenetic analysis of the data The transcripts of students’ discourse fall into two broad categories: (1) Negotiating the meaning of the gist of the news; (2) Negotiating the choice of linguistic terms. The following notation system was used in the transcripts:

D. Li

140

italics … boldface underline S

words were negotiated for meaning sequence of dots indicates a pause boldface is employed to cite a letter, word, or phrase as a linguistic example words underlined were inappropriate linguistic choice1 Student

3.3.1 Scaffolding to negotiate meaning In Episodes 1, 2 and 3, students support each other to focus on the meaning of the message. We notice some signs of scaffolding behaviour in which students negotiate meaning of the gist of the news either by discussing the meaning of lexical items or the names of places mentioned in the news. Episode 1 1

S4:

2 3 4

S3: S1: S4:

But there are two cities in Canada I heard. They are Ottawa and Montree. I heard from the news. No. No Montree! Should be … Montreal. I’m sure it’s Montreal. So … the forum is in Ottawa and Montreal in Canada. Ah, yes, yes. Montreal, Montreal in Canada.

In this episode, students negotiate the places mentioned in the news, particularly the name of the city Montreal. When S4 arouses others’ attention to the places, he presents the information from his receiving process of the intake. In Turn 4, he makes self-regulation2 to the name of the Canadian city when S3 corrects the name acting in the tutor’s role in scaffolding. Meanwhile, S1 also gets scaffolded help from S3. In Turn 3, he confirms the place from his and S3’s comprehension. Meanwhile, he plays an active role in scaffolding S4 in understanding the word “Montreal”. Episode 2 5

S7:

6 7

S6: S5:

So … it is organizers who said they will make the committee to deliver best games in Olympic. Not committee. How can they? … I heard commitment. Commitment? … means what?

1 Linguistic choice refers to the choice of linguistic units, such as phonemes, words, phrases, or sentences. 2 Self-regulation is a term used in sociocultural theory to refer to the activity of an individual to regulate his or her own mental activity. It constitutes the final stage in the development of higher-order skills.

Facilitating Students’ Understanding of English News: Peer Scaffolding

8

S8:

9

S6:

10 S7: 11 S5:

141

Commitment? You hear commitment? … yes, should be affirming the commitment to … Commitment means, … uh, a task, responsibility that … er … we should fulfill it. OK, it is said by the news that the organizers will fulfill the commitment to deliver best games in Olympic. OK, right. I got it.

Episode 2 shows the negotiation of meaning of “commitment” in the comprehension process of the news. When S6 makes other-regulation3 to S7’s comprehension, S5 raises the query of the meaning of “commitment”. Then, in Turns 8, 9 and 10, S6, S7 and S8 scaffold each other in the discussion of the meaning. In Turn 10, S7 makes self-regulation of the understanding of news when he receives scaffolding from S6 and S8. As a result, S5 comprehends the meaning of the word scaffolded by the discussion of S6, S7 and S8. Episode 3 12 S7: 13 S6: 14 S8: 15 S7:

The news is on Monday. I guess … they speak at the international Olympic Committee. At what? Where? Well … I heard it’s a city! Salt Lake City. To … to deliver best games in 2008. Yeah, Salt Lake City.

In Episode 3, S6 is acting in the tutor’s role and pushes the progress of information exchange and negotiation of meaning. He gives a corrective feedback to S7’s comprehension. In Turn 14, S8 supports S6 to affirm that the place should be Salt Lake City. Consequently, S7 is scaffolded to get the right message decoded from the intake. 3.3.2 Scaffolding to negotiate linguistic term Episodes 4 and 5 show the students’ interaction on linguistic choice. Scaffolding takes its role in the discussion of a linguistic term and promotes the acquisition of the target language. Episode 4 16 S2: 17 S3:

About what? …you don’t know? I don’t get it. About unite … oh, yes. The unite of China.

3 Other-regulation is a term used in sociocultural theory to refer to activity that is governed by another person. It constitutes an intermediate stage in the development of higher-order mental activity.

D. Li

142

18 19 20 21 22

S1: S4: S3: S1: S2:

Is unite used as a noun? To be united… Unification. I remember. Yeah, use the noun. Should be reunification. Ah, unification. Thanks. Ok, about unite. Oh, no, unification.

This episode shows that although students get the meaning of “unification”, they still negotiate the form. In Turn 18, S1 scaffolds S2 and S3 by questioning the part of speech of the word “unite”. In Turn 19, S4 recalls the appropriate noun form from his current interlanguage resource within his ZPD. S3 also confirms the form scaffolded by S4. Then S1 is scaffolded to acquire the form. In Turn 22, S2 makes a self-regulation in his utterance, which proves the acquisition of the linguistic term. In a word, S1, S2, S3 and S4 make a linguistic choice in mutual scaffolding. Episode 5 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

S5: S6: S7: S6: S8: S5: S6: S7:

The spokesman said that … anti-terror campaigns … What campaign? … the spokesman said what? Anti-terror campaigns? … seems not right … should be … Terror … terrorism. Yes, I remember it now … anti-terrorism. Oh, right. Terrori … Terrorism. T-e-double r-o-r-i-s-m. So we got it. The spokesman talked about anti-terrorism campaigns …

In Episode 5, students reach agreement on the linguistic choice of “terrorism” through scaffolding. In Turns 24, 25 and 26, S6 and S7 make regulation to S5’s comprehension and S6 recalls the right form within S6’s ZPD. In Turns 27, 28 and 29, S6, S7 and S8 scaffold S5 to learn the spelling of “terrorism”. 4 Conclusion In conclusion, the study has observed the dynamics of scaffolding as it occurs in second language listening comprehension tasks. The major contributions of this study are, firstly, that students play a critical role in classroom interaction in understanding the meaning of messages. Peer scaffolding generally creates opportunities for students to participate in meaning-focused communication tasks. Learning takes place in their interaction which can be demonstrated in microgenetic analysis.

Facilitating Students’ Understanding of English News: Peer Scaffolding

143

Secondly, peer scaffolding may be mutual. The study has contributed to an understanding of the complex mechanisms that occur during mediated learner-learner interaction by scaffolded help potentially activated within learners’ ZPDs. It has brought to light behaviours that may facilitate growth within the ZPD. One significant finding is that there is a peer performing as a tutor even in a peer-peer scaffolding. Self-regulation and other-regulation are the two major phenomena in their interactional dialogues. Third, such scaffolding can facilitate the development of second language acquisition in the negotiation of meaning and linguistic forms of the target language. Learners work collaboratively and complement each other’s current interlanguage resources by initiating questions about linguistic choice and integrating form with meaning through feedback and regulation. Learners still pay incidental attention to the form when they are negotiating the meaning. References Anton, M., & DiCamilla, F. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 314–342. Bailey, K. (2001). What my EFL students taught me. The PAC Journal, 1(1), 7–31. Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 21–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dobinson, T. (2001). Do learners learn from classroom interaction and does the teacher have a role to play? Language Teaching Research, 5(3), 189–211. Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language learning research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Donato, R. (2000). Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second language classroom. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 27–50). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 193–220. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. (Eds.). (1996). Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247–273. Guerrero, M.C.M. de, & Villamil, O.S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51–68. Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and humancomputer interaction (pp. 17–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

144

D. Li

Ko, J., Schallert, D., & Walters, K. (2003). Rethinking scaffolding: Examining negotiation of meaning in an ESL storytelling task. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 303–324. Lantolf, J., & Appel, G. (Eds.). (1994). Vygotskian approaches to second language learning research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Lantolf, J.P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Maybin, J., Mercer, N., & Stierer, B. (1992). Scaffolding learning in the classroom. In K. Norman (Ed.), Thinking voices: The work of the National Oracy Project (pp. 186–195). London: Hodder & Stoughton. McCormick, D., & Donato, R. (2000). Teacher questions as scaffolded assistance in an ESL classroom. In J.K. Hall & L.S. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 183–201). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Ohta, A.S. (1995). Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of learner discourse: Learnerlearner collaborative interaction in the Zone of Proximal Development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 93–121. Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationship between form and meaning during task performance: The role of teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks (pp. 119–140). London: Longman. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions and output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–338. Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London: Longman. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Wells, G. (1996). Using the tool-kit of discourse in the activity of learning and teaching. Mind, Culture and Activity, an International Journal, 3, 74–101. Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Williams, M., & Burden, R.L. (1997). Psychology for teachers: A social constructivist approach. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.

8 VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES AMONG ADULT FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNERS

Shameem Rafik-Galea and Bee Eng Wong

1 Introduction Little importance has been given to the study of vocabulary learning strategies (VLS) in language learning despite the fact that vocabulary (lexicon) is central to language and crucially important in learning a foreign language. This is unfortunate, as lexical acquisition is clearly central for second/foreign language acquisition. Vocabulary is basic to communication, and often seen as the greatest source of problems by second and foreign language learners. The centrality and importance of the lexicon to both acquisition and use of a language is clearly described and explained in the following quote by Hatch (1983): […] it is the lexical level that adult second language learners claim is most important. When our first goal is communication, when we have little of the new language at our command, it is the lexicon that is crucial […]. The words […] will make basic communication possible. (p. 74)

Lexical acquisition is also of critical importance in the education domain. In fact, many researchers (e.g. Laufer, 2002; Lewis, 2001; Tschirner, 2004; Zimmerman, 2000) claim that the lexicon is central to language acquisition and learning. Others (Anderson & Freebody, 1981; Misulis, 1999) have demonstrated that lexical development and reading comprehension are strongly related. In other words, vocabulary knowledge becomes the key predictor of a learner’s ability to comprehend text. Much research on vocabulary acquisition has been with first language (L1) learners in the classroom. Zimmerman (2000) claims that the vocabulary learning is undervalued in second language (L2) acquisition. In view of the central role that the mental lexicon plays in the acquisition of language, both L1 and L2, there is therefore a need for second language teachers and instructors to view vocabulary development as

146

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

an important aspect of language acquisition and to investigate the phenomenon in order to come up with strategies that would aid the process. Such strategies are basically learning strategies for the acquisition of vocabulary. This chapter presents findings based on a larger study which sought to explore and investigate how adult learners acquire and learn vocabulary in the context of foreign language learning based on second language learning theories. The approach adopted for the study was based on the theory of second language acquisition (SLA) where SLA is best understood as a complex cognitive skill (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). Basically research on vocabulary learning strategies is inspired by two closely interwoven disciplines, SLA and cognitive psychology. O’Malley and Chamot (1990, p. 217) argue that learning is an active and dynamic process in which individuals make use of a variety of information and strategic modes of processing. To them, language is a complex cognitive skill that has properties which are common to other complex skills in terms of how information is stored and learned. Accordingly, SLA is best considered a mental operation, a complex cognitive skill. One cognitive psychological model that has been applied to SLA is Anderson’s model (1985) of mental operation in learning a skill. It was O’Malley and Chamot (1990) who applied it to SLA. Anderson’s model proposes that two kinds of knowledge are involved in language acquisition: declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge. The former is knowledge of “that” and the latter is knowledge of “how”. The two types of knowledge are used in a sequence of three stages — cognitive, associative and autonomous. Declarative knowledge is gained at the cognitive stage. The associative stage is the transitional stage, while the autonomous stage is where the declarative knowledge becomes procedural knowledge. In this view, learning a language thus entails a stage-wise progression from initial awareness and active manipulation of information and learning processes to full automaticity in language use. We believe that learning strategies parallel theoretically derived cognitive processes and an understanding of it will provide the potential for influencing learning outcomes in a positive manner. It is believed that adults studying a second or foreign language would undergo such similar processes to acquire vocabulary. 2 Vocabulary learning strategies Research in the area of language learning strategies appeared in the mid 1960s but began in earnest only in the 1970s when interest emerged in how learners learn and how this might affect their acquisition of language. Researchers

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

147

such as Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) conducted studies merely to describe what a good language learner does. Such studies yielded descriptions and classifications of strategies learners used in learning a second language. Rubin (1981) in a later study along with Naiman, Frohlich, Stern and Todesco (1978) proposed classification schemes for language learning strategies. However, the schemes were not systematic. Cohen (2001) and Dornyei (2001) point out that aptitude alone is not a good measure of language learning success and that efforts by individual learners are largely responsible for their success in language learning. A number of research studies have been carried out in the area of learning strategies in the L2 context but VLS remain largely unexplored, particularly in the context of foreign language learning. Research on VLS includes the work of Cohen and Aphek (1980, 1981), Ahmed (1989), Lawson and Hogben (1996), Gu and Johnson (1996), Meara (1997), Schmitt (1997), Kudo (1999), and Gu, (1994, 2003). However, there appears to be a lack of research into VLS in learning a foreign language, particularly outside the non-native speaking context. VLS are a sub-class of learning strategies (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990; Wenden & Rubin, 1987). The importance and popularity of VLS in the group of language learning strategies in terms of actual use is reflected by the fact that the vast majority of language learning strategies listed in taxonomies, such as Oxford’s (1990), are either VLS (all strategies in the memory category) or can be used for vocabulary learning tasks. In spite of this, research into language learning strategies has tended to neglect VLS, preferring to focus on language learning as a whole or on the strategies used in other skills such as reading. Most research on VLS has focused on various methods of vocabulary presentation, and their effects on retention, i.e. the most studied VLS are memory strategies (Gu & Johnson, 1996). The majority of learners seem to favour some form of mechanical strategy such as repetition over deeper, more complex ones (Lawson & Hogben, 1996; Schmitt & McCarthy, 1997). At the same time, individual learner differences are a crucial aspect in VLS; in particular, good learners vary enormously in their choice of strategies and tend to use different strategies as well as a combination of such strategies (Schmitt, 2000). Which strategies are used largely depends on the learner type and individual differences in learning style (Heimbach, 1993). In the process of learning a foreign language, individual learners have to acquire vocabulary in order to be able to communicate and studies have shown that most learners do use strategies for learning vocabulary (Schmitt, 1997, p. 100).

148

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

Studies have also shown that learners vary considerably not only in the way they use VLS, but also with regard to the type of strategies used (Cohen, 1998; Ehrmann & Oxford, 1989; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Schmitt, 1997). Some of the factors that may affect learners’ choice of VLS and are well documented in the literature include the factors like the language being learned, gender, ethnicity, age, language teaching methods or approaches as well as those of task requirements, attitudes (motivational level) and metacognitive awareness (Chamot & Kupper, 1989; Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Parry & Stanfield, 1990; Politzer, 1983; Politzer & McGroaty, 1985; Wenden, 1986). Identification of factors that influence choices in the strategy used can provide insights into task development and selection of appropriate approaches for teaching and learning. As is obvious in this brief review, there seems to be no definite agreement among the various researchers on what constitutes learning strategies. In this study, the definition of learning strategies is adapted from Oxford (1990). She states that these strategies are “specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations” (p. 8). Oxford’s taxonomy comprises direct and indirect strategies. The direct strategies are memory, cognitive and compensation strategies. These strategies are directly applied to and used in the language learning process. Memory strategies are those that help learners store and retrieve information. Cognitive strategies in turn enable learners to understand and produce the target language using different means while compensation strategies allow learners to use the language in spite of gaps in the knowledge (p. 37). Indirect strategies are metacognitive, affective and social in nature. These are indirectly involved in language learning. Metacognitive strategies are said to allow learners to control their own cognition, which includes the processes of centering, arranging, planning and evaluating. In addition, Schmitt’s (1997), Kudo’s (1999) and Gu’s (2005) descriptions of metacognitive strategies were used to identify and categorize metacognitive strategies in this study. Schmitt (1997, p. 207) defines metacognitive strategies as consolidation strategies for controlling and evaluating one’s own learning including self-assessment, searching for practice opportunities and planning for learning tasks. Kudo (1999) describes metacognitive strategies as selfinitiation strategies and Gu (2005, p. 220) defines metacognitive strategies as self-initiation and selective attention strategies. Affective strategies help learners to regulate their emotions, motivations and attitudes, whereas social strategies help them learn through interaction with others (p. 135).

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

149

3 Study 3.1 Purpose of the study The purpose of the study was to explore the VLS used by young adults learning a foreign language in a non-native speaking environment. In addition, the study sought to identify the different types of strategies used by the different ethnic groups. 3.2 Methodology The study utilized mainly a quantitative approach in gathering and analyzing data. This approach uses basically a questionnaire survey. The main instrument used for this study is a 53 item bilingual (English/Malay) six-point Likert scale questionnaire (Appendix A) adapted from Schmitt (1997) and Kudo (1999) as these questionnaires have been tested and used with Asian students within an Asian context. The data were categorized, analyzed and interpreted by adapting and triangulating Oxford’s (1990) and Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomies of strategies, and Kudo’s (1999), Gu’s (1994, 2005) and Gu & Hu’s (2003, cited in Gu, 2005) strategy analysis methods. The data were statistically analyzed using frequency counts, percentages and mean. 3.3 Subjects Data were collected from 235 Malaysian students studying for a Bachelor of Arts or Science degree at a Malaysian university. They were studying various foreign languages as an additional requirement or as an elective. The subjects consisted of 175 females and 60 males belonging to various ethnic groups — more specifically, 75 Malays, 143 Chinese, 10 Indians and 7 Others (Kadazan-Dusun, 3, and Iban, 4) participated in the study. The subjects ranged in age from 18 to 29 with the majority being between 21 and 23 years of age. They were in the process of learning a number of foreign languages like Japanese (53), Korean (20), Arabic (34), Spanish (44), French (28), German (21), Russian (8) and Thai (21). This study excluded students studying for a Bachelor’s degree in a foreign language. The subjects were drawn from other university departments. Furthermore, the subjects were randomly selected and consisted of those who were at levels two and three of foreign language instruction. There are three such instructional levels offered by the Department of Foreign Languages of the university. Level one comprises zero or low proficiency learners,

150

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

level two low intermediate and level three high intermediate. All the subjects are proficient in Bahasa Melayu (BM), which is the national and official language of Malaysia and the medium of instruction in schools and universities. In addition, all the subjects are knowledgeable in English as English is either taught as a second or foreign language for them or taught as a subject in all schools and universities. In fact, most Chinese, Indians and Others speak more than two languages such as Mandarin, Cantonese and other Chinese dialects, Tamil, Kadazan, Dusun and/or Iban. 4 Results and discussion The objective of the analysis of the questionnaire is to establish the respondents’ general tendency in or preference for the use of learning strategies by classifying their beliefs into five basic categories. Each of the categories is further broken down into an overall listing of preferred strategies used by the respondents as a whole and by the ethnic groups involved. The results were interpreted using a six-point Likert Scale for all the strategies used as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Interpretation and conversion scale Scale 1 2 3 4 5 6

Statement of Use Never Seldom Occasionally Often Usually Always

A mean value of under 3.5 showed a leaning towards never (extreme) whereas a mean value of 3.5 and above indicated a leaning towards always (extreme). Hence, any mean value between the digits in Table 1 indicated the tendency of the responses towards the given scale. However, in order to discuss the results in a less complex manner, the authors added the percentages for often, usually and always as cumulative scores to suggest a leaning or tendency towards the use of a specific strategy. Each individual item on the scale of never, seldom, occasionally, often, usually, always is discussed according to its importance in the analysis of the results. The results for the whole group of respondents were analyzed in terms of five strategy categories, namely cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, memory and social strategies, where each category consisted of a number of

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

151

learning strategies statements. Resulting categories are found in Tables 2 to 6. The different types of strategy statements used by the respondents within each category are also included. Each table also shows the results for each strategy statement in terms of percentages on a Likert scale of never, seldom, occasionally, often, usually and always, including the overall mean for each strategy. The results for the whole group were further sub-divided and analyzed as in the above five vocabulary learning strategy (VLS) categories by ethnic groups, and these are presented in Tables 7 to 11. 4.1 Overall analysis of strategy use 4.1.1 Cognitive strategies The cognitive strategy category consists of eleven statements as shown in Table 2 below. The table shows the percentages and means scores of each type of cognitive strategy used by the respondents. From the table it appears that the students tend to strongly use strategy 26 “Take notes in class”. This strategy has the highest mean value of 4.8979 with a variation extending from 0.4% (never) to 41.7% (always) and its correspondent cumulative score of 87.3% for often, usually and always. In this case, the variation range of 41.3% turns out to be the largest in this category. It is followed by strategy 25 “Use a vocabulary section in your textbook” that has a mean value of 4.2043 with a variation extending from 1.7% (never) to 23.6% (always). The correspondent cumulative score is 66.8% for often, usually and always. Strategy 33, “Keep a vocabulary notebook”, has the third highest mean value of 3.9872 with a variation extending from 3.4% (never) to 24.4% (often) and its correspondent cumulative score of 62.0% for often, usually and always. In conclusion, it appears that the cognitive strategies 26, 25 and 33 are most preferred by the respondents and are strategies that do not require much effort on the part of the respondents. In contrast, the respondents appear to marginally favour strategy 40 “Do verbal repetition” but are equally split over the use of strategy 18 “Do written repetition of the word”. Statement 40 has a mean value of 3.5793 with a variation from 2.2% (never) to 22.3% (often and usually) and a corresponding cumulative score of 53.6% for often, usually and always. Statement 18 in turn has a mean value of 3.5983 with a variation from 4.7% (never) and 26.5% (occasionally) and a correspondent cumulative score of 50.4% for often, usually and always. Hence, statements 40 and 18 can both be considered as neutral in terms of a preferred choice by the respondents in their use of cognitive strategies.

152

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong Table 2. The percentage, frequency and mean value of each cognitive vocabulary learning strategy selected by category Cognitive Strategies (Statement No.)

Never

Seldom

Occasionally

Often

Usually

Always

%

%

%

%

%

%

2

17.4

37.0

25.1

16.6

3.8

0

2.5234 (20.4%)

18

4.7

18.4

26.5

24.8

14.1

11.5

3.5983 (50.4%)

25

1.7

12.8

18.7

20.9

22.1

23.8

4.2043 (66.8%)

26

0.4

3.0

9.4

22.6

23.0

41.7

4.8979 (87.3%)

33

3.4

13.7

20.9

24.4

17.9

19.7

3.9872 (62.0%)

37

17.2

27.9

30.0

16.3

8.2

0.4

2.7167 (24.9%)

40

8.2

19.7

18.5

22.3

22.3

9.0

3.5794 (53.6%)

46

5.1

20.0

24.7

19.1

9.8

0

3.5872 (28.9%)

47

35.0

25.2

18.8

13.7

4.7

2.6

2.3547 (21.0%)

49

8.1

22.1

30.2

26.0

10.6

3.0

3.1787 (39.6%)

50

9.8

20.4

24.3

23.4

15.3

6.8

3.3447 (45.5%)

Mean / Cumulative %

The next most preferred strategies used within the cognitive category by the respondents are strategies 50 and 49 respectively, but both of these amounted to less than 50%. Thus, strategy 50 “Look for similarities and contrast between the new words and words from my own mother tongue” only has a mean value of 3.3447 with a variation from 6.8% (always) to 24.3% (occasionally) and a corresponding cumulative score of 45.5% for often, usually and always. Strategy 49 “Use of familiar words in different combinations to make new sentences”, on the other hand, scores a mean value of 3.1787 with a variation from 3.0% (always) to 30.2% (occasionally) and a corresponding cumulative score of 39.6% for often, usually and always. The four least often used cognitive strategies appear to be strategies 46 “Remember where the new word is located on the page, or where I first saw

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

153

or heard it”, 37 “Categorizing words in a foreign language into the various parts of speech”, 47 “Use flashcards with the new word on one side and the definition or other information on the other”, and 2 “Listen to tape of word list”. These strategies seem to require a little more effort on the part of the respondents in using them. It can be concluded that overall, the respondents appear to mostly favour the following cognitive strategies: strategy 26, “Take notes in class”; strategy 25, “Use a vocabulary section in your textbook”; and strategy 33, “Keep a vocabulary notebook” in this order. These strategies are followed by strategies 40 and 18, i.e. “Do verbal repetition” and “Do written repetition of the word” respectively. The least favored strategies were 2, 37, 46, 47, 49 and 50. In sum, the most highly used cognitive strategy by the respondents is statement 26 “Take note in class”. The least used strategy is statement 2 “Listen to tape of word list”. The overall mean of the category of cognitive strategy as compared to the other four main categories (compensation, metacognitive, memory and social strategies) is 3.45, as shown in Fig. 1. This mean indicates that, on the whole, cognitive strategies are used more than the other four categories of VLS. 4.1.2 Compensation strategies The compensation strategy category consists of an inventory of eight statements as shown in Table 3. Table 3 indicates that the compensation strategies most often used are those corresponding to statements 3, 39 and 51. Statement 3 “Guess from the textual context in reading” scores a mean value of 3.9702 with a variation from 1.3% (never) to 38.3% (usually) and a corresponding cumulative score of 69.4% for often, usually and always, statement 39 “Use of bilingual dictionary” a mean value of 4.0730 with a variation from 7.7% (never) to 25.3% (always) and a corresponding cumulative score of 65.6% (cumulative scores for often, usually, always), and statement 51 “Guess the general meaning of new word using clues from the context or situation in listening and speaking” a mean value of 3.9149 with a variation from 1.7% (never) to 30.2% (often) and a corresponding cumulative score of 61.63%. The four compensation strategies corresponding to statement 52 “Make up new words if I do not know the right ones”, statement 38 “Use borrowed words in another language”, statement 27 “Use of thesaurus”, and statement 30 “Use of picture dictionary” are much less often used than the three strategies above, whereas strategy 48 “Physically act out the new word” turns out to be the least preferred strategy.

154

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong Table 3. The percentage, frequency and mean value of each compensation vocabulary learning strategy selected by category

Never

Seldom

Occasionally

Often

Usually

Always

%

%

%

%

%

%

3

1.3

8.9

20.4

38.3

23

8.1

3.9702 (69.4%)

27

22.7

21.9

25.3

13.7

9.4

6.9

2.8584 (30.0%)

30

23.1

24.8

25.2

11.5

10.3

5.1

2.7650 (26.5%)

38

11.6

23.2

30.9

18.5

10.3

5.6

3.0944 (34.4%)

39

7.7

11.6

15.0

22.3

18.0

25.3

4.0730 (65.6%)

48

30.8

31.6

23.1

10.6

3.4

0.4

2.2564 (14.4%)

51

1.7

10.6

26.4

30.2

17.9

13.2

3.9149 (61.3%)

52

16.2

21.3

25.1

22.6

10.6

4.3

3.0298 (37.5%)

Compensation Strategies (Statement No.)

Mean/ Cumulative %

To conclude, it is noted that for the compensation strategy category, strategies corresponding to statements 3, 39 and 51 are selected most frequently. In turn, strategies 52, 38, 27, and 30 are used to a far lesser degree. The least frequently used strategy by the respondents is strategy 48 “Physically act out the new word”. It has the largest variation of 26.5% (30.9% – 0.4%) such that the overall mean for compensation strategies in comparison with the other four strategy categories turns out to be 3.245, as shown in Fig. 1. This shows that the category of compensation strategies is the third most frequently used VLS overall. 4.1.3 Metacognitive strategies The metacognitive strategy category consists of an inventory of eight statements as shown in Table 4. From the results presented in Table 4 it appears that metacognitive strategies are not very popular among the respondents. The highest mean score attained is only 3.3745% for statement 7 “Focus on learning words written on commercial items (labels, brochures, manuals, etc.)” with a variation from 7.7% (always) to 30.2% (seldom) and a corresponding

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

155

cumulative score of 47.2% for often, usually and always. It is followed in rank by two statements, 10 and 4. The strategy 10 “Know when to use a relevant foreign language song” has a mean of 3.0128 and a variation from 6.0% (always) to 27.7% (seldom) and a corresponding cumulative score of 34.1% for often, usually and always. Strategy 4 “Look out for a relevant foreign language TV program”, in the third position, has a mean of 3.0638 and a variation from 7.7% (always) to 30.2% (seldom). The corresponding cumulative score was 32.24% for often, usually, and always. Table 4. The percentage, frequency and mean value of each metacognitive vocabulary learning strategy selected by category

Never

Seldom

%

%

Occasionally %

4

10.6

30.2

7

8.1

8

Metacognitive Strategies (Statement No.)

Often

Usually

Always

%

%

%

26.8

14.5

10.2

7.7

3.0638 (32.4%)

20.4

24.3

27.7

12.3

7.2

3.3745 (47.2%)

21.4

26.1

30.8

13.2

6.4

2.1

2.6368 (21.7%)

9

32.3

28.9

20.4

12.3

4.7

1.3

2.319 (18.3%)

10

12.3

27.7

26.0

20.4

7.7

6.0

3.0128 (34.1%)

13

44.3

28.1

18.7

4.3

4.7

0

1.9702 (9.0%)

14

29.4

30.2

18.7

13.2

7.2

1.3

2.4255 (21.7%)

36

25.8

29.2

22.7

11.2

8.6

2.6

2.5536 (22.4%)

Mean / Cumulative %

Strategies 36, 14 and 8 are less popular. Strategy 36 “Search for a suitable foreign language radio program” has a mean of 2.5536, 14 “Look for a relevant foreign language website” a mean of 2.4255, and 8 “Use a relevant foreign language video” a mean of 2.6368. The least often used strategy, ninth in rank of preference, is strategy 13 “Know when to read a relevant foreign newspaper” with a mean of 1.9702. The apparent lack of use of this strategy could lead to a very important issue in the learning process and the efforts made by a national Malaysian newspaper in getting children to read could change this attitude in the long run.

156

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

In general it is worth noting that metacognitive strategies are the least used strategies. In particular, strategy 13 shows the smallest mean value and the largest variation range of 44.3 when compared to all the strategies under consideration in this study. The overall mean for the metacognitive strategy category in comparison to the other four VLS categories is 2.66 as shown in Fig. 1. It is, hence, the least used strategy among all the VLS. 4.1.4 Memory strategies The memory strategy category consists of an inventory of 16 statements as shown in Table 5. Memory strategies, in the context of Malaysia, were expected to be the most popular with the respondents. Most teachers in primary and secondary schools tend to focus on learning through memory. In this study, memory strategies are found to be very popular with the respondents. Out of the 16 memory strategy statements, the first 7 statements have a mean of over 3.5 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 52.0% for often, usually and always. The first seven strategies in order of popularity with the respondents are strategies 28, 34, 41, 44, 45, 5 and 35. Strategy 28 “Memorize the meaning of affixes and roots” occupies the first position showing a mean of 4.2137 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 69.2% for often, usually and always. Strategy 34 “Imagine the word’s meaning” reveals a mean of 3.8455% and a corresponding cumulative score of over 63% for often, usually and always, and strategy 41 “Associate the sound of a new word with the sound of a familiar word” a mean of 3.7222 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 59.0%. Strategy 44 “Visualize the spelling of the new word in my mind” occupies the fourth position with a mean of 3.7319 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 58.7% for often, usually and always. Strategy 45 “Use a combination of sound and images to remember the new word” has a mean of 3.6638 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 57.0%. The five most popular strategies selected by the respondents had a mean value of over 3.70. These are followed by strategy 5 “Associate the word with other words of similar meaning” (3.6197%) and strategy 35 “Connect the words to a personal experience” (3.5923%). These are followed by strategy 1 “Paraphrase (rewrite) the meaning of the word on your own,” strategy 22 “Connect words to already known words,” strategy 20 “Use of new words in sentences” and strategy 42 “Use rhyming to remember words” and strategy 43 “Remember the word by making a clear mental image of it or by drawing it”. The least popular strategies used were as follows, in descending order: strategy 32 “Group words together in writing” with a mean of 2.9359, thir-

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

157

teenth in rank; strategy 15 “Connect the word to its synonyms and antonyms” with a mean of 2.5574; strategy 29 “Use semantic maps and/or diagrams” with a mean of 2.4353; and finally strategy 24 “Learn the words of an idiom together”, the least popular strategy of all, with a mean of 2.0085 and the largest variation within the group from 42.7% (never) to 0.9% (always). Table 5. The percentage, frequency and mean of each memory vocabulary learning strategy selected by category Memory Strategies (Statement No.)

Never

Seldom

Occasionally

Often

Usually

Always

%

%

%

%

%

%

1

3.0

16.2

32.9

22.2

18.8

6.8

3.5812 (47.8%)

5

3.0

17.5

23.9

33.3

14.5

7.7

3.6197 (55.5%)

15

16.2

37.0

27.7

13.6

5.1

0.4

2.5574 (19.1%)

20

5.1

20.4

32.3

22.1

16.2

3.8

3.3532 (42.1%)

22

4.7

18.4

30.3

26.1

12.3

8.1

3.4744 (46.5%)

24

42.7

27.4

19.7

7.7

1.7

0.9

2.0085 (9.49%)

28

2.1

9.4

19.2

25.2

22.2

21.8

4.2137 (69.2%)

29

30.6

25.0

26.3

9.9

4.7

3.4

2.4353 (18.0%)

32

14.1

26.4

27.4

19.2

9.4

3.4

2.9359 (32.0%)

34

1.3

15.9

19.7

31.8

22.7

8.5

3.8455 (63.0%)

35

5.2

18.9

23.6

24.0

20.4

7.7

3.5923 (52.1%)

41

4.7

17.9

18.4

31.2

15.0

12.8

3.7222 (59.0%)

42

11.9

20.9

21.3

23.8

14.9

7.2

3.3064 (45.9%)

43

12.3

23.0

23.4

23.4

12.3

5.5

3.1702 (41.2%)

44

6.8

14.5

20.0

25.5

23.8

9.4

3.7319 (58.7%)

45

7.7

16.6

18.7

27.2

18.3

11.5

3.6638 (57.0%)

Mean/ Cumulative %

158

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

From these results it can be concluded that memory strategies are the most highly used strategies. In particular the strategy “Memorizing the meaning of affixes and roots” shows the highest mean value of 4.2137. The overall mean for the memory strategy category in comparison to the other four main VLS categories ascends to 3.33, as shown in Fig. 1, such that memory strategies are found to be the second most often used set of VLS strategies, second only to cognitive strategies. 4.1.5 Social strategies The social strategy category consists of an inventory of ten statements as shown in Table 6. The analysis of the statements corresponding to social strategies shows that the most popular strategies within this category are those that correspond to statements 6, 53, 19 and 17. Strategy 6 “Ask a teacher or friend for a paraphrase or synonym” with a mean of 3.6838 and a corresponding cumulative score of 56.8% for often, usually and always is the most preferred. This is closely followed by strategy 53 “Learn new words with a regular language learning partner” with a mean of 3.5447 and a corresponding cumulative score of 49.4%, and by strategy 19 “Learn to understand new words through pair works in class” with a mean of 3.3404 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 43.0%. Strategy 17 “Ask a foreign language teacher or friends for a sentence including the new word” with a mean of 3.3047 and a corresponding cumulative score of over 40.5% is ranked fourth. Strategies 12, 21 and 11 make up the next most popular strategies, having means within the range of 3.1660 and 2.1706. Strategy 12 “Learn to understand new words through group discussion in class”, strategy 21 “Study and practice new words in a group outside class”, and strategy 11 “Ask my foreign language teacher to check my word list for accuracy” are ranked fifth, sixth and seventh. The least frequently used strategies within this category, in descending order, are those that correspond to statements 31 “Ask your brothers or sisters who know the foreign language to translate the words into your mother tongue”, 23 “Ask your parents for the foreign language translation into your mother tongue”, and, finally, 16 “Practice the relevant foreign language with my parents or sibling”.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

159

Table 6. The percentage, frequency and mean of each social vocabulary learning strategy selected by category

Never

Seldom

%

%

Occasionally %

6

1.7

14.5

11

18.7

12

Social Strategies (Statement No.)

Often

Usually

Always

%

%

%

26.9

33.3

17.5

6.0

3.6838 (56.8%)

30.6

27.2

12.3

6.4

4.7

2.7106 (23.4%)

9.4

26.0

25.5

22.6

11.1

5.5

3.1660 (39.2%)

16

36.6

28.1

20.9

10.6

2.1

1.7

2.1872 (14.4%)

17

7.7

22.7

28.8

19.7

14.0

6.8

3.3047 (40.4%)

19

10.2

18.7

28.1

20.4

14.9

7.7

3.3404 (43.0%)

21

12.0

25.2

31.6

17.5

9.0

4.7

3.0043 (31.2%)

23

54.9

19.1

12.3

8.1

5.1

4

1.9064 (17.2%)

31

56.0

15.8

10.7

9.0

6.0

2.6

2.0085 (17.6%)

53

6.8

17.9

25.1

23.4

17.9

8.1

3.5447 (49.4%)

Mean / Cumulative %

From these results, it is clear that the social strategy that is most frequently used as a VLS by the respondents is that of “asking a teacher and friends for paraphrasing or synonym”, while the strategy least frequently used is “practicing with the parents”. This suggests that there is an interaction barrier when the students talk to their parents. It could also be a function of ethnicity and/or cultural background, an aspect to be discussed later in this chapter. The overall mean for the social strategy category, in comparison with the other four strategy categories, is 2.89 as shown in Fig. 1; i.e. social strategies are the fourth most frequently used VLS. 4.2 Conclusion: Vocabulary learning strategies for the group as a whole The VLS included in this study have been grouped into five major categories, namely cognitive, metacognitive, compensation, memory and social. The

160

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

overall analysis of the data has revealed that the respondents used the various categories of learning strategies in the following descending order of frequency: cognitive (mean of 3.45), memory (mean of 3.33), compensation (mean or 3.24), social (mean of 2.89) and metacognitive (mean of 2.66). This is illustrated in Fig. 1. Within each category some VLS were used much more often than others. The most and the least often used vocabulary learning strategies in each category are as follows: Cognitive strategies (statement 26 [mean 4.8979] and 47 [mean 2.3547]), Compensation strategies (statement 39 [mean 4.0730] and statement 30 [mean 2.7650]), Metacognitive strategies (statement 7 [mean 3.3745] and statement 13 [mean 1.9702], Memory strategies (Statement 28 [mean 4.2137] and statement 24 [mean 2.0085]), and Social strategies (statement 6 [mean 3.6838] and statement 16 [mean 2.1872]).

2.89

3.45

Cognitive

2.66

Social

3.33

Metacognitiv e

3.24

Memory

4 3 2 1 0

Compensatio n

Mean

Overall Mean

Vocabulary Learning Strategies

Fig. 1. Overall mean of type of vocabulary learning strategies used (by categories)

To conclude, the results of this exploratory study are based on a random sample of 235 students studying a foreign language, made up of five different ethnic groups and whose first language is not English. It is possible therefore that the students have never been trained in using effective strategies and that their teachers or instructors have not explicitly shown them how to use different strategies for learning vocabulary or that some of the strategies may not be easily used. It is however interesting to note that memory strategies are highly used by the respondents. This is to be expected, since most Malaysian students prefer to learn through memorization because of the examination-oriented instructional system. As for this study, the majority of the respondents learn a for-

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

161

eign language to fulfill a graduation requirement. Thus, learning a foreign language by memorization seems to be the best option in order to obtain a passing grade for the learners. 5 Ethnicity and use of vocabulary learning strategies This section presents and discusses the VLS used by the different ethnic groups in the study according to the five strategy categories, namely cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, memory and social strategies. The mean scores are presented for each category in Tables 7 to 11. 5.1 Strategy selection 5.1.1 Cognitive strategies The results in Fig. 2 and Table 7 show that there is a general agreement among the ethnic groups with regard to which learning strategies are used with the exception of some minor differences. Table 7. The mean score of each cognitive vocabulary learning strategy selected by the different ethnic groups Cognitive Strategies (Statement No.)

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

2

2.19

2.72

2.30

2.43

18

3.41

3.73

3.70

2.71

25

3.81

4.46

4.00

3.43

26

4.55

5.10

5.10

4.29

33

3.72

4.15

4.00

3.57

37

2.53

2.79

3.30

2.29

40

3.09

3.84

4.00

3.00

46

3.40

3.70

3.50

3.43

47

2.20

2.39

2.20

3.57

49

2.89

3.32

3.60

2.71

50

3.24

3.41

3.80

2.43

Strategy 26 “Take notes in class” appears to be the most used strategy by all the ethnic groups, Malays (4.55), Chinese (5.10), Indians (5.1) and Others

162

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

(4.29), whereas strategy 2 “Listening to tape of words list” was the least frequently used by Malays, Chinese, Indians and Others (Kadazan-Dusun and Ibans). The major difference between the group preferences for the use of a specific strategy can be seen in strategy 47 “Use flashcards with the new words on one side and the definition or other information on the other”. It is noted that the Malays (mean of 2.2), Chinese (2.39) and Indians (2.2) did not use this strategy as often the Others (3.57). The Malay and Chinese respondents used strategy 18 “Do written repetition of the word” and strategy 46 “Remember where the new word is located on the page or where I first saw or heard it” almost equally frequently with a mean of 3.41 and 3.40 respectively. The Indians in turn used strategies 25 “Use the vocabulary section in your textbook”, 33 “Keep a vocabulary notebook” and 40 “Do verbal repetition” equally as the second most preferred strategies with a mean of 4.00. Finally, the Others’ group selected the strategies 33 “Keep a vocabulary notebook” and 46 “Remember where the new word is located on the page or where I first saw or heard it” with equal frequency, with a mean of 3.57 each. In conclusion, the Malays, Chinese and Indians generally agree in terms of order of priority in the use of specific VLS, with minor differences. However, the Others tended to show strong differences in some cases. Figure 2 shows the overall mean values for each ethnic group for the cognitive strategies category. The mean for the Malays is 3.19, Chinese 3.6, Indian 3.59 and Others 3.08. This is a reflection of the relative preference of each ethnic group for the use of cognitive strategies, with the Chinese and Indians scoring the highest mean values. The overall analysis shows that the Chinese, Indians and Malays prefer to use cognitive strategies over any other category of strategies. However, this is not true for the Others with the lowest mean value of 3.08.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

163

Mean

C o g n itiv e S tra te g ie s 3.70 3.60 3.50 3.40 3.30 3.20 3.10 3.00 2.90 2.80

3.60

3.59

3.19 3.08

M alay

Chines e

Indian

O thers

Eth n icity

Fig. 2. Mean frequency of cognitive strategies by ethnicity

5.1.2 Compensation strategies Figure 3 and Table 8 present the findings for the types of compensation strategies used in terms of mean scores. The results show that there is some general agreement among the ethnic groups in their preferences for particular learning strategies, given that the differences are minor. Table 8. The mean scores of each compensation vocabulary learning strategy selected by the different ethnic groups. Compensation Strategies (Statement No.)

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

3

3.8

4.03

4.00

4.57

27

2.75

2.85

3.90

2.71

30

3.15

2.46

3.80

3.29

38

2.69

3.35

3.00

2.43

39

4.09

4.06

3.90

4.29

48

2.24

2.27

2.20

2.14

51

3.52

4.10

4.20

4.00

52

2.81

3.08

3.10

4.29

The Malay and Chinese respondents report using mostly strategy 39 “Use a bilingual dictionary” with means of 4.09 and 4.06 respectively, whereas the Indians tend to use strategy 51 “Guess the general meaning of a new word

164

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

using clues from the context or situation in listening and speaking” most (mean value of 4.2). The Others group shows a high preference for strategy 3 “Guess from textual context in reading” with a mean value of 4.57. The Malays, Chinese and Indians ranked strategy 3 “Guess from textual context in reading” as their second most used strategy with a mean value of 3.8, 4.03 and 4.0 respectively. The least often used strategy among all the ethnic groups in this category is strategy 48 “Physically act out the new word”. There appears to be some general agreement in the order of preference in the use of specific strategies by the Malays and Chinese. These include strategies corresponding to statements 1 and 2 as discussed above, 51 “Guess the general meaning of a new word using clues from the context or situation in listening and speaking,” 52 “Make up new words if I do not know the right ones”, and 27 “Use a thesaurus”. The Indians and Others groups prefer to use strategy 48 (discussed above), strategy 30 “Use picture dictionary” and strategy 38 “Use borrowed words in another language”. In conclusion, the analysis shows that there are differences in the VLS used between the four ethnic groups with some similarities between the Malays and Chinese, and between the Indians and Others. The learning strategy corresponding to statement 39 “Use a bilingual dictionary” was the first choice for both the Chinese and the Malay students. However, statement 3 “Guess from textual context in reading” appears to be used by all four ethnic groups. The least used VLS appears to be statement 48 “Physically act out the new word”. Figure 3 presents the overall mean value for each ethnic group in the use of compensation strategies. The mean value for the Malays is 3.12, for Chinese 3.28, for Indians 3.51 and for Others 3.46. This is a reflection of the relative preference in the use of compensation strategies by each ethnic group. The Indians used this strategy most, followed closely by the Others and the Chinese. The Malays used it the least compared to the other ethnic groups. Compensation strategies are found to be the third most used set of strategies by the Malays, Chinese and Indians.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

165

C o m p e n s a tio n S tra te g ie s 3.60

3.51

3.46

3.50

Mean

3.40 3.28

3.30 3.20

3.12

3.10 3.00 2.90 M a la y

C h in e s e

In d ia n

O t h e rs

E th n i c i ty

Fig. 3. Mean frequency of compensation strategies by ethnicity

5.1.3 Metacognitive strategies The metacognitive strategy category consists of an inventory of eight statements and the mean scores are shown in Fig. 4 and Table 9. There appears to be a general agreement among the groups in the use of the learning strategies, with some minor variations. Similar to the results for the use of compensation strategies, no one particular metacognitive strategy appears to be commonly used by all ethnic groups. Table 9. The mean score of each metacognitive vocabulary learning strategy selected by the different ethnic groups. Metacognitive Strategies (Statement No.) 4

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

3.27

2.88

3.10

4.57

7

3.32

3.35

3.70

4.00

8

2.58

2.66

2.80

2.43

9

2.12

2.43

2.00

2.71

10

3.07

2.95

2.50

4.43

13

2.52

1.75

1.50

1.29

14

2.65

2.29

2.70

2.43

36

2.85

2.35

2.20

4.00

The learning strategy corresponding to statement 7 “Focus on learning words written on commercial items (labels, brochures, manuals etc)” is most

166

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

frequently used by the Malays (mean of 3.32), the Chinese (3.35), and the Indians (3.70). On the other hand, the Others chose strategy 4 “Look out for a relevant foreign language TV program” (mean of 4.57). Strategy 4 (mean of 2.88) is also the third most often used strategy by the Chinese. The strategy that is selected least often is strategy 13 “Know when to read a relevant foreign language newspaper”. It is rated seventh by the Malays and eighth by the Chinese, Indians and the Others. Strategy 4 “Look out for a relevant foreign language TV program” is popular with the Indians and Malays who rate it as the second most frequently used strategy with a mean of 3.10 and 3.27 respectively. As for strategy 36 “Search for a suitable foreign language radio program to listen to” the Chinese and Indians ranked it the sixth most often used strategy (with a mean of 2.35 and 2.20 respectively). For learning strategy 9 “Use a relevant foreign language video”, the Chinese and the Others rank it the fifth most used strategy with a mean of 2.53 and 2.71 respectively. The analysis shows that the most often used metacognitive strategy was strategy 7 “Focus on learning words written on commercial items (labels, brochures, manuals etc)” and the least used one is strategy 13 “Know when to read a relevant foreign language newspaper”. This latter strategy may be considered to be very important because many students in Malaysia tend not have the habit of reading, and hence the consequences of this poor reading attitude could be the lack of other kinds of knowledge, including that of other languages. As an overview, Fig. 4 presents the overall mean values for the ethnic groups’ use of metacognitive strategies. The Malays return a mean of 2.80, Chinese 2.57, Indians 2.56 and Others 3.23. The Others use these strategies the most, followed by the Malays. The Chinese and Indians however used this strategy almost equally frequently but less so than the other two groups. Metacognitive strategies on the whole appear to be the least often used VLS by the respondents when compared to the other strategy categories. This again could be a reflection of the students’ inability to plan, monitor and evaluate their own learning of vocabulary.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

167

Metacognitive Strategies

Mean

4.00 3.00

3.23

2.80

2.57

Malay

Chinese

2.56

2.00 1.00 0.00 Indian

Others

Ethnicity

Fig. 4. Mean frequency of metacognitive strategies by ethnicity

5.1.4 Memory strategies The results for the use of the memory strategies by the different ethnic groups are shown in Fig. 5 and Table 10. There seems to be no general common trend among the groups as to which learning strategies in this category are selected the most. Both the Malays and Chinese choose strategy 28 “Memorize the meaning of affixes and roots” as the most often used strategy at a mean of 3.95 and 4.40 respectively, whereas the Indians used strategy 45 “Use a combination of sounds and images to remember the new word” with a mean of 4.2 most often, and the Others group used strategy 1 “Paraphrase (rewrite) the meaning of the word on your own” with a mean of 4.14 most often. The strategy least often used by the respondents appears to be strategy 24 “Learn the words of an idiom together” which is sixteenth in rank for the Malays (mean of 2.05), the Chinese (1.98) and the Indians (1.17) and fourteenth for the Others group (2.57). This result represents the only common trend observed among the groups.

168

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong Table 10. The mean score of each memory vocabulary learning strategy selected by the different ethnic groups Memory Strategies (Statement No.)

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

1

3.77

3.46

3.5

4.14

5

3.77

3.50

3.90

4.00

15

2.71

2.48

2.80

2.29

20

3.09

3.50

3.60

2.86

22

3.17

3.62

3.30

4.00

24

2.05

1.98

1.70

2.57

28

3.95

4.40

4.00

3.57

29

2.19

2.45

3.70

3.00

32

2.91

2.94

3.40

2.43

34

3.57

3.98

4.10

3.71

35

3.35

3.67

4.10

4.00

41

3.28

4.01

3.40

2.86

42

3.01

3.45

3.50

3.14

43

2.85

3.32

3.40

3.14

44

3.28

3.97

4.10

3.14

45

3.29

3.83

4.20

3.43

In terms of similarities in the use of particular strategies, the Malays and Chinese select strategy 42, “Use rhyming to remember words” with means of 3.01 and 3.45 respectively. This strategy represents the eleventh most frequently used strategy. Strategy 15 “Connect the word to its synonyms and antonyms” with means of 2.71 and 2.48 respectively is ranked fourteenth in terms of preference, and strategy 29 “Use semantic maps and/or diagrams” with means of 2.19 and 2.45 respectively is ranked fifteenth. The Malays and the Indians use strategy 34 “Imagine the word’s meaning” as the fourth most often used strategy with a mean of 3.57 and 4.10 respectively. In contrast, for the Chinese and the Indians, strategy 32 “Group words together in writing” with means of 2.94 and 3.40 respectively is the thirteenth most frequently used, and strategy 1 “Paraphrase (rewrite) the meaning of the word on your own” with means of 3.46 and 3.5 respectively is ranked tenth in terms of preference.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

169

The Malays identify the strategies corresponding to statement 1 “Paraphrase (rewrite) the meaning of the word on our own” and statement 5 “Associate the words with other words of similar meaning” as second most popular, both with a mean value of 3.77. The VLS most often used by the Others (a mean of 4.00 and above) are strategies 1, 5, 22 “Connect new word to already known word”, and 35 “Connect the words to a personal experience”. The Chinese identify the strategy corresponding to statements 41 “Associate the sound of a new word with the sound of a familiar word” as the second most used strategy with a mean of 4.01. The third most often used strategy with a mean of 3.97 is 34 “Imagine the word’s meaning” and 44 “Visualize the spelling of the new word in my mind”. In contrast, the Indians identify three strategies as their second most often used VLS, namely strategy 34, “Imagine the word’s meaning”, strategy 35 “Connect the words to a personal experience”, and strategy 44 “Visualize the spelling of the new word in my mind”. The Others identified three strategies as the second most frequently used, all with a mean value of 4, namely strategy 5 “Associate the words with other words of similar meaning”, strategy 22 “Connect new word to already known words”, and strategy 35 “Use the vocabulary section in your textbook”. The findings show that the different ethnic groups differed in their choices or preferences in the use of memory strategies. However, some similarities are evident between two of the groups in terms of the use of specific strategies. Three groups identified more than one learning strategy as most important. For the Malays, these are strategies 2 and 3 with a mean of 3.77, for the Indians strategies 34, 35 and 44 with a mean of 4.1, and for the Others group strategies 5, 22 and 35 with a mean of 4.00. The Chinese, on the other hand, choose strategy 41 (mean of 4.01), strategy 34 (3.99) and strategy 44 (3.97) as the second to fourth most used learning strategies. The Malays and Chinese showed similarities in most of the memory strategies used, as shown by the selection of statement 28 “Memorize the meaning of affixes and roots”. However, the Indians prefer strategy 45 “Use a combination of sounds and images to remember the new word” and the Others choose strategy 1 “Paraphrase (rewrite) the meaning of the word on your own”. All the ethnic groups except for the Others have high mean scores. The high scores favouring memory strategies were expected, as this appears to be the preferred mode of learning among Malaysian students. Figure 5 presents the overall mean value for each ethnic group for the use of memory strategies. The Malays have a mean of 3.15, Chinese 3.41, Indian 3.54 and Others 3.27. If these values are compared to the means obtained for

170

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

the other learning strategy categories (see Figs. 2 to 6), one notes that the mean of the memory strategies category for the Malays, Chinese, Indians and the Others is the second highest among the five categories. The results indicate that memory strategies are considered the second most important set of strategies overall, after compensation strategies, which were discussed above (see 5.1.2). M em o ry S trateg ies 3.54

3.60 3.50

3.41

Mean

3.40 3.27

3.30 3.20

3.15

3.10 3.00 2.90 M alay

Chines e

Indian

O thers

Eth nicity

Fig. 5. Frequency of memory strategies by ethnicity

5.1.5 Social strategies The results related to the vocabulary learning social strategies used by the different ethnic groups are shown in Fig. 6 and Table 11. The results do not reveal conclusively which of the social strategies is most frequently used by the respondents, and there is a noticeable lack of an overall tendency. However, from the analysis, strategy 6 “Ask a teacher or friend for a paraphrase or synonym” appears to be the first choice, and strategy 53 “Learn new words with a regular language-learning partner” the second choice. Strategy 6 is the first choice for the Malays (mean of 3.79) and the second choice for the Chinese (3.59) as well as the Others group (4.17). Strategy 53 in turn is the second choice for the Malays (3.33) and the first for the Chinese (3.62) and also for the Others (4.57), but it is the sixth choice for the Indians.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

171

Table 11. The mean score of each social vocabulary learning strategy selected by the different ethnic groups. Social Strategies (Statement No.)

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

6

3.79

3.59

3.90

4.17

11

2.64

2.71

3.10

2.86

12

3.17

3.17

3.30

2.86

16

2.51

1.99

2.30

2.57

17

3.16

3.39

3.40

3.00

19

3.12

3.48

3.40

2.86

21

2.72

3.11

3.40

3.29

23

2.17

1.71

1.80

3.29

31

2.41

1.80

1.50

2.57

53

3.33

3.62

3.30

4.57

The least often used social learning strategies for all the ethnic groups appear to be strategy 31 “Ask your brothers or sisters who know the foreign language to translate the word into your mother tongue” and strategy 23 “Ask your parents for the foreign language translation into your mother tongue”. They are the least used strategies among the Malays, Chinese and Indians, but not the Others. All the respondents use some of the strategies equally frequently. The Malays have a preference for strategies 12 “Learn to understand new words through group discussion in class” and 17 “Ask a foreign language teacher or friend for a sentence including the new word”. The Indians also prefer to use strategies 12 and 17, but included in their selection strategy 19 “Learn to understand new words through pair work in class” as well as strategy 21 “Study and practice using new words in a group outside of class”. This selection process reveals some concordance between Malays and Indians in their use of these strategies. The Others also choose learning strategy 21 but show a preference for strategy 23 “Ask your parents for the foreign language translation into your mother tongue” as well. In conclusion, there is a general agreement in the use of social strategies among the ethnic groups with some slight variations. The second most preferred learning strategy is strategy 6 “Ask a teacher or friend for a paraphrase or synonym”, followed by strategy 53 “Learn new words with a regular lan-

172

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

guage-learning partner”. The least often used social learning strategy appears to be strategy 31 “Ask your brothers or sisters who know the foreign language to translate the word into your mother tongue”. A number of strategies were used equally frequently by all ethnic groups such as strategies 12 “Learn to understand new words through group discussion in class” and 17 “Ask a foreign language teacher or friend for a sentence including the new word”. Similarly, the Indians choose strategies 12 and 17. In addition, they also choose strategy 19 “Learn to understand new words through pair work in class” and strategy 21 “Study and practice using new words in a group outside of class”. However, the lower ranking of the strategies 23, 21 and 16 suggests that there might be a lack of communication within the family as well as with language teachers during the learning process for the Indian students. Figure 6 shows the overall mean value of each ethnic group for the social strategies category. If these mean values are compared to the means obtained for the other categories (Figs. 2 to 6) it appears that the mean of the social category for the Malays (mean 2.91) the Chinese (mean 2.87), Indians (mean 2.94) rank fourth in terms of value whereas for the Others (mean value of 3.20), it ranks fifth, the lowest mean among the five categories. This reflects the order of preferences in relation to the other learning strategy categories and also indicates that social strategies are the fourth most often used category of the respondents. Social Strategies 3.30

3.20

3.20

Mean

3.10 3.00

2.91

2.90

2.94 2.87

2.80 2.70 2.60 Malay

Chinese

Indian

Ethnicity

Fig. 6. Frequency of social strategies by ethnicity

Others

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

173

5.2 Conclusion about the selection of vocabulary learning strategies by ethnicity The results with regard to the cognitive strategies statements show that there is a general tendency among the different ethnic groups as to which learning strategies are most frequently used, except for some minor differences. The Chinese and the Indians prefer to use this category of learning strategy more than the other two groups and also prefer them over the other four categories of learning strategies. This category of learning strategy represents the first choice overall. The results for the compensation strategies indicate that there is some general agreement among the groups as to which learning strategies are used, if one considers the differences to be minor. The Indians appear to prefer this type of learning strategies whereas for the other three groups it is only third in preference (but only slightly lower than the memory category) compared to the other four categories of learning strategies. However, one should bear in mind that the sample size of this group is very small in comparison to the Chinese and Malays. This category of learning strategies can be considered as being the third choice overall, just slightly lower than the memory strategy category. The results with regard to metacognitive strategies indicate that there is some general agreement between the groups in the use of this category of strategies. The Others group prefers using metacognitive strategies more than the other three groups. This strategy category ranks third overall in terms of preference for them (Others), compared to the other learning strategies. Also note that the sample from the Others group is very small in comparison to the Chinese and the Malays. This category of learning strategy was found to be the fifth choice overall. Malays follow its pattern. The results from the memory strategies statements indicate that there is no general agreement among the groups as to which learning strategies are preferred but there is some limited agreement in the order of preference among the different ethnic groups. The Indians appear to prefer this type of learning strategy over the other three groups but overall it ranks second in preference (just slightly above the compensation category) compared to the other four learning strategies categories. The Chinese group follows the Indians closely but then their sample size is much larger. This category of learning strategies turns out to be the second in popularity overall. The category of social strategies relates to a very important aspect of life in some countries, in particular in Malaysia because of the different cultural backgrounds and diversity of its nationals; hence, it is expected that reasona-

174

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

ble differences will be found. The results indicated that there is general agreement among the groups in some cases as to which learning strategies are most frequently used, but no total agreement can be found except for the least often used learning strategies. The absence of such learning strategies suggests that there is a lack of communication during the learning process within the family as well as in the interaction with language teachers. It is important to acknowledge such a situation, and the reasons for it need to be addressed somehow. In general, the respondents are more comfortable in learning with their peers. The highest preference ranking is found in the Others group followed by the other three groups which are nearly identical in the use of social strategies. This category is placed fourth in the overall ratings of the respondents. 6 Conclusion The findings of the present study indicate that students of different ethnic groups studying Thai, Korean, French, Arabic, Japanese, Spanish, Russian and German use a number of different types of VLS when acquiring the foreign language. This finding provides an insight into the differences between ethnic groups as they employ distinct types of VLS in order to learn a foreign language. Most of the students across the ethnic groups seem to use both effective and ineffective vocabulary learning strategies, with most using slightly more ineffective strategies for learning vocabulary. This result provides very interesting insights into why students often fail to learn a foreign language well. The analysis further indicates that students use both direct and indirect learning strategies (Oxford, 1990) when acquiring vocabulary in the acquisition process. The direct strategies used are mainly those of the memory, cognitive and compensation categories. The students tend to choose them over indirect strategies like social strategies and metacognitive strategies. The findings reveal that students do not want to use strategies which require them to use songs, foreign language tapes or videos, connect words to its synonyms and antonyms, devise semantic maps/diagrams, identify word categories, utilize flash cards, engage in physical action or study word coinage. Interestingly, these are very helpful strategies. The Indians and Others appear to want to try out a greater number of different strategies compared to the Chinese and Malay students but the data are not truly representative as their numbers are smaller compared to the number of Malays and Chinese.

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

175

The VLS used by these young adults can also be categorized according to receptive and productive strategies. Receptive strategies are strategies which involve thinking and cannot be observed. Productive strategies, in turn, are strategies which can be seen. This study reveals that productive strategies are used more frequently than receptive strategies. The study, which is exploratory in nature, provides an overview of the types of strategies which adult students use. It appears that they give preference to memory and cognitive strategies. One explanation for this finding could be the fact that, being undergraduates, these students show a different kind of orientation in the way they learn. What is even more interesting is the fact that the students hardly use any metacognitive strategies even though these have been shown to be good. The pedagogical implications of this study are clear. This study reveals that the respondents fail to use effective strategies that can help them to acquire vocabulary effectively in the acquisition of a foreign language. Learners should be trained to use effective strategies and to become more aware of the strategies that work well for them. Language instructors on the other hand should provide learners with a variety of language tasks by incorporating different learning strategies for the acquisition of vocabulary. They should guide students in their beliefs and strategies for vocabulary learning, and provide the necessary input, materials, exercises, approaches and opportunities for the development of vocabulary acquisition. In addition, the findings show that different ethnic groups have different preferences. Finally, language instructors need to be aware of these differences in order to account for them in their teaching. References Ahmed, M.O. (1989). Vocabulary learning strategies. In P. Meara (Ed.), Beyond words (pp. 3– 14). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. Anderson, J.C. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications (2nd ed.). New York: Freeman. Anderson, J.C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J.T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching (pp. 77–117). Newark: International Reading Association. Chamot, A.U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Learning strategies in foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 22(1), 13–24. Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Harlow: Longman. Cohen, A.D. (2001). The learner’s side of foreign language learning: Where do styles, strategies, and tasks meet? Unpublished manuscript. University of Minnesota. Cohen, A.D., & Aphek, E. (1980). Retention of second-language vocabulary overtime: Investigating the role of mnemonic associations. System, 8, 221–235.

176

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

Cohen, A.D., & Aphek, E. (1981). Easifying second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3, 221–236. Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ehrmann, M., & Oxford, R. (1989). Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adults’ second language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal, 73, 1–13. Hatch, E. (1983). Psycholinguistics: A second language perspective. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Heimbach, R. (1993). The effect of interaction on the comprehension and acquisition of new lexical items by kindergarten E.S.L. learners. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Temple University. Gu, Y. (1994). Vocabulary learning strategies of good and poor Chinese EFL learners. In N. Bird, P. Falvey, A.B.M. Tsui, D.M. Allison & A. McNeill (Eds.), Language and learning (pp. 376–401). Hong Kong: Education Department. ERIC Document reproduction Service No. ED 370411. Gu, Y. (2003). Fine brush and freehand. The vocabulary learning art of two successful Chinese EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 37(1), 73–104. Gu, Y. (2005). Vocabulary learning strategies in the Chinese EFL context. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish. Gu, Y., & Johnson, R.K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46(4), 643–679. Kudo, Y. (1999). L2 vocabulary learning strategies. Retrieved October 20, 2000, from http://www.111.hawaii.edu/nflrc/networks/NW14/. Laufer, B. (2002). The lexical plight in second language reading. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition (pp. 20–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lawson, M.J., & Hogben, D. (1996). The vocabulary learning strategies of foreign language students. Language Learning, 46(1), 101–135. Lewis, M. (2001). Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice. Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications. Meara, P. (1997). Towards a new approach to modelling vocabulary acquisition. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 109– 121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Misulis, K. (1999). Making vocabulary development manageable in content instruction. Contemporary Education, 70(2), 25–19. Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H.H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Toronto: Institute for Studies in Education. O’Malley, J.M., & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House/Harper Collins. Oxford, R.L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 13(2), 291–300. Parry, T.S., & Stanfield, C.W. (1990). Language aptitude reconsidered. New Jersey. Prentice Hall

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

177

Politzer, R.L. (1983). An exploratory study of self-reported language learning behaviours and their relation to achievement. Studies in Second Language acquisition, 6, 54–65. Politzer. R.L., & McGroaty, M. (1985). An exploratory study of learning behaviours and their relationship to gain linguistic and communcation competence. TESOL Quarterly, 19(1), 103–123. Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41–51. Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 117–131. Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp.199–227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stern, H.H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 304–318. Tschirner, E. (2004). Breath of vocabulary and advanced English study: An empirical investigation. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 27–39. Wenden, A. (1986). What do second language learners know about their language learning: A second look at retrospective accounts. Applied Linguistics, 7, 186–205. Wenden, A., & Rubin, J. (Eds.). (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall International. Zimmerman, C.B. (2000). Historical trends in second language vocabulary instruction. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 5–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

178

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

Appendix Vocabulary Learning Strategies Questionnaire (Soal Selidik Strategi Pembelajaran Perbendaharaan Kata) Please answer the following questions first, before you continue on to the following questionnaire. (Sila Jawab soalan-soalan berikut dahulu sebelum anda menjawab soal selidik yang seterusnya.) 1. Gender (Jantina): Male (Lelaki) Female (Perempuan) 2. Ethnicity (Bangsa): Malay (Melayu) Chinese (Cina) Indian (India) Eurasian (Serani) Others (Lain-Lain)

Please state: ______________________ (Sila nyatakan)

3. Age (Umur): 18 – 20 27 – 29

21 – 23 30 – 32

24 – 26 33 – 35

35 and above (35 dan keatas)

4. What foreign language are you learning now? (Nyatakan bahasa asing yang anda pelajari pada masa ini?) __________________________________ 5. Foreign language level (Tahap kemahiran bahasa asing): 2 3 6. Did you attend any foreign language courses before taking your current foreign language course(s)? (Pernahkah anda menghadiri kursus bahasa asing sebelum mengambil kursus bahasa asing yang anda ikuti pada masa ini?) Yes (Ya) No (Tidak)

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

179

7. What is your mother tongue? (Nyatakan bahasa ibunda anda?) English (Inggeris) Malay (Melayu) Chinese (Cina) Others (Lain-lain)

If necessary, state your dialect: ______________________ (Jika perlu, nyatakan dialek anda) If necessary, state your dialect: ______________________ (Jika perlu, nyatakan dialek anda) If necessary, state your dialect: ______________________ (Jika perlu, nyatakan dialek anda) State the language and dialect: ______________________ (Jika perlu, nyatakan dialek anda)

8. Do your parents and siblings speak languages other than the mother tongue? (Adakah ibu bapa anda dan adik-beradik anda bertutur bahasa-bahasa selain bahasa ibunda?) Yes (Ya) No (Tidak) If yes, please state the languages/dialects spoken: _____________________________ (Jika ya, sila nyatakan bahasa/dialek yang digunakan) 9. Please state the languages/dielects you speak/use at home:_______________________ (Sila nyatakan bahasa/dialek yang anda gunakan di rumah) 10. Please state the language(s) that you speak and understand and rate the language skills of each according to the criteria below: (Sila nyatakan bahasa-bahasa yang anda gunakan dan fahami serta berikan kadar kecekapan kemahiran bahasa tersebut berdasarkan kriteria berikut) Very Competent (Sangat Cekap) Competent (Cekap) Less Competent (Kurang Cekap) Poor (Lemah)

1 2 3

Languages (Bahasa) 1. 2. 3. 4.

Reading (Bacaan)

Writing (Menulis)

Listening (Mendengar)

Speaking (Bertutur)

180

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

11. Why do you want to learn a foreign language? (tick all that apply) (Mengapa anda ingin mempelajari bahasa asing? (tandakan mana-mana yang berk enaan) * Interested in the language (Berminat terhadap bahasa tersebut) * Interested in the culture (Berminat terhadap budayanya) * Have friends who speak the language (Mempunyai kawan-kawan yang bertutur dalam bahasa tersebut) * Required to take a language course to graduate (Dikehendaki mengambil kurusus bahasa asing untuk tujuan graduasi) * Need it for my future career (Memerlukan untuk karier pada masa hadapan) * Need it for travel (Memerlukan untuk tujuan pengantaraan) * Others (Lain-lain)

Please state: (Sila nyatakan)

____________________________________________________________________________ The following is a list of vocabulary learning strategies. Learning strategies here refer to the methods by which you learn vocabulary. We would like to know what you actually do, NOT what you should do or want to do. We would like you to indicate how often you have used certain strategies when learning the foreign language. Please CIRCLE the appropriate option: (Berikut adalah merupakan satu senarai strategi pembelajaran perbendaharaan kata. Strategistrategi pembelajaran di sini merujuk kaedah-kaedah bagaimana anda mempelajari perbendaharan kata. Kami ingin tahu apa yang anda sebenarnya lakukan BUKAN APA YANG ANDA PATUT ATAU HENDAK BUAT. Kami harap anda dapat menyatakan berapa kerap anda menggunakan strategi-starategi tertentu apabila mempelajari bahasa asing. Sila BULATKAN pilihan yang bersesuaian). 1.

Paraphrase (rewrite) the meaning of the word on your own (Parafrasa (menulis semula) makna sesuatu perkataan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

2. Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Listen to tape of word lists (Mendengar rakaman senarai-senarai perkataan) Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners 3.

Guess from textual context in reading (Mengagak makna daripada konteks tekstual dalam pembacaan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

4.

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Put relevant foreign language labels on physical objects (Meletakkan label bahasa asing yang berkaitan pada objek-objek fizikal) Never (Tidak Pernah)

9.

Usually (Kerap)

Learn words written on commercial items (labels, brochures, manuals, etc.) (Mempelajari perkataan yang ditulis pada barang-barang komersil (label, brosur, manual dan lain- lain) Never (Tidak Pernah)

8.

Often (Biasa)

Ask a teacher or friend for a paraphrase or synonym (Bertanya kepada guru atau kawan tentang sesuatu parafrasa atau sinonim) Never (Tidak Pernah)

7.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Associate the word with other words of similar meanings (Mengaitkan perkataan dengan perkataan-perkataan lain yang membawa makna yang serupa) Never (Tidak Pernah)

6.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Use a relevant foreign language TV program (Menggunakan program TV yang relevan dengan bahasa asing) Never (Tidak Pernah)

5.

181

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Use a relevant foreign language video Menggunakan video bahasa asing yang relevan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

182 10.

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong Use a relevant foreign language song (Mendengar/memahami lagu bahasa asing yang relevan)

Never (Tidak Pernah) 11.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Connect the word to its synonyms and antonyms (Menghubungkan perkataan kepada antonim dan sinonimnya) Never (Tidak Pernah)

16.

Always (Selalu)

Use a relevant foreign language website (Menggunakan laman web bahasa asing yang berkesan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

15.

Usually (Kerap)

Read a relevant foreign language newspaper (Membaca akhbar dalam bahasa asing yang relevan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

14.

Often (Biasa)

Learn to understand new words through group discussion in class (Belajar untuk memahami perkataan-perkataan baru menerusi kumpulan perbincangan di dalam kelas) Never (Tidak Pernah)

13.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Ask my foreign language teacher to check my word lists for accuracy (Bertanya kepada guru bahasa asing untuk memeriksa senarai perkataan bagi tujuan ketepatan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

12.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Practise the relevant foreign language with my parents or siblings (Mempraktikkan bahasa asing yang relevan berkenaan dengan ibu bapa dan adik beradik saya) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners

183

17.

Ask a foreign language teacher or friend for a sentence including the new word (Bertanya kepada guru bahasa asing atau kawan tentang sesebuah ayat yang mengandungi perkataan baru) Never (Tidak Pernah)

18.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Connect new words to already known words (Hubungkan perkataan baru dengan perkataan-perkataan yang sudah diketahui) Never (Tidak Pernah)

23.

Always (Selalu)

Study and practise using new words in a group outside of class (Belajar dan menggunakan perkataan-perkataan baru dalam sesebuah kumpulan di luar kelas) Never (Tidak Pernah)

22.

Usually (Kerap)

Use new word in sentences (Menggunakan perkataan baru dalam ayat-ayat) Never (Tidak Pernah)

21.

Often (Biasa)

Learn to understand new words through pair work in class (Belajar untuk memahami perkataan baru menerusi kerja berpasangan di dalam kelas) Never (Tidak Pernah)

20.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Do written repetition of the word (Membuat pengulangan bertulis bagi sesebuah perkataan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

19.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Ask your parents for the foreign language translation into your mother tongue (Bertanya kepada ibu bapa anda untuk menterjemahkan bahasa asing kepada bahasa ibunda anda) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

184

24.

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong

Learn the words of an idiom together (Belajar perkataan-perkataan dalam sebuah idiom) Never (Tidak Pernah)

25.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Use semantic maps and/or diagrams (Menggunakan peta dan alatan diagram semantik) Never (Tidak Pernah)

30.

Always (Selalu)

Memorize the meaning of affixes and roots (Menghafal makna dan asal perkataan)

Never (Tidak Pernah) 29.

Usually (Kerap)

Use a thesaurus (Menggunakan tesaurus) Never (Tidak Pernah)

28.

Often (Biasa)

Take notes in class (Mengambil nota-nota di dalam kelas) Never (Tidak Pernah)

27.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Use the vocabulary section in your textbook (Menggunakan bahagian perbendaharaan dalam buku teks) Never (Tidak Pernah)

26.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Use picture dictionary (Menggunakan kamus bergambar) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners 31.

Ask your brothers or sisters who know the foreign language to translate the words into your mother tongue (Bertanya kepada abang atau kakak yang mengetahui bahasa asing untuk menterje mah perkataan-perkataan itu dalam bahasa ibunda) Never (Tidak Pernah)

32.

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Listen to a foreign language radio program (Mendengar program radio dalam bahasa asing) Never (Tidak Pernah)

37.

Usually (Kerap)

Connect the words to a personal experience (Menghubungkan perkataan dengan pengalaman sendiri) Never (Tidak Pernah)

36.

Often (Biasa)

Imagine the word’s meaning (Membayangkan makna bagi sebuah perkataan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

35.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Keep a vocabulary notebook (Menyimpan buku catatan perbendaharaan kata) Never (Tidak Pernah)

34.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Group words together in writing (Mengumpulkan perkataan-perkataan yang mempunyai persamaan secara bertulis) Never (Tidak Pernah)

33.

185

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Categorising words in a foreign language into the various parts of speech (Mengkategorikan perkataan dalam bahasa asing kepada pelbagai bahagian tataba hasa) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

186 38.

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong Use borrowed words in another language (Menggunakan perkataan-perkataan pinjaman dalam bahasa lain)

Never (Tidak Pernah) 39.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Remember the word by making a clear mental image of it or by drawing it (Mengingat perkataan dengan membuat imej mental yang jelas atau menerusi lukisan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

44.

Always (Selalu)

Use rhyming to remember words (Menggunakan rima untuk mengingat perkataan) Never (Tidak Pernah)

43.

Usually (Kerap)

Associate the sound of a new word with the sound of a familiar word (Menhubungkan bunyi sesebuah perkataan baru dengan bunyi perkataan yang sudah biasa dikenali) Never (Tidak Pernah)

42.

Often (Biasa)

Do verbal repetition (Melaksanakan pengulangan verbal) Never (Tidak Pernah)

41.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Use a bilingual dictionary (Menggunakan kamus dwi-bahasa) Never (Tidak Pernah)

40.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Visualise the spelling of the new word in my mind (Menggambarkan ejaan perkataan baru dalam minda saya) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Adult Foreign Language Learners 45.

Use a combination of sounds and images to remember the new word (Menggunakan kombinasi bunyi-bunyi dan imej-imej untuk mengingati perkataan baru) Never (Tidak Pernah)

46.

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Use familiar words in different combinations to make new sentences (Menggunakan perkataan-perkataan yang biasa dikenali dalam kombinasi berbeza untuk membinaayat-ayat baru) Never (Tidak Pernah)

50.

Often (Biasa)

Physically act out the new word (Melakonkan secara fizikal perkataan baru tersebut) Never (Tidak Pernah)

49.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Use flashcards with the new word on one side and the definition or other information on the other (Menggunakan kad flash dengan perkataan baru pada satu permukaan dan definisi atau maklumat lain pada permukaan yang lain) Never (Tidak Pernah)

48.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Remember where the new word is located on the page, or where I first saw or heard it (Mengingat di mana perkataan baru itu ditempatkan dalam muka surat atau di mana biasanya melihat atau mendengar buat pertama kali) Never (Tidak Pernah)

47.

187

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Look for similarities and contrasts between the new words and words from my own mother tongue (Melihat persamaan dan perbezaan antara perkataan-perkataan baru dan perkataan daripada bahasa ibunda saya sendiri) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

188 51.

S. Rafik-Galea & B. E. Wong Guess the general meaning of a new word using clues from the context or situation in listening and speaking (Mengagak makna umum sesebuah perkataan baru dengan menggunakan bayangan daripada konteks atau situasi dalam mendengar dan bercakap)

Never (Tidak Pernah) 52.

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Make up new words if I do not know the right ones (Membuat perkataan-perkataan baru sekiranya saya tidak mengetahui perkataan mana yang betul) Never (Tidak Pernah)

53.

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Learn new words with a regular language learning partner (Mempelajari perkataan baru dengan rakan biasa dalam pembelajaran bahasa) Never (Tidak Pernah)

Seldom (Kadang-kadang)

Occasionally (Jarang-jarang)

Often (Biasa)

Usually (Kerap)

Always (Selalu)

Please write any other strategies you have used that are not written or listed above. (Sila tulis strategi lain yang telah anda gunakan tetapi tidak dinyatakn di atas) ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

PART 2 CLASSROOM PRACTICE AND EVALUATION STUDIES

9 TECHNOLOGY IN THE SERVICE OF CONSTRUCTIVIST PEDAGOGY: NETWORK-BASED APPLICATIONS AND KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

Wai Meng Chan and Ing Ru Chen

1 Introduction Technological developments and the increasing use of technology in education, including the teaching and learning of foreign languages, have run concurrent to a major paradigm shift in education í that from objectivism and instruction-based learning to constructivism and construction-based learning. In their attempts to root and justify constructivist pedagogy, scholars (e.g. Martel, 2000; Müller, 2000; Perkins, 1992; Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson & Coulson, 1992; Wendt, 2000; Wheatley, 1991) have variously traced the roots of constructivism and linked its principles to major traditions in philosophy, psychology and pedagogy which include such illustrious names as Immanuel Kant, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Jean Piaget, John Dewey, John Bruner, Ulric Neisser and Lev Vygotsky. Constructivist pedagogy is based on the principle that knowledge does not represent an objective entity which exists independently of the human mind and can be transmitted as a complete and unadulterated body of information from one person to another. Wheatley sums up this view by stating that: […] knowledge is not passively received, but is actively built up by the cognizing subject. Ideas and thoughts cannot be communicated in the sense that meaning is packaged into words and “sent” to another who unpacks the meaning from the sentences. That is, as much as we would like to, we cannot put ideas in students’ heads, they will and must construct their own meanings. Our attempts at communication do not result in conveying meaning but rather our expression evokes meaning in another, different meanings for each person. (1991, p. 10)

Constructivists view learning as an active and subjective process for the construction of meanings and knowledge. In the same vein, Chun and Plass describe the learner as “an active processor of information and constructor of

192

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

new knowledge” (2000, p. 160). As the learner perceives new information through his senses, he attempts to interpret and make sense of this information on the basis of his pre-existing cognitive structures, including especially his personal experiences, beliefs and attitudes. New knowledge that is meaningful and relevant to the learner is created through this process, and constructivist pedagogy strives to create conditions that are conducive to and facilitate such construction of knowledge. This knowledge is by no means static but is of a dynamic nature and constantly revised under the influence of new information and experiences. As Martel (2000) remarks, “knowledge is not acquired once and for all” (p. 56). This chapter will consider if and how computer and network technologies can make a telling contribution towards the realisation of constructivist principles of learning. It will begin with a review of relevant literature, providing an account of these principles as well as a discussion of the potential of computer media and their specific attributes, including especially the feature of interactivity, for supporting and enabling constructivist learning. Having established the theoretical framework, it will then report on three network-based applications developed at the National University of Singapore (NUS) for German as a foreign language, “My Vocabulary Book”, “Interactive Situation Simulation” and “Movie Studio”, which are examples for the translation of constructivist principles into practice. All three applications are designed to exploit the advantages of technology for the active construction of knowledge by giving learners control over the processes and contents of their learning, and enabling them to adapt and customize the applications to better suit their own learning strategies and preferences. 2 Principles of constructivist pedagogy Almost two decades since the beginnings of constructivist pedagogy, a consensus has largely been reached among constructivists about the role of the teacher and the learner as well as the way constructivist learning can best be fostered. The following principles are generally regarded as being fundamental to constructivist pedagogy. - Learning requires the active participation of the learner. As mentioned above, central to constructivist pedagogy is the view that learning represents the active process of integrating pre-existing and new knowledge to create new knowledge. Müller (2000) views this process as subjective and personal to the learner who interprets new experiences in an attempt to make sense of them. It thus emphasizes the agency of the learn-

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

193

er whose role is that of an active constructor and not one of a passive reproducer of externally transmitted information (Bednar, Cunningham, Duffy & Perry, 1992; Chun & Plass, 2000; Jonassen, 1992; Mandl & Reinmann-Rothmeier, 1998). Teaching practices should therefore seek means to activate learners and to support the construction of meaningful new knowledge on the basis of their existing cognitive structures (Perkins, 1992). - Constructivist pedagogy is process-oriented and encourages reflective learning. The learner as an active constructor of knowledge will necessarily have to take control of his learning. Perkins (1992) argues that the responsibility for task management has to be transferred from the teacher to the learner — with an appropriate amount of scaffolding provided by the teacher. This implicitly emphasizes the need to develop the learners’ metacognition to enable them to direct their own learning. Constructivist pedagogy should facilitate the development of learning strategies and metacognitive capabilities to enable the learner to learn without the explicit and direct supervision of the teacher (Müller, 2000). Arguing along much the same lines, Bednar et al. (1992) propose that teachers help learners develop a reflective awareness of their own construction processes. Jonassen (1992) believes that by evaluating not just the product, but also the process of knowledge acquisition, the learner will ultimately become more metacognitively aware (see also Rüschoff, 1999). Constructivist pedagogy is thus necessarily process-oriented. - Learning should be situated in authentic contexts. For learning to be meaningful and to result in “transferable and practicable knowledge” (Müller, 2000, p. 46), learning tasks need to be authentic and situated in real-world contexts (Bednar et al., 1992; Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989; Duffy & Jonassen, 1992; Resnick, 1987). Contextualizing a learning task allows the learner to perceive the meaning and relevance of the task and how the knowledge constructed can be useful for his interactions with the world beyond the classroom. In fact, Resnick (1987) believes the frequently observed lack of transfer between learning and behaviour in and out of school can largely be attributed to the decontextualization of learning. However, constructivists also acknowledge that there is also a place in the curriculum for tasks which are not fully authentic — especially when learners are still being initiated into the construction process — and that the level of authenticity may vary in relation to the learners’

194

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

expertise and skill (e.g. Bednar et al., 1992). It may sometimes be difficult, e.g. due to constraints specific to the learning environment, to provide more than simulated situations. For instance, providing authentic communicative activities for a foreign language classroom in an acquisition-poor learning environment geographically distant from the country of the target language may represent quite a challenge to the teacher. - Learning tasks should be open-ended. If the perception and interpretation of objects and experiences do indeed represent, as constructivists claim, subjective and personal processes that are unique to individuals, then learning, or the construction of knowledge, will invariably also lead to different learning experiences and outcomes among individual learners, even if their learning takes place in a common environment. Wheatley (1991) thus proposes to provide tasks in which students assume the role of explorers or inventors and which permit them to experiment, question, reflect, discover, invent and discuss, while the teacher becomes a resource person and facilitator. Learning (as well as assessment) tasks need to be open-ended and should allow as well as encourage potentially different outcomes (Perkins, 1992). An example of such open-ended materials is the Jasper series of interactive videos developed by the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University for fifth and sixth grade mathematics learners. The authentic tasks presented in these videos are all in the form of stories built around a person by the name of Jasper Woodbury. The unique feature of these materials is that the resolution of each story must be provided by the learners themselves through their interactions with the video. Such open-endedness not only adds to the realism and authenticity of the tasks, it also provides, as the developers assert (see Cognition & Technology Group, 1992), a very strong motivation for the learners to focus on and actively participate in the tasks. 3 Technology and constructivist pedagogy Computer media can make a telling difference in the realisation of constructivist learning principles and thus help foster learners’ knowledge creation. In particular, the element of interactivity, arguably the single most significant attribute of computer media, provides a means for learners to interact with the task and/or other learners online. Indeed, the interactive and communication capabilities of computer and network technologies give computer media a comparative advantage over conventional print media in the active involvement of learners as well as the sharing of ideas during the process of learning.

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

195

The above-cited Jasper series of interactive videos provides an example of how the generative character of the tasks, achieved through the exploitation of the medium’s interactivity, can lead to more active participation and a higher level of motivation among learners (see Cognition and Technology Group, 1992). Open-ended tasks such as those in the Jasper series encourage the application of new and existing skills and knowledge to real-world problems and can foster the development of problem-solving skills (Kozma, 1994). Many constructivists espouse the view that technology and computer assisted language learning (CALL) materials can support these complex learning processes by providing various cognitive tools for learning (e.g. Chun & Plass, 2000; Duffy & Jonassen, 1992; Issing, 1998; Jonassen & Reeves, 1996; Rüschoff & Wolff, 1999). Jonassen and Reeves (1996) describe computers and software such as databases, spreadsheets, and multimedia/hypermedia construction systems as important cognitive tools which can help learners organize, restructure and represent knowledge. For language learners, cognitive tools are available in the form of word processors, electronic encyclopedia and dictionaries, spelling and grammar checkers, and concordancers (Rüschoff, 1999). The Internet as an immense and rapidly expanding pool of resources, including information and authentic texts for foreign language teachers and learners, is another significant tool which provides both motivation and means for exploratory learning in an interactive real-world environment. Learning support can also be provided on a micro level, i.e. at the level of individual tasks or learning applications, to aid learners’ task processing. For Chun and Plass (2000), multimedia learning programmes can add options for multimodal learning (such as text commentaries, audio and video supplements) to suit learners’ individual learning preferences. Brett (1995) cites the example of a multimedia software for developing learners’ listening skills in business communication in English, which provides learners with options to determine the content, mode of delivery, activity and task type, degree of difficulty, level of support, sequence of activity, and time and pace of learning. He sees instantaneous feedback which multimedia software can provide as an important form of learning aid, for it can encourage learners to self-correct and thus evaluate their own strategies. Chan and Kim (2004) believe that computer technologies make it easier to design language learning tasks which provide a significant degree of differentiation among learners by providing interactive aids on demand (e.g. word explanations, lists of expressions, hints and strategy advice for task processing, information on learning strategies and grammar rules). They point out that the immense processing capabilities of

196

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

the computer make it possible to provide such help instantaneously and may greatly encourage the use of these options. Like Brett, they believe that this will encourage learners to adopt a more conscious approach to task processing and develop a greater reflective awareness of their own learning processes. This would be consistent with the constructivists’ call for the development of metacognitive awareness among learners and for greater attention to the process of knowledge construction (Bednar et al., 1992). As mentioned above, providing authentic learning tasks and contextualizing them is an important principle of constructivist pedagogy. Besides enabling multimodal learning and improving the comprehension, retention and recall of information (Issing, 1998; Plass, Chun, Mayer & Leutner, 1998; Plass, 1999), Issing (1998) sees a distinct advantage of multimedia technology in its capability to provide realistic and interactive learning opportunities. Indeed, the unique integration of graphics, photographs, videos, animation and sound in multimedia learning applications makes it possible to re-create or simulate real-life scenarios for situation-based language learning and for introducing the target culture to learners. 4 Network-based learning applications in support of constructivist pedagogy: Three examples In this chapter, the paper will look at three network-based applications designed to support the learning of German language learners at the NUS. All three complex learning objects, conceived by the German language teaching faculty of the NUS and scripted according to their specifications by the university’s own Centre for Instructional Technology, are designed to facilitate learning in accordance with constructivist principles, as discussed above. The applications are accessible to learners anywhere and anytime, provided they are connected to the web and have the proper user IDs and passwords to log onto the NUS network. These applications can be reached through links in the German language programme’s own electronic selfaccess centre, “e-daf” 1 .

1 “e-daf” is short for “Elektronisches Selbstlernzentrum für Deutsch als Fremdsprache” (in English: Electronic Self-access Centre for German as Foreign Language). While the three applications described in this paper require students to log in with NUS user IDs and passwords, “e-daf” (URL http://courseware.nus.edu.sg/e-daf) and many of its resources are available to the general Internet community.

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

197

4.1 My Vocab Book The application “Mein Vokabelheft” (in English: My Vocab Book) consists of a server-based database and a web-based user interface scripted using Macromedia Flash (see Fig. 1). The primary objective behind this application is to allow learners to create an online personalized store of vocabulary items in the German language and thus to enable more effective vocabulary learning. In line with the process-oriented approach of teaching practised by the German language faculty, students are introduced to “My Vocab Book” early in their learning progression, usually in the first few weeks of the German 1 course. Students are given a demonstration and shown how to carry out the range of operations available in the three distinct sections of the applications. They will be shown and given the opportunity to input self-selected vocabulary items, individual words or phrases and collocations, into their personal databases, created automatically the first time they access the application. Various structured forms are available in the first section “Add Records” for the input of various categories of words (e.g. nouns, verbs, prepositions, adjectives/adverbs, phrases etc.). The forms contain fields not just for the items to be added but also for relevant grammar information (such as genders and plural endings of nouns, and imperfect tense and past participles of verbs), example sentences and notes (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 1. My Vocab Book í main menu

198

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

Fig. 2. My Vocab Book í adding a record

Learners are also shown how they can then retrieve and display the stored items in the second section “View/Manage Records” in accordance with their own learning needs. The items are also searchable and sortable according to various criteria. For instance, learners can search for specific word categories (such as nouns), items entered within certain time periods (e.g. in the last week, month or half a year) or items starting with specific letters of the alphabet. They can also sort the retrieved items according to various criteria. For instance, nouns can be sorted by gender. For more complex manipulation of the items or to print them, they can be downloaded to learners’ harddisk as text files. An electronic flash card is created automatically for every item added to the database. These cards, frequently employed learning and memorization tools, can be accessed in the third section “Learning Interactions”. Students can opt to view all available cards or to select cards according to word categories (nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.) which are then displayed one at a time (see Fig. 3). By default, the card with the German item is usually first displayed and a click on the closed card next to it will reveal the English meaning of this word (including vital grammar information such as gender and plural endings for nouns) as entered by the learners. Learners may also opt to display the cards in the reverse order to test their recall of the German items. Cards of items they have mastered may be removed from the stack or re-added later for review purposes. In the course of the semester, teachers will usually show

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

199

students how the database can be utilized to support other vocabulary learning strategies. For instance, learners are shown how to sort nouns by gender easily using the sorting function under “View/Manage Records”, and then downloading and exporting this list to a word processor where the nouns are arranged into three columns for more effective memorization of the genders.

Fig. 3. My Vocab Book í flashcard function

“My Vocab Book” is essentially an electronic adaptation of the popular vocabulary card catalogue. The automatic creation of flash cards saves learners much time and effort and enhances the efficiency of this learning technique. It would appear evident from the description above that “My Vocab Book” represents a useful cognitive tool which supports constructivist learning. It allows learners to construct individually meaningful lexical knowledge by creating a vocabulary store which holds lexical items that reflect his needs and interests. Furthermore, learners take an active part in this process, as he must make conscious decisions about his choice of items and build a personalized vocabulary store (as opposed to using a standard textbook glossary whose contents are pre-determined by textbook authors). In addition, as the examples cited above indicate, the appropriate use and integration of this application in the language classroom can foster a greater awareness and encourage greater use of various strategies for vocabulary learning. In this manner, “My Vocab Book” can contribute to learners’ metacognitive development.

200

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

4.2 Interactive Situation Simulation “Interactive Situation Simulation” is a series of web-based multimedia units based on authentic communicative situations. The three earliest units were created using Javascript and Macromedia Shockwave, while for the latest unit Macromedia Flash technology was used. The application aims to address the problem of the immense distance between Singapore and the Germanspeaking countries by providing supplementary linguistic inputs, which serve to enhance students’ vocabulary learning and their conversational skills using simulated communicative situations. It also provides learners with a means to self-evaluate their learning outcomes. Three units, based on communicative situations in the German 1 syllabus, are currently available for beginners: 1) “In the German Classroom” with two sub-units, “The First German Lesson”, and “Small Talk before the German Lesson”; 2) “In the Grocery Store”; and 3) “In the Restaurant”. Each unit consists of two components, Vocabulary Practice and Conversational Practice (see Fig. 4). Learners can start either with Vocabulary Practice or Conversational Practice and are not required to attempt these components in a linear sequence. In both components, a Learning Mode and a Testing Mode are available for the purposes of learning and self-evaluation respectively. It is an undisputed fact that the ability to self-evaluate is an essential pre-condition for self-directed learning. In fact, self-evaluation is a vital metacognitive process which enables learners to gain an accurate assessment and an awareness of the success of their own learning. It is essential if learners are to be able to address their learning problems and improve their learning outcomes.

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

201

Fig. 4. Entry page of the ISS unit “In a Restaurant”

This paper will elaborate more about this online application “Interactive Situation Simulation” with the latest unit “In a Restaurant”. In the Learning Mode under Vocabulary Practice (see Fig. 5), learners can learn various lexical items related to the situation. He has full control over his learning and needs to take an active part by self-selecting the items to learn. By clicking on an item in the picture, the German and English words for the selected item appear on the right hand side of the user interface. Learning support is available in the form of an image of the item and the audio reproduction of the German word, which enable multimodal learning. Further support is provided in the form of learning tips which allow learners to elaborate on the word for more effective retention and recall. This is a potentially effective strategy for the learning of lexical items and their genders and plural forms. For instance, when learners click on soup bowl (“Suppentasse” in German), the learning tips provided will inform them that the gender of a compound noun in German is determined by the last noun of the word; words ending with -e are mostly feminine and the plural of the word is formed by adding -n to it (“Suppentassen” is thus the plural). Apart from learning about items and people in a restaurant, being able to understand the menu is essential as well in this communicative situation. A simulated menu with selected dishes and beverages typical for German restaurants was created for this purpose. Learners are free to choose any item from the categories given (e.g. set menu, appetizer and soup, main course, light fare, dessert and drinks). At a click, the image of the selected dish as well as

202

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

its German and English names will appear on the right of the user interface. By clicking on the loudspeaker icon, learners can listen to the name of the dish in German (Fig. 6).

Fig. 5. Learning Mode under Vocabulary Practice

Fig. 6. Reading and understanding a menu

In the Testing Mode under Vocabulary Practice (Fig. 7), learners likewise have complete control over the evaluation process, as they may decide freely

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

203

on the test items. These may be words they have just learned or would like to review. A timer is available and has to be set again by learners themselves. After each testing session, they are given the option of viewing and printing their current session’s results or those of their last three sessions. The access to such data enables them to track their own learning progress over three sessions (see Fig. 8) and to see problem areas they should pay greater attention to. Support is provided in the form of instantaneous feedback with hints for the self-correction of any wrong answers.

Fig. 7. Testing Mode under Vocabulary Practice

Fig. 8. Display of test results in the last three sessions

204

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

In order to provide learners with meaningful linguistic inputs in common situations in the restaurant, four scenarios — “Studying the menu”, “Ordering food”, “Talking about food” and “Paying the bill” — are included in the Learning Mode under Conversational Practice (Fig. 9). Learners actively interact with a “virtual” partner, simulated by the computer which assumes a role in the respective situations. For example, in the scenario “Paying the bill”, the computer takes on the waiter’s role. Learners choose one of two or three possible statements as response to each utterance of the waiter’s (see Fig. 10).

Fig. 9. Learning Mode under Conversational Practice

Linguistic input is thus embedded into simulated situations and made available to learners through the web to supplement the limited amount of materials presented in the classroom. Learning support is provided in the form of a glossary which does not just contain explanations for words and expressions, but provides useful country and culture information (see Fig. 10). For instance, there is a brief explanation on “Eurocard” which is not commonly used in Singapore.

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

205

Fig. 10. Glossary as learning aid under Conversational Practice

The task here is thus open-ended and enables learners to co-determine the progression and the outcome of the dialogue. All dialogue lines were prerecorded, and learners can listen to the pronunciation and intonation of these lines while constructing their dialogues. At the end of this constructive process, the ensuing dialogue is compiled and played back as a whole (see Fig. 11). After the assembly of a dialogue, learners have the option to record the dialogue. They will play one of the two roles and record the line in blue by clicking on the recording button included (see Fig. 12). This recording feature based on Macromedia Flash Communication Server Technology is the most recent addition to the features of this ISS unit. The recorded lines are saved in the server and an automatic e-mail with the link for the playback of the dialogue will be generated. Learners can e-mail the link for the dialogue to their friends and the dialogue can be retrieved at any time (see Fig. 13). The recording seeks to provide a means for learners to produce and simulate speech, and to practise their pronunciation and intonation in the process.

206

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

Fig. 11. Playback of the assembled dialogue with recording option

Fig. 12. Recording a dialogue

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

207

Fig. 13. Retrieval and playback of the recorded dialogue

Fig. 14. Testing Mode under Conversational Practice

In the Testing Mode under Conversational Practice (Fig. 14), learners have to solve multiple-choice tasks, picking for each task the correct response which will advance the conversation. The learners are not just responding to the stimuli, but engaging actively in the process and seeking to make sense of the discourse. In this unit “In a Restaurant”, there are four different tests for students’ self-evaluation of their learning outcome. Each corresponds to one

208

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

of the four communicative situations included in the Learning Mode of this unit. With the open-ended tasks in this component, learners can “explore” and even “experiment” with different flows of conversations and acquire or reinforce useful expressions relevant to authentic contexts. In this process, the learner is the key agent of learning and the constructor of new knowledge. “Interactive Situation Simulation” is an example of how technology can support situation-based constructivist learning. It provides open-ended tasks which afford active learner participation and much control, and results in meaningful constructive processes. Learners are encouraged to explore and experiment, and to acquire or reinforce lexical items and structures for authentic communication. Technology has also made it possible to provide easy access to various forms of interactive aids (such as learning tips, glossary, graphical and aural representations of a word) which can support and promote learners’ cognitive and metacognitive processes strategies. This application would appear to satisfy Issing’s (1998) criteria for a truly interactive learning application as it: 1) provides room for learners to be creative and to modify or create contents; 2) is dynamic and responds dynamically to the learners’ actions; 3) allows learners to assume control of their own learning processes; and 4) provides learning aids and support. Using the taxonomy of interaction proposed by Schwier and Misanchuk (1993) as a frame of reference, one would say that the “Interactive Situation Simulation” allows for “proactive interaction” as it enables “learner construction and generative activity” (p. 11). 4.3 Movie Studio “Movie Studio” is a web-based multimedia application which serves as a motivating platform for the scripting and recording of situation-based dialogues, which are embedded and played back in a computer animation. It makes use of Macromedia Flash to provide an attractive graphical interface for the above activities and Macromedia Flash Communications Server streaming technology to record and play back students’ speech. The “Movie Studio” was designed with the objective of providing students with simulated communicative situations to practise their speech in the German language and develop their conversational ability in an acquisition-poor environment geographically distant from the countries where the target language is spoken (Germany, Austria and Switzerland). Learners are encouraged to apply the appropriate vocabulary and structures introduced in class for

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

209

various situations and communicative tasks (such as discussing and ordering food and drinks in a café, and asking for and giving directions to destinations). Through the articulation and recording of self-authored dialogues, learners can build greater fluency in their speech, including their pronunciation and intonation. In addition, the application also seeks to provide some information about various aspects of the cultures and countries of the target language and to encourage learners to seek further information on their own. Currently, two units are available, based on the following topics and situations: 1) In a café; and 2) Travelling in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The “Movie Studio” requires full and active participation from students who work through six steps to produce their movies. In Step 1, they select the movies’ setting from five possible scenarios (see Fig. 15). For instance, in the Travelling Unit, students can choose from five cities and towns in the three German speaking countries (Munich, Berlin, Vienna, Goslar and Lucerne). Attractive graphical depictions of these places help students visualize the contexts in which their dialogues take place and lend a touch of realism. In Step 2, students pick two to three characters to appear in their movies (see Fig. 16). Up to nine characters are available for selection for each of the available scenarios, with some generic characters appearing in all five scenarios. The palette of characters is intended to enable learners to create several different communicative situations. The characters typically represent a cross-section of travellers of both sexes from Singapore or other countries as well as residents or representative characters of the depicted destinations, including special characters such as a “Fiaker” coachman in Vienna and someone in a Bavarian “Lederhose” (leather trousers) in Munich. Objects complementing these characters can be picked for each of the selected characters in Step 3, for example, a camera or travel guide for tourist characters, easel and brush for the street painter, and an attaché case, shopping bag or umbrella for local residents. The selection of characters and objects not only serves the purpose of motivating learners but also helps them structure the storyline of their movie and dialogue script. They are visual aids for the construction of meaningful contexts. The German and English words for each character are displayed in a compartment on the right of the graphical interface when learners move the mouse over the character, thus providing learners with the opportunity to acquire new vocabulary or reinforce previously learned vocabulary.

210

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

Fig. 15. Step 1 í Selecting a setting for the movie

Fig. 16. Step 2 í Selecting characters for the movie

In Step 4, besides confirming their selections of setting, characters and objects, learners have to opt to produce a “silent” movie with speech balloons or to record their dialogues as well. Learners write the dialogue in Step 5 and can input up to 15 lines of text with a maximum of 80 characters per line (see Fig. 17). If the learner has opted to record the movie, recording buttons will be enabled for each line of the dialogue. The recorded speech, streamed to and

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

211

saved on a server, will be synchronized with the speech balloons that appear during the playback of the movie. Learning support is provided in the form of a glossary (“Glossar”) and a phrase book (“Sprachbaukasten”). The glossary contains a list of all the figures and objects available for selection and their English translations for quick and easy reference, while the phrase book provides relevant phrases for performing the communicative tasks in the respective units. For instance, for the travelling unit, the phrases are organized in two categories corresponding to the communicative tasks of “requesting directions” and “describing the way”.

Fig. 17. Step 5 í Writing and recording the dialogue

In Step 6, learners fill out a form, providing personal details such as their own names and e-mail addresses, the movie titles, and the names and e-mail addresses of intended viewers. Upon successful transmission of these data, emails will be automatically generated and sent to the intended recipients. Much like electronic greeting cards, viewers click on a link in the mail to launch the movie (see Fig. 18 for the final product). The authors of the movies can also view their own productions after the successful transmission of the data.

212

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

Fig. 18. An example of the final product

Like the “Interactive Situation Simulation”, the “Movie Studio” is an example of how technology can be harnessed to contextualize learning using simulated situations and to provide authentic and open-ended communicative tasks based on these contexts. It also satisfies Issing’s (1998) criteria for a truly interactive learning application and allows for “proactive interaction”, as defined by Schwier and Misanchuk (1993). Furthermore, hyperlinks to websites with information on the featured cities and towns are provided for the Travelling Unit to encourage further exploratory learning in the Internet. As the “Movie Studio” calls for the inclusion of two or more characters in the movies, it provides a natural motive for collaborative learning and for the mutual negotiation of the movies’ contents and language. Anecdotal reports reveal that in some groups students provide one another with critical feedback and support for written and spoken aspects of their productions (including the pronunciation and intonation of dialogue lines). 5 Conclusion This chapter provided an overview of the main principles of constructivist pedagogy and discussed how computer media and network technologies can support learners’ construction of knowledge. Computer-based resources such as electronic encyclopedia and dictionaries, spelling and grammar checkers, concordancers, and Internet pages in the target language represent important

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

213

learning aids, or “cognitive tools” as Jonassen and Reeves (1996) suggest, for language learners. Furthermore the interactivity of computer media allows for the design of learning applications which provide various forms of support for learners at the micro-level, i.e. within each learning application or task. Such aids (such as in-built glossaries, strategy information, hints for task processing, grammar reference information etc.) support learners’ task processing, strategy use and metacognition, as some evidence from a recent study (Chan, in press) suggests. Three network-based applications, “My Vocab Book”, “Interactive Situation Simulation” and “Movie Studio”, were used to illustrate how technology can be harnessed to facilitate constructivist language learning. “My Vocab Book” represents a cognitive tool to support learners’ vocabulary learning by allowing them to create personalized online stores of vocabulary items which are meaningful and relevant to them. At the same time, it provides them with a strategic and effective means of learning vocabulary through the automatic generation of flash cards. Both “Interactive Situation Simulation” and “Movie Studio” are learning applications which provide situation simulations for the contextualization of meaningful communicative tasks. Both applications are designed to enable learners to take control of their own learning. Learners actively interact with the applications and make use of the in-built resources to generate multimedia contents in the target language (dialogues and dialoguebased animations). To facilitate learners’ constructive processes, both applications also provide learners with various learning aids to support their task processing and with options to adapt the applications to suit their individual preferences and strategies. Though informal feedback and the enthusiasm which students have shown in working with these applications provide some indications of the success of these applications, extensive and properly documented evaluation studies are nonetheless necessary to validate these impressions. Such studies are currently being carried out at the NUS and are intended to supply more conclusive evidence of the contributions of technology to constructivist learning as well as insights into learners’ interactions with computer-based tasks, including their cognitive processes and strategies. They thus represent attempts to answer calls by constructivists such as Kozma (1994) to build media theory by gaining a better understanding of how learners use the processing capabilities of the computer and how computer technology may influence learning.

214

W. M. Chan & I. R. Chen

References Bednar, A.K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T.M., & Perry, J.D. (1992). Theory into practice: how do we link? In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation (pp. 17–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Brett, P. (1995). Multimedia for listening comprehension: the design of a multimedia-based resource for developing listening skills. System, 23, 77–85. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42. Chan, W.M. (2006). Metacognition and learners' interactions with a web-based CALL grammar exercise. In P. Zaphiris & G. Zacharia (Eds.), User-centered computer aided language learning (pp. 209–233). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. Chan, W.M., & Kim, D.H. (2004). Towards greater individualization and process-oriented learning through electronic self-access: Project “e-daf”. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(1), 83–108. Chun, D.M., & Plass, J.L. (2000). Networked multimedia environments for second language acquisition. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: concepts and practice (pp. 151–170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cognition and Technology Group, Vanderbilt University (1992). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation (pp. 77–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Duffy, T.M., & Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Constructivism: new implications for instructional technology. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation (pp. 1–16). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Issing, L.J. (1998). Lernen mit Multimedia aus psychologisch-didaktischer Perspektive. In G. Dörr & K.L. Jüngst (Eds.), Lernen mit Medien: Ergebnisse und Perspektiven zu medial vermittelten Lehr- und Lernprozessen (pp. 159–178). Weinheim & München: Juventa. Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Evaluating constructivistic learning. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation (pp. 137–148). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Jonassen, D.H., & Reeves, T.C. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 693–719). New York: Macmillan. Kozma, R.B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 7–19. Mandl, H., & Reinmann-Rothmeier, G. (1998). Auf dem Weg zu einer neuen Kultur des Lehrens und Lernens. In G. Dörr & K.L. Jüngst (Eds.), Lernen mit Medien: Ergebnisse und Perspektiven zu medial vermittelten Lehr- und Lernprozessen (pp. 193–205). Weinheim & Munich: Juventa. Martel, A. (2000). Constructing learning with technologies: Second/foreign languages on the Web. In M. Wendt (Ed.), Konstruktion statt Instruktion. Neue Zugänge zu Sprache und Kultur im Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 55–71). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Müller, K. (2000). Constructivism in education. In M. Wendt (Ed.), Konstruktion statt Instruktion. Neue Zugänge zu Sprache und Kultur im Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 43– 54). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.

Technology in the Service of Constructivist Pedagogy

215

Perkins, D.N. (1992). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation (pp. 45–55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Plass, J. (1999). Lernpsychologische Grundlagen der Verwendung von Multimedia in der Fremdsprachenausbildung. Fremdsprachen lehren und lernen, 28, 15–31. Plass, J., Chun, D.C., Mayer, R., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second-language multimedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 25–36. Resnick, L. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16, 13–20. Rüschoff, B. (1999). Wissenskonstruktion als Grundlage fremdsprachlichen Lernens. Fremdsprachen lehren und lernen, 28, 32–43. Rüschoff, B., & Wolff, D. (1999). Fremdsprachenlernen in der Wissensgesellschaft. Ismaning: Hueber. Schwier, R.A., & Misanchuk, E.R. (1993). Interactive multimedia instruction. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications. Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (2000). Knowledge representation, content specification, and the development of skill in situation-specific knowledge assembly: Some constructivist issues as they relate to cognitive flexibility theory and hypertext. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation (pp. 121–128). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wendt, M. (2000). Kognitionstheorie und Fremdsprachendidaktik zwischen Informationsverarbeitung und Wirklichkeitskonstruktion. In M. Wendt (Ed.), Konstruktion statt Instruktion. Neue Zugänge zu Sprache und Kultur im Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 15– 39). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Wheatley, G.H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75, 9–21.

10 PEDAGOGICAL CONCERNS: SOME COMMON FEATURES OF CONTENT-BASED INSTRUCTION, TASK-BASED LEARNING AND BUSINESS CASE STUDY, AND THEIR ROLES IN AN EBP CLASS

Wenhua Hsu

1 Introduction English is not an official language in Taiwan. The focus of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) in Taiwan has up to now been at tertiary level. English and non-English majors see ESP mainly as having two orientations: academic and professional preparation. The subjects participating in the study were 112 students in Wenzao College of Languages. The students had been learning English formally for eight years and were seen as being at high-intermediate proficiency level. At Wenzao, the aim of the last two years’ English courses is to supply students with academic subject matter by offering various ESP courses in many fields. Content-based instruction (CBI) in the target language is the principal approach used in the ESP programs. Why is content-based instruction the major teaching approach in the ESP programs at Wenzao? Most English majors go to English-speaking countries for further study upon graduation. Although English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses in U.S and in U.K. universities offer pre-sessional and insessional language and academic skills training for overseas students needing to improve their English, they do not provide specialist knowledge instruction for a particular academic discipline (Hartill, 2002). The elective ESP programs with CBI format serve such a need. In contrast to “deep” ESP where ESP lecturers are language practitioners and their learners are subject specialists, the context of the current research represents a situation where the ESP teachers are subject specialists, giving subject lectures in the target language (i.e. English) and the non-subject students are English majors in an EFL setting. The ESP class in this study can

218

W. Hsu

therefore be seen as an amalgam of EGP (English for general purposes) and deep ESP. These English majors have an EGP learning background and engage in an ESP program to prepare to be subject specialists in the near future. Consequently the nature of the ESP courses in the current context is different from that of a “classic” ESP class. The emphasis on what items of language for specific purposes are to be learned in an ESP class turns out to be a focus on what specialized content is to be learned in such a “semi”-ESP class. This “semi”-ESP is characterized by the redirection of attention from “content in favor of language” to “language in favor of content”. 2 The 3-in-1 theoretical framework for EBP teaching English for business purposes (EBP) is one of the sub-areas of ESP. Due to lack of specificity of ESP methodology, the 3-in-1 teaching framework in my EBP context has thus been developed by my predecessors. The three teaching approaches are phased into the EBP class one at a time [(CBIÆTBLÆthe BCS approach) which leads to the BCS task]. Meanwhile three aspects of knowledge are imparted (see Fig. 1). As the figure illustrates, CBI is given at the beginning to provide knowledge for a subsequent series of subject-matter related language tasks and the case task. The CBI approach acts as the first vehicle for leading the learners to the point where they can discuss a business case using the language and content they have studied in the topic unit. Following CBI, it is aimed to create in the EBP classroom the essential conditions for language learning through a series of language tasks. The aim is also to raise students’ awareness of linguistic knowledge before the case discussion. There is ample flexibility in choosing tasks, depending on the students’ proficiency level and needs. The content of the tasks can be either more form-focused, an emphasis on the relationship between the form and the function, or an orientation to the real world business skills. A range of pre-BCS tasks will extend students’ vocabulary and raise consciousness of language use.

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

Knowledge embedded:

Approaches: Functions:

Subject-matter knowledge

Linguistic knowledge

Knowledge of a disciplinary approach

CBI

TBL

BCS

Activate/equip students with content-area knowledge

A 3-way methodology:

Contextualized tasks:

219

Raise students’ awareness of linguistic knowledge through a series of tasks

“When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” (See note below.)

3-in-1, which incorporates knowledge of subject-matter, linguistic knowledge and knowledge of a disciplinary approach BCS tasks, in which content is specialized.

Note: The business case study is an integral part of MBA programs in business and management schools. The BCS approach is the primary teaching methodology with a long history in the business field.

Fig. 1. A 3-way methodology with knowledge and function foci

The BCS approach follows the language tasks. Business case study (BCS) is a general term. The use of BCS can mean several things: written case texts, a method for doing a case, problem-solving tasks, an academic subject, a disciplinary methodology, a spoken/written genre and a proposed pedagogy for teaching EBP (Boyd, 1991; Grosse, 1988; Jackson, 1998; Westerfield, 1989). In terms of this teaching framework, the BCS lends itself to two purposes: one as the methodology of tackling a case following the tradition of the business field (i.e. the BCS approach) and the other as a pedagogical task, which is contextualized and in which content is specialized (i.e. the BCS task). Incorporating the BCS approach into the framework is based on the notion that “When in Rome, do as the Romans do”. This approach has some support in the business field. The case study approach is the primary teaching method used in business management schools. It is a vehicle that guides students to practice systematic analysis of the case problems.

220

W. Hsu

The notion that “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” can also be sustained in the ESP field. Widdowson (1975) posed the question of the extent of practical knowledge needed for teaching English for Science and Technology (EST). In Widdowson’s opinion, “the closer the English teacher’s methodology can be made to approximate that of science teaching, the more successful he will be in integrating the two areas of knowledge whose synthesis constitutes relevant English use” (p. 7). Later Widdowson (1981) extended his proposal for the correspondence between disciplinary methodology and cognitive deep structure and concluded that the best an ESP teacher can do is to design ESP program by direct reference to the methodologies of academic subjects concerned. Finally the three teaching approaches interact in the business case study in this context as a culminating task, which requires the synthesis of content information, language and disciplinary approach/skills and provides a sense of successful completion for students as well. That is, the case study leads the learners to a point where they can carry out a problem-solving task using the subject matter knowledge, linguistic knowledge and knowledge of a disciplinary approach they have studied in the previous phases. Figure 1 also shows another profile of the relationship between content knowledge, functions and the choice of approach. There is a symbiotic relationship between content knowledge and the approach to its delivery. The teaching approach imparts the content knowledge and the content knowledge enriches the delivery approach. The progressing principle of CBIÆTBLÆBCS may be supported by Skehan’s (1996) analysis of the planning effect on language performance. Skehan proposed that planning itself has two purposes: planning as rehearsal and planning as engaged knowledge. Planning as rehearsal is directed to mobilizing linguistic and conceptual processes so that the subsequent task can be done better. In contrast, planning as engaged knowledge highlights the way in which a task would draw upon an organized knowledge base, which would be made use of as the task requires. In line with Skehan’s planning notion, the CBI phase in the framework can be positioned as planning as engaged knowledge whereas the TBL pre-task phase can serve the rehearsal function, which has potential for maximizing the language teaching within content teaching. The cognitive load of the subsequent business case studies may become less heavy as a result of the interaction of the two types of planning through the CBI and TBL phases. In sum, this theoretical framework comprises (1) the three teaching approaches, which have their own sources and theories to support them; (2)

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

221

three types of content knowledge embedded in the teaching approaches: subject-matter knowledge, linguistic knowledge and knowledge of a disciplinary approach; and (3) two kinds of tasks, which are distinguished based on the stages in task implementation, namely, a series of language tasks before the BCS and the BCS task itself. The whole framework is used to formulate a 3way EBP teaching methodology, derived from the integration of previous approaches. From this premise, I sought to rely on the theories set out in the literature to support the present 3-in-1 teaching framework and found that each approach itself can stand alone to account for its pedagogical rationale. It is the similarities that led to a viable incorporation of the three different teaching approaches in an EBP class. 3 CBI, TBL and BCS: some common features ESP and CBI share several guiding principles: for example, both emphasize that language instruction cannot be separated from the contexts, in which the content reflects the target situation. Both ESP and CBI engage students in meaningful use of language rather than the use of linguistic components in isolation. Authentic materials and classroom activities are employed to encourage the transfer of language skills and other skills to real life (Johns, 1997). In their endeavor to account for the strengths of content-based instruction and the support from other learning theories, Grabe and Stoller (1997, pp. 19– 20) listed seven rationales for CBI. o In content-based classrooms, students are exposed to a considerable amount of language while learning content. This incidental language should be comprehensible, linked to their immediate prior learning and relevant to their needs. o CBI supports contextualized learning. In content-based classrooms, students have many opportunities to negotiate content through language in natural discourse contexts. o Students in CBI classes have increased opportunities to use the content knowledge and expertise that they bring to class. o Students in CBI classes are exposed to complex information and are involved in demanding activities, which can lead to intrinsic motivation. o CBI supports other learning approaches such as co-operative learning, project-based learning and task-based learning.

222

W. Hsu

o CBI allows additional subtopics and issues to be incorporated into the course and activity sequences. o In CBI classrooms, student involvement in topic and activity selection is increased, because there are many avenues for exploring themes in content-based classes. From these points, some notions are familiar from other fields. These notions are (1) comprehensible input; (2) negotiation of meaning; (3) studentcenteredness; (4) intrinsic motivation; (5) innovative learning/ teaching methodology; (6) knowledge-building goals; and (7) “authentic” materials. Moving from CBI to TBL, we can see similar notions and rationales. Based on Ellis (2000), Skehan (1996) and Willis (1996), some points concerning the rationales and assumptions of a TBL approach can be summarized as follows. 1. Promoting negotiation of meaning and thus comprehensible input in the task-based interaction (Krashen, 1980; Long, 1996). 2. Considering learners’ needs and incorporating them in the task. 3. Drawing on learners’ own input (experience and subject matter knowledge, etc.) 4. Doing things with language/using language to exchange meanings for a real purpose. 5. Relating tasks to the real-world relationship/using authentic tasks/ materials. 6. Focusing on meaning/emphasizing holistic language use, not isolated chunks of language use. 7. Integrating the four skills as well as other skills in the task interaction. 8. Being goal-oriented while undertaking tasks. 9. Evaluating outcomes when tasks are completed. Similarly taking TBL rationales as a foundation, business case studies can be characterized thus: ¾ Drawing on learners’ experience and subject matter knowledge (e.g. identifying the problems in a business case and realizing the facts). ¾ Requiring meaning-oriented interaction (e.g. generating alternatives). ¾ Being outcome-evaluated (e.g. predicting outcomes and evaluating alternatives). ¾ Being goal-oriented (e.g. choosing the optimal solutions). ¾ Using authentic materials reflecting business situations. The BCS appears to fulfil some defining characteristics regarding tasks: 1. By drawing upon authentic materials, the BCS brings the realities of the business world into the classroom, and hence is related to the real

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

223

world. [E.g. in accordance with Skehan’s (1996) and Long’s (1989) task definitions.] 2. The case texts deliberately involve red herrings (e.g. putting in irrelevant issues and a mass of data), information gaps and content discrepancies to encourage students to engage in negotiation and some process of thought. [E.g. in consonance with Prabhu’s (1983) and Ellis’ (2000) task definitions.] 3. Like law cases, the BCS narrates the problems or decisions that face a company management, telling the story up to a point where students are left to analyze the dilemma and to solve the problems. During the case discussion, students’ attention is focused on meaning and they have a goal which needs to be achieved, i.e. recommending the optimal solutions. [E.g. in line with Skehan (1996), Ellis (2000), Willis (1996) and Nunan (1989).] 4. The case studies have neither right answers nor simple solutions. The ambiguity provides a conceptual problem space for discussion or even open debate. [E.g. in tune with Bygate (2001), Ellis (2000) and Candlin (1987).] 5. The open-ended nature of case discussions may bring about an unpredictable and emergent process of language use. (E.g. in agreement with Bygate’s (2001) and Candlin’s (1987) task definitions.) From the above underlined features of the BCS, it is clear that the BCS is a task rather than an exercise. It provides learners with contexts for meaningful practice, emphasizing holistic language use instead of isolated chunks of linguistic components. Using the list of TBL rationales as a basis for comparison, the common features between CBI, BCS as well as ESP are presented in numbers, which correspond with the numbered items of the TBL rationales, in the following table. Table 1. Common features between ESP, BCS, CBI and TBL

ESP 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8

BCS 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

CBI 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

From the table, some similarities of ESP, CBI, BCS and TBL in learning rationales are clear. The common notions they share are drawing upon learners’ own input (e.g. knowledge and skills), creating a context for learners to experience language in various ways, relating to the real world and focusing

224

W. Hsu

on meaning. What the convergence of these rationales implies is that having been developed in different fields, these approaches are, nevertheless, closely related to each other. It also suggests that the integration of CBI, TBL and BCS into the present EBP teaching framework is viable. The next point after the idea of the 3-in-1 incorporation is to seek the possible evaluation modes. Jordan (1997) pointed out that the tendency is for business programs to require more oral participation from students in the lecture than is the case with postgraduate taught degrees in other disciplines. The business study, seminar and group discussions are speech events common to most business schools. Since active verbal participation is highly demanded in case discussion, the quantity and the quality of participation might give substance to the realization of the evaluation for this teaching framework. 4 Research methodology The procedure involved two phases of audio-taped data collection: pilot (one business case discussion) and main (three). The main study was carried out via three separate business case discussions, each treatment using one pedagogical approach. The measures of participation involved language accuracy, content errors and group work, which reflect the quality of participation (the definition, coding and criteria of the operational measures are provided in Appendix 1); and the number of words, which shows the quantity of participation. More process insights were obtained retrospectively from post-case questionnaires for immediate recall and interviews (see Appendix 2). The EBP classroom data collection spanned two academic semesters and involved three classes, 112 students in total. The overall quantitative research design is presented in the following table.

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

225

Table 2. The quantitative research design

Types of prepara- Stage 1: CBI Stage 2: TBL Stage 3: BCS Stage 4: BCS tion language approach task Case 0; Class A, + B, C Case 1; Class A + + Case 1; Class B + + Case 1; Class C + + Case 2; Class A + + Case 2; Class B + + Case 2; Class C + + Case 3; Class A + + Case 3; Class B + + Case 3; Class C + + Note: “+”: having this treatment; “-“: not having this treatment. Class A: 40 students (10 groups of 4); Class B: 36 students (9 groups of 4); Class C: 36 students (9 groups of 4)

One-way independent groups and repeated measures ANOVA were used to test for significant difference in both quantity and quality of participation. This was coded numerically to see whether there were prominent differences in the language and content produced by the students of three classes with different teaching approach treatments. The research questions, formulated from pedagogical perspectives, are concerned with the 3-in-1 framework, its associated teaching approaches and their positions in the EBP classroom: 1. Do CBI, TBL and BCS approaches help students to improve their English performance while, at the same time, learning the subject? 2. Do CBI, TBL and BCS approaches have an equal effect on classroom participation? If not, which of these three teaching approaches is most effective in terms of L2 speech production? 3. What is the students’ perception regarding the most effective teaching approach of the three? 4.1 Procedures Small group work, especially in groups of four, was common at Wenzao. The groups across three EBP classes were formed based on the students’ choice. Each group of four involved the same partners and the same seating arrangement for one academic year. All of the participants (Class A, 40 students; Class B, 36; Class C, 36) were novices in business. Cases were distributed at

226

W. Hsu

6-week intervals. The time spent on the implementation of CBI, TBL and BCS alone was equal, namely two weeks for each, six hours in total. The recordings of three classes were made during normal class times. Three classes were audio taped following the same procedures in the same place during the same week, but on three different days. The students knew that all the groups were being audio-recorded simultaneously. In a 50-minute session, the recording for each class was planned to run 30 minutes. The 30-minute business case discussion on each occasion was later converted to 25-minute transcripts for analysis. 4.2 Teaching approach treatments: taking case 1 parallel import as an example Class A was introduced to the notions of parallel import and gray market for six hours in total, while the other two classes (named as classes B and C) were not. The delivery approach was teacher-fronted lecture in the target language, drawing upon business textbooks written in English. Meanwhile Classes B and C were given pre-BCS TBL activities and the handouts concerning the BCS approach in turn. The rationale for such an individual treatment rested upon the straight comparison among three classes. After the first case discussion, content instruction of parallel import was given to classes B and C in the normal class time in order to complement their lack of knowledge of this area in the prior treatment. In contrast, Class A and Class C at this post-case 1 phase undertook a series of language-focused tasks. Class A and B were introduced to the BCS approach with a case analysis sample at the end. Therefore three classes had the same content at the end but were given differently in time. In cases 2 and 3, the recording procedures and treatments in different orders were repeated as in case 1. The issues in the four business cases were comparative advantages, parallel import, foreign exchange risk and negotiating an agreement. 5 Results of data analysis 5.1 The pilot study The pilot study served as a baseline as there was no teaching approach given before the case discussion. Each class normally contains students of high, middle and low achievement. Little difference among three classes could be justified by the small difference of the final average scores for the English

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

227

language subjects on their second year academic records among the three classes (Class A mean score=72.05, N=40; Class B mean score=75.22, N=36; Class C mean score=73.04, N=36, p=0.703). It was decided that students’ English ability was not of account as an independent variable while running SPSS. Table 3 shows that none of the participation measures approaches significant difference. The results confirmed the homogeneity of three classes. Table 3. Statistical results across three classes in case 0

Measures The number of words Language accuracy Content errors Group work

Mean A=421, B=405,

C=416

A=36%, B=38%, C=39%

F 0.455

p-value 0.635

0.352

0.704

A=3.46, B=3.51, C=3.59 0.548 A=0.3, B=0.3, C=0.2 Ȥ 2=2.322

0.585 0.677

Class A, n=40; Class B, n=36; Class C, n=36. The determination of the significance level was set at p<.05. Table 4. Correlation between language ability and language accuracy

The average English scores

Language accuracy (% of error-free clauses) R=-0.077 Sig. (2-tailed)=0.523 N=112

Note: The final average scores for the English language subjects involving listening, speaking, reading and writing on the 2nd year academic records were utilized to represent English language ability.

In addition, the two variables, language accuracy and language ability did not seem to be associated. The results (very low r, r=-0.077, Table 4) indicate that there was virtually no consistency between their English ability and the percentage of language accuracy. It was speculated that there might be a negative association between language accuracy and wrong content contribution. The one who spoke more accurately tended to make fewer content errors in his/her speech turns. To have the same scale type, the speech turns of wrong content were converted into a percentage by dividing by the total turns. The results obtained by way of Pearson r correlation tests on three classes of students (see Table 5) show that language accuracy and content error ratio did not seem to be associated as the very low Pearson r correlation coefficient (r=-0.073) has shown.

228

W. Hsu

Table 5. Correlation between language accuracy and wrong content contribution

Language accuracy (% of error-free clauses) Content error (in %)

R= -0.073, Sig. (2-tailed)=0.444, N=112

5.2 The main study Table 6 shows the operational measures of participation and the results across three classes and three cases. Table 6.1. The quantity index of participation: The number of words

Case 1 Class A 424 Class B 452 Class C 417 F(independent) 0.349 P 0.756

Case 2 416 464 421 0.362 0.708

Case 3 404 458 410 0.354 0.714

F (repeated) 0.049 0.062 0.054

P 0.951 0.945 0.949

Table 6.2. The quality index of participation: Language accuracy (= % of error-free clauses)

Class A Class B Class C F(independent) P

Case 1 51 % CBI 69.8 % TBL 46 % BCS 45.229

Case 2 49 % BCS 54 % CBI 67.8 % TBL 30.4

Case 3 68.2 % TBL 46.2 % BCS 55 % CBI 34.71

0.000***

0.000***

0.000***

F(repeated) P 36.71 0.000*** 45.11 0.000*** 40.89 0.000***

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

229

Table 6.3. The quality index of participation: The number of instances of wrong content turns

Class A Class B Class C F(independent) P

Case 1 0.97 CBI 2.47 TBL 1.73 BCS 9.44 <0.01**

Case 2 1.67 BCS 1.17 CBI 2.46 TBL 8.35 <0.01**

Case 3 F(repeated) 1.47 TBL 6.8 0.94 BCS 10.71 0.67 CBI 10.98 3.162 0.046*

P 0.01** <0.01** <0.01**

Note: “*”=statistically significant difference (p<.05); “**”=p<.01; “***”=<<.01 Table 6.4. The quality index of participation: The number of groups giving reasonable solutions

Case 1 Case 2 6/10 (0.6) 5/10 (0.5) 4/9 (0.444) 5/9 (0.555) 5/9 (0.555) 3.5/9 (0.3888) Fisher’s test 2.83 1.94 P 0.6 0.89 Class A Class B Class C

Case 3 4/10 (0.4) 5/9 (0.555) 6/9 (0.666)

Fisher’s test 2.322 1.369 1.99

P 0.677 0.937 0.723

2.316 0.678

Table 6.1 shows that the expectation of either the impact of CBI, TBL or BCS on more talk was not supported across three cases under different treatments in turn. In Table 6.2, content knowledge did not seem to favor language quality. On the contrary, the class with pre-task TBL treatment produced more obviously accurate language (69.8%, 67.8% and 68.2% of clauses accurate, compared to 51%, 54% and 55% for the class with CBI across three cases in turn). Inferiority of the class with CBI or BCS to the class with TBL in language accuracy was statistically apparent. Alternatively linguistic knowledge activation via a TBL approach (i.e. an awareness-raising effect through the planning process) brought about an improvement in language performance. Without pre-BCS TBL activities, it could be possible that during the case discussion, the students might have ignored the accuracy of language use and have paid more attention to the expression of content. In pilot study without any treatment, students might have had a heavier cognitive workload while they were discussing the case in the target language, and thus paid less attention to language accuracy, as lower percentage of error-free clauses each class has shown (language accuracy in pilot data, Class

230

W. Hsu

A=36%, Class B=38% and Class C=39% versus Table 6.2, % of error-free clauses, as low as 46% and as high as 69.8%). Unconsidered and naïve talk was assumed to be associated with lack of content knowledge or misconception. The assumption triggered the prediction: fewer errors in content contribution would be made due to greater content area knowledge. As predicted (Table 6.3), Class A in case 1, Class B in case 2 and Class C in case 3 generated fewer instances of wrong and naïve talk (the mean content error made per person for Class A in case 1=0.97; for Class B in case 2=1.17; for Class C in case 3=0.67). The result of the group solution was not encouraging. As presented in Table 6.4 (the index reflecting the quality of the group solution), in case 1, 6 groups out of 10 in Class A with the aid of CBI came up with reasonable/ logical solutions in contrast to 4 out of 9 in Class B with TBL, and 5 out of 9 in Class C with BCS. If the students had known that parallel import is legal under some conditions, they would have given up taking legal action against gray importers. They might have put forward marketing strategies to counter competitors or re-evaluate the exclusive distribution agreement in terms of profit margins. The knowledge of parallel import determined the line of reasoning and subsequently the quality of the solution. The claim was not supported because Fisher’s Exact test did not attain the 0.05 level of prominence across three cases. Overall, the results of the treatment with BCS seem to suggest at first glance that few clear-cut differences existed across three classes and three cases. However, the inferential statistics should be interpreted with caution for two reasons. Firstly, the sample size concerning groups was small (Class A, 10 groups; Class B, 9 groups; Class C, 9 groups). Secondly, in business practice, getting the job done right is emphasized. In case 1, more groups in Class A with CBI and in Class C with BCS (6/10, 5/9 versus Class B, 4/9) made a more intelligent decision based on what they knew about the case with the aid of subject matter knowledge or the BCS approach. Similarly, in cases 2 and 3, the class with CBI or BCS did a better job than the class with TBL. In terms of the BCS effect taken horizontally and vertically (between subjects comparison across cases and across classes given the BCS treatment), there was little variation in any of the four participation measures (Tables 6.1Æ6.4). To sum up, the class with the aid of CBI had fewer instances of naïve and wrong content presentation across three cases. The result that CBI did not cause students to produce target language more grammatically was counter to our prediction. The pre-task planning: TBL approach (a series of pedagogical tasks undertaken before a case to raise students’ awareness of linguistic know-

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

231

ledge) demonstrated an immediate impact on the accuracy of language use. Inferential statistics in Table 6 reveal that overall the BCS approach did not noticeably work for any class statistically in enhancing better and more verbal participation. From the perspective of group work, CBI, TBL and BCS did not show any striking potential in generating optimum solutions. Namely, neither of the treatment raised the quality of group solutions. The expectation of the impact of CBI, TBL and BCS on more talk was not sustained as well. 5.2.1 Students’ perception toward content-based instruction The bulk of students’ preferences (84 out of 112 students) tended to center around business content instruction. They gave reasons for their preferences: - “Business content knowledge acquired has made me feel that I am a double major: English major and business minor. Learning a new content area makes me feel a sense of achievement.” - “Business concepts are easily kept in mind once understood. I have a short memory. I dislike form-function exercises.” - “Without content area knowledge, I don’t know how to tackle the case problems and discuss them deeply.” - “I think both content and language are inseparable and become more instrumental in complementing each other.”

The value of CBI was further highlighted by students’ conception that they were more knowledgeable being a double major than being a language single major. Their needs for knowledge of another content area became prominent when chances were given. One function of the elective EBP class was thus deemed by them to be learning content and language at the same time. Such content knowledge needs might have dictated their preference for CBI. This can be partly ascribed to the fact that the members of the target group researched were language majors in an EFL context. The EBP class provided them with the opportunity of learning something new and different from the language courses. The content learning needs also help explain why the content of the class lecture remained in their mind beyond one semester. Question 1 in the interview, “what immediately comes to your mind when you think of the business case study?” did not directly address the issue of the effects of the different teaching approaches. However, very surprisingly most interviewees were impressed with the content lecture delivered at the beginning of this course in the first semester. The topics taught were completely new to them so that CBI seemed more effective in terms of memory than TBL. One possible implication is that the students still remember the subject matter content in the class

232

W. Hsu

lecture but they forget what pedagogical tasks related to language have been undertaken. Though TBL has achieved an immediate effect on language performance, CBI effect on content learning remains longer. The following is a selection of their reactions. - “Price quotation. I remember Ms. Hsu’s content lecture was price quotation concerning shipping terms at the beginning of the last semester. The concepts are deeply rooted in my head.”

Below is what some interviewees said about the impact of content knowledge on their participation. - “More content knowledge would enhance our collaboration. We had a happy experience in case discussion. We helped each other until each of us understood. - “With more content area knowledge, I would be able to talk in depth and breadth.” - “Knowledge is power. Content knowledge enables me to talk with confidence.”

The comment below represents how some students pointed to the importance of CBI, in particular delivered over a long period of time. - “Content instruction has made us familiar with a certain topic at a basic level but we did not have opportunities to stick with the topic and develop its relevant critical thinking skills both in depth and breadth. We hope to get more content area expertise over a long period of time.”

It is worth noting here that these language students did not have the notion of sustained CBI or knowledge of teaching approaches. This comment was a great encouragement for a CBI teacher. These students addressed their needs of sustained CBI, which was proposed by Pally et al. (2000). According to their claims, none of the previous CBI programs had followed a subject enough to enable their students to synthesize content knowledge, question data or present argumentation of their own. Given these concerns from the students’ critical comments, the factor “sustained” appears to be worthy of consideration for CBI practitioners. 5.2.2 Students’ perception toward pre-BCS language tasks - “Language form-function exercises are very important to content learning. Language knowledge enables us to express the concepts in a particular subject matter and their relationship among them.” - “It is a good new language exercise from the viewpoint of a discipline. Topicrelated vocabulary and subject matter concepts were continuously recycled and

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

233

it helps to review our linguistic knowledge again from the position of another discipline instead of a language subject.” - “I have learned a lot from other language classes, which emphasize formfunction, grammar exercises of similar types. I hate structure exercises.”

From the reactions to TBL, there was a general consensus amongst the students that language oriented tasks were helpful and complementary to content learning. Though useful, several of them were not interested in the language tasks. One even resented language structure exercises. This immediately suggests that instrumental perception and interest may not always coincide. As is evident from one student’s comment, she did not find form-function tasks enjoyable though she believed that she needed to learn. The contradictions also echo the incongruence between the best effect of TBL approach shown in the statistical results and the students’ preference for CBI approach demonstrated in the qualitative data. In addition to this, students’ allocation of attentional resources seemed to be selective. They tended to process content meaning as priority. The interview obtained the results of their being inclined to attending to content prior to language. - “The message of communication is content. As the time span between thought and utterance was extremely short, we had to pay attention to the content we really wanted to say. I think during the case discussion, I was aware of both with more attention to content.” - “I focused on content. Language is just a tool/media to assist us in message transmission.” - “While others were talking, I concentrated on their expression of content. While I was talking, I drew ideas upon some basic grammatical rules and organized them roughly in my head before utterance.” - “Case discussion is an information pool activity. As to language accuracy, we were supposed to learn grammar well in other language classes.” - “As long as there was no breakdown in communication, I didn’t care too much about English accuracy. We never bother to find fault with each other’s talk in English.”

Most students stated that they were attentive to content while talking. This result is parallel to van Patten’s (1990) claim. He suggested that learners, in particular at an early stage, have great difficulty in attending to both form and content at the same time in input processing. The interview responses also supported Skehan’s (1996) claim that under the pressure of real time communication, learners’ attentional capacities become limited. Learners may place great emphasis on communicating meanings but do not necessarily worry about the exact form that they use.

234

W. Hsu

The students’ perception toward TBL did not surprise us. Not only were the examples of the students’ preference for CBI approach found in the questionnaire, but their choice of attentional resources was also content-oriented. They did not overlook the benefits of form-focused tasks but they appeared to lack interest in this aspect and did not seem keen on language accuracy. 5.2.3 Students’ perception toward the BCS task and the teaching procedure The BCS approach aims to equip students with higher order thinking skills. Unfortunately the statistical results contradicted the expectation that the class with the BCS treatment would generate more groups putting forward reasonable and logical solutions. The following responses to other questions in the questionnaire and the interview raised two concerns: - “I need thinking skill training such as synthesizing ideas drawn from many sources and making connections between important data.” - “Case discussion would not make any sense if without content area knowledge. The topic in the case would become ostensible and a carrier one purely for the sake of language exercises.” - “Thinking skills became easier with increased knowledge of the content area.”

1. Knowledge of the BCS approach may be essential in tackling the case problem. As one student indirectly hinted, thinking skills development promotes an understanding of the nature of business and insights into the core facts of the case. Another student pointed out his difficulty in making connections between the case parts. The above views do point toward the need to train students to develop the skills of case problem solving. 2. The case task and content knowledge seemed inseparable to the students. In their opinion, the BCS task highlighted the requirement of content knowledge more than any other types of tasks. 6 Discussion The research results enables us to answer Research Question 1, “Do CBI, TBL and BCS approaches help students to improve their English performance, while at the same time, learning the subject?” and leads us to conclude that CBI and TBL approaches help students to improve their English performance on business case studies in two distinct ways, i.e. in content and in language.

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

235

The answers to Research Question 2, “Do CBI, TBL and BCS approaches have an equal effect on classroom participation? If not, which of these three approaches is most effective in terms of the L2 speech production?” are much dependent on which aspect of participation is emphasized. The orientation toward the quality of language or the quality of content dictates the choice of teaching approaches. The findings lead us to claim that language-oriented tasks undertaken before the case task can boost language performance and the effect of CBI lasts longer. BCS tasks provide learners with a purpose for language use, but language is not the only object of manipulation. The answers to Research Question 3, “What is the students’ perception regarding the most effective teaching approach of the three?” can be obtained directly from the questionnaire and the interview. The qualitative data show that CBI was overwhelmingly popular with the students despite the immediate effects of the TBL pre-task on language performance. The reason might be that the students in this research were language students. Some of the students in this investigation specifically mentioned CBI’s usefulness and relevance to BCS studies and their own interest. These reactions support Grabe and Stoller’s (1997, p. 20) claim that “CBI itself promises to generate increased motivation among students in content-based classrooms”. From our case the BCS task provided the language students with immediate practice opportunities to apply their content area knowledge to the case problem-solving task. It was the two (i.e. both CBI and BCS) that stimulated the students’ interest. Therefore the 2nd possible reason for leaning toward CBI is that business case studies involve more specialized knowledge and students feel the urgent need for content domain knowledge. As one student indicated, without content area knowledge as a backup, case discussion may simply become small talk among peers. A new concern is generated from the responses to RQ 3, “Which should be given prominence, the teaching approach embracing most students’ preference or the most effective teaching approaches lacking popularity?”. The students did not seem to feel the effectiveness of TBL pre-task activities. From the data, the effectiveness alone may not always guarantee students’ satisfaction. TBL activities undertaken before the business case study were perceived to be helpful but not necessarily enjoyable to them. As is evident from their responses, when the content instruction was a new experience to them and matched what they believed they would need in the near future, their curiosity was aroused, and thus led to interest. To answer the question, “What should be given more prominence, the most effective or the most popular teaching approach?”, I wish to echo Hutchinson and Waters’ (1987) claim that

236

W. Hsu

students are people, not machines, and they need creativity and fun, not merely the prospect of efficiency and effectiveness. From the responses to the interview Q6, “Would you like your teacher to continue teaching this way, content-based instructionÆlanguage formfunction pedagogical tasksÆbusiness case study? Why or Why not?”, most interviewees generally supported this teaching sequence in the order of CBI, then TBL and BCS task at the end. Below is a summary of their comments in the interview: - “This method is pretty easy to follow and understand. It did fulfil my expectation of acquiring both specialised knowledge and English skills for specific purposes. I learned a lot from this course. At least I know better than my fellow English majors who do not take a business class.” - “It was an enjoyable learning experience. I was equipped with such content area knowledge as to speak more like a business specialist.”

This pedagogical framework seemed to be acceptable to them in terms of the delivery sequence: from receiving input to generating output, and from needs identification to the integration of language and content into the case discussion. Generally speaking, the business case study was an enjoyable experience in the target language for them. 7 Implications for the pedagogical framework In the phases of CBI and TBL, all the possible planning has been envisaged, and the subsequent job is to throw students into, and let them swim in, the BCS task. Over-orienting students to language form or factual accuracy in relation to content, and over-stressing the class progression following the original plan may discourage students from producing output on their own. In particular, most EFL contexts involve students in the target language for only a small portion of each day, because the classroom activities are probably the only practice opportunity for the EFL students to generate English output. Depending on the background of students, the components of planning and improvisation can be weighted differently. To overcome the weakness from improvisation, it is instructive to include post-task language form analysis at the end, as Willis (1996) and Skehan (1996) suggested. The post-task language analysis/assessment is currently not the focus of this research but it is interesting and worthwhile to explore. In sum, the proposed 3-in-1 framework (CBIÆTBLÆthe BCS approachÆthe BCS task) for EBP teaching, grounded in the careful structuring of disciplinary content, language instruction and disciplinary approaches, does

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

237

not necessarily operate in all types of EBP programs, nor does it signify a panacea. However, this framework does offer an alternative way to the systematic use of BCS for non-business EFL students as opposed to business professionals. This research has reviewed the present theoretical framework for EBP teaching. The findings are essential to the ongoing reflections on, in and for the practice of this framework. References Boyd, F.A. (1991). Business English and the case method: A reassessment. TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 729–733. Bygate, M. (2001). Introduction. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 1–2). Harlow, Essex: Longman. Candlin, C. (1987). Towards task-based language learning. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language Learning Tasks (pp. 5–22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ellis, R. (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 193–220. Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies on Second Language Research, 18, 299–323. Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In M.A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 5–21). White Plains, N.Y.: Longman. Grosse, C.U. (1988). The case study approach to teaching business English. English for Specific Purposes, 7(2), 131–136. Hartill, J.A. (2002). The role and application of descriptive research to course design in EAP. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Essex. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach. London: Longman. Jackson, J. (1998). Reality-based decision cases in ESP teacher education: Windows on practice. English for Specific Purposes, 17(2), 151–167. Johns, A.M. (1997). Text, role and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jordan, R.R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Krashen, S. (1980). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Long, M. (1989). Task, group and task-group interactions. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 8, 1–26. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Communication and learning in the classroom community (pp. 23–48). Singapore: SEAMEO. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

238

W. Hsu

Pally, M., Bailey, N., Camhi, P.J., Bernard, R.W., & Carson, J.G. (Eds.). (2000). Sustained content teaching in academic ESL/EFL: A practical approach. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co. Prabhu, N.S. (1983). Procedural syllabuses. Paper presented at the SEAMEO Eighteenth Regional Seminar, Singapore. Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 17–30). Oxford: Heinemann. Van Patten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(3), 287–301. Westerfield, K. (1989). Improved linguistic fluency with case studies and a video method. English for Specific Purposes, 8(1), 75–83. Widdowson, H.G. (1975). EST in theory and practice. In English for academic study with special references to science and technology problems and perspectives (April, pp. 1–13). The British Council: English Teaching Information Centre. Widdowson, H.G. (1981). English for specific purposes: Criteria for course design. In L. Selinker, E. Taron & V. Hanzeli (Eds.), English for academic and technical purposes: Studies in honor of Louis Trimble (pp. 1–11). London: Newbury House. Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman.

Appendix 1 Wrong content contribution measure: Definition, coding and criteria Definition: Wrong content contribution is defined as incorrect fact description, wrong inference, incomplete understanding and repeating others’ incorrect utterances. Since part of the research focuses on content knowledge, it also includes unconsidered ideas and naïve judgments. Students’ limited content knowledge might incline them to process the information superficially and thus toward poor solutions to the case problems. Coding and Criteria: Each speaker’s turn was assessed based on the following criteria. 1 point was awarded for each turn of wrong and naïve content and the total points were tallied. The mean content errors made per person could thus be the total wrong content turns divided by the total persons of a class. 1. Does the speaker make a correct fact description/explanation? Yes: coded as 0. No: coded as 1. 2. Do the speaker’s utterances indicate superficial/unconsidered ideas based on the holistic impression of an experienced specialist? Yes: coded as 1. No: coded as 0. 3. Do the speaker’s utterances show any sign of incomplete understanding, which biased others and even corrected others’ right utterances?

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

239

Yes: coded as 1. No: coded as 0. 4. Does the speaker repeat others’ incorrect utterances? Yes: coded as 1. No: coded as 0. The group work measure: Definition, coding and criteria Group work refers to the solution(s) to the case problem(s) put forward by a group rather than a measure of the quality of group interaction or effectiveness. The measure could be construed as indirectly measuring the quality of reasoning and critical thinking collectively generated in a group, as well as background content knowledge and reading comprehension ability for the case text. The quality of group work involves one of the criteria: reasonable, logical and feasible. To minimize subjectivity, the raters were guided by the ready solutions provided in the Teacher’s Answer Key Manual. The answers were checked and agreed by the raters, both of whom have business degrees. If the group solutions were outside the answer keys, they were judged by the same raters. The overall quality of the group solutions was rated on the basis of a 3-point scale, from 0 (all wrong solutions), 0.5 (partially right and partially wrong) to 1 (all correct solutions). Each group for each case received a final grade (0, 0.5 or 1) based on whether the group developed a reasonable/ logical solution as given in the Teacher’s Manual. Consequently the total of the scores represents the average number of groups reaching correct answers per class as well. The quantity and quality measures of participation in terms of language: Definition, coding and criteria The amount of talk was operationalized as the number of words. Language accuracy was coded as a percentage of error-free clauses. Following Foster and Skehan (1996), clauses were counted with slight modification. To avoid inflating the percentage of accurate clauses, the verb phrases (e.g. “I mean”, “Do you mean”, and “I think”, etc.) were not counted both in the accurate and total clauses. Dennis’ examples from the main data collection illustrate the calculation of the four measures. Group: B9 Case: Parallel import Dennis: I think parallel import is not truly illegal. I think we can say in what ways. For example, in the paragraph, we can see the lawyer say it is illegal if the Leclerc product he selling, counterfeit, not genuine Leclerc products. It is illegal. Yes? Max: I find it. Dennis: In my opinion,

240

W. Hsu

Karlin: I think the problem is in the LMC company. Maybe they want to make more money, so they sell the Reliable Restaurant. Ingrid: Why? Dennis: I think one point in the paragraph. You can see the lawyer say---You can see Reliable violation on the Leclerc. They didn’t tell distributor about their agreement.

Number of words Dennis 76 Max 3 Karlin 22 Ingrid 1

Number of correct clauses 4 0 2 0

Number of total clauses 10 1 3 0

% of error-free clauses 40 % 0 66.6 % 0

Summary of the examples for the participation measures concerning language.

Appendix 2 There were a total of six open-ended questions on the questionnaire. 1. Did you have difficulties in participating in the case discussion? What were the difficulties? Did the difficulties cause you to talk less? 2. How did your group reach a group solution? 3. What did you feel about the quality of your group solution? Why? 4. What did you feel about the business content knowledge instruction before case discussion? 5. What did you feel about the language form-function exercises before case discussion? 6. Which one do you prefer, content knowledge instruction or language form-function exercises? The interview included six questions. 1. What immediately comes to your mind when you think of business case study? 2. While you were talking to your group members in the case discussion, did you pay more attention to language accuracy or more attention to the content you would like to express? Why? 3. Do you feel you would talk more if you knew content knowledge more than the others in your group? Why? Or why not? 4. In case discussion, what knowledge or skills do you think you need? 5. Which part did you find was harder in the case discussion? Which part was easier? 6. Would you like your teacher to continue teaching this way, content in-

Some Common Features of CBI, TBL, and their Roles in an EBP Class

241

structionÆlanguage form-function exercisesÆcase study? Why? Or why not?

11 MEMORIZING DIALOGUES: THE CASE FOR “PERFORMATIVE EXERCISES”

Izumi Walker and Tomoko Utsumi

1 Introduction Gass (1995) has commented critically on the tendency among language teachers to avoid drills and memorization of dialogues in language teaching: There was no concerted effort to evaluate the model in order to discover what parts of the model might be valuable for learning and ultimately for learners. Are repetition and drills totally unnecessary? Teachers were taught that repetition, drills, and memorization of dialogues are unnecessary and avoided them rather than evaluating their potential usefulness. Without an understanding of the SLA literature based on, for example, automaticity and restructuring, there is little context for understanding these methods. (p. 7)

How would teachers of a foreign language react to Gass’ opinion? How about learners? This chapter is particularly concerned with the usefulness of memorizing dialogues for learners of Japanese. The memorization of dialogues has been included in one of the major classroom activities used by the Japanese language program at the Centre for Language Studies of the National University of Singapore. These activities, called “Performative Exercises” (Walker, 2003; Walker, 2004), are role-play type exercises, and have received positive reviews from both instructors and students. The instructors believe that it is important to ensure that students have mastered the basis of a conversation to some extent in order to conduct role-plays effectively, and memorizing a dialogue is essential for them because, otherwise, most of the class hours would have to be spent just building up a basic conversation. However, as Gass (1995) points out, memorizing dialogue is often deemed unnecessary or viewed negatively in recent communicative teaching. In order to clarify this issue, this chapter attempts to investigate the usefulness of memorizing dialo-

244

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

gues (MD) from the students’ perspective and then explores the benefits and limitations of memorizing dialogues through classroom observation. 2 Background This section first reviews the major issues about role-plays discussed in the literature and the memorization of dialogues in language learning, and then describes the features and methodology of Performative Exercises. 2.1 Role-plays and language learning The importance of developing pragmatic ability is being emphasized more and more within second language acquisition research and pedagogy. The language classroom should not only be the place to teach linguistic competence, but also the place to teach “Speech Acts (i.e. functional units in communication)” (Cohen, 1996, p. 253) or “intercultural competence”, “knowing how, and why to say what to whom” (Steele, 2000, p. 193) or “cultural context” (Walker, 2000, p. 221). What is commonly emphasized in such views of language teaching is that a message in isolation makes little sense and, thus, the role relationship of interactants has to be recognized in any given speech event. From this perspective, role-plays are viewed as a useful classroom activity. Littlewood (1992) suggests that there are different levels of role-plays: from controlled exercises to role-plays in the form of debate or discussion, and to large-scale simulations and improvisations, and it is important for teachers to choose the most appropriate activity, depending on the learner’s ability. Stern (1992) states that role-plays enable learners to familiarize themselves with personalities representing the target culture and points out that “it is also often the only way in which the class and the teacher can mentally break away from the conventional teacher-student relationship” (Stern, 1992, p. 171). The National Foreign Language Center (1993) suggests in language curricula developed by it that “contextualized exercises”, context-driven drills where students construct new discourse according to the change of context, must be the main component of classroom activities for the student to learn and to produce utterances that are socially appropriate, contextually relevant, and in keeping with the reality of the worldview of the target culture. In summary, although the nomenclature may differ from one paper to another, role-plays are viewed as one of the most important classroom activities for teaching second language. There are also many published teaching

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

245

materials for role-plays. However, little is mentioned as to whether it is necessary to memorize model dialogues for role-plays. How, then, has memorizing dialogue been viewed within second language acquisition research and pedagogy? 2.2 Memorization and language learning Only a few studies refer to the memorization of dialogues. This is probably because dialogue memorization was introduced through the Audiolingual Method and it has been simply ignored as part of any other method. The Audiolingual Method has been heavily criticized and the main criticisms are summarized as follows: First, the lessons, which are composed mainly of explicit grammar rules, repetition of models, memorization of short dialogues, and transformation exercises, tend to be dry and boring resulting in declining motivation and attention. Second, the method does not develop associations between words and meaning, and learned materials cannot be integrated easily into a student’s cognitive structure. Thus, even if the materials are memorized, they are easily forgotten and are difficult to change or paraphrase. Third, the method focuses too much on accuracy and leaves little scope for creative construction (Howatt, 1984; Long, 2000; Stern, 1991; Terrell, 1983). Subsequently, the Communicative Approach swept away the Audiolingual Method, but some researchers suggest that we cannot simply ignore the importance of drills, repetition or the memorization of dialogues. For example, Pawley and Syder (1983) state that native speakers use memorized sentences and phrases for a high percentage of everyday conversation. Furthermore, a reliance on memorized sentences or phrases does not distract from creating new sentences but rather facilitates creativity since less processing capacity is required to construct new sentences. In particular: We believe that memorized sentences and phrases are the normal building blocks of fluent spoken discourse, and at the same time, that they provide models for the creation of many (partly) new sequences which are memorable and in their turn enter the stock of familiar usages. (Pawley & Syder, 1983, p. 208)

Furthermore, some researchers found that recurrent sequences of words or automatized repertoires of phrases are useful for second language learners to improve fluency since they can be utilized as a whole unit (Oppenheim, 2000; VanPatten, 1998; Wood, 2001). In summary, these studies imply that memo-

246

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

rizing dialogues may have positive implications for second language acquisition. 2.3 Performative Exercises This section presents the main features of “Performative Exercises” (PE) and how memorizing a dialogue plays a part in them. 2.3.1 Module structure Figure 1 outlines the course structure of a Japanese language module with PE. PE are conducted during the final hour of the seven classroom hours per week with the aim of enabling learners to readily apply what they have learned in the classroom to real-life situations. Prior to the PE class, new vocabulary and structures as well as the socio-cultural background to the model dialogue are introduced and discussed with a video of the dialogue in the lecture. During the subsequent tutorial classes, which consist of groups of fifteen students, the target expressions are then practiced in mechanical drills or simple tasks, as well as in short conversations. After that, students practice the whole or part of the model dialogue; this is called the Core Conversation (CC) in this chapter to distinguish it from the model conversation in textbooks. Before the PE class, students have to practice to the point where they can reproduce the CC fluently without depending on the script. Lecture (2 hours) Introduction of new vocabulary, structures and socio-cultural background of the new lesson.

Video Viewing of Model Dialogue / Core Conversation

Tutorial (2 hours x 2) Mechanical drills and exercises on new vocabulary and structures in short and simple dialogues

Memorization of Core Conversation Tutorial (1 hour) “Performative Exercises”

Application of Core Conversation

Fig. 1. Course structure for courses using “Performative Exercises”

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

247

2.3.2 Procedure for conducting PE PE classes are usually conducted in the following stages: Stage 1: Discussion of content and context of the model dialogue/CC Stage 2: Performance check on memorized CC Stage 3: Controlled role-play/contextualized exercises Stage 4: Creative role-play Stage 5: Presentation and feedback At stage 1, the teacher asks questions about the content and context of the Model Dialogue or Core Conversation (CC) so that students are well aware of the background to the CC before performing it. This activity also aims at enabling students to describe the dialogue. At stage 2, pairs or small groups of students take turn to perform the memorized CC before the rest of the class, and the teacher provides feedback, models or practice on particular parts of the dialogue, if necessary. Some parts of the CC may be substituted after some performances. Through this activity, students gradually become able to produce a native-like performance. At stage 3, controlled role-plays or contextualized exercises are conducted where the CC is applied to various contexts with the teacher’s assistance. At stage 4, less controlled role-plays are conducted with learners engaged in producing their own conversation in pairs or groups based on what they have learned in stage 3. At stage 5, learners perform what they have produced in front of the class, and the teacher and/or their peers give feedback. 2.3.3 Main characteristics of PE There are at least three characteristics of PE. Firstly, PE classes consist of different levels of role-plays, referred to as “Contextualized Exercises” (National Foreign Language Center, 1993) or controlled role-plays, and “creative role-plays” (Littlewood, 1992). What should be noted here is that PE combine these different levels of role-plays according to learners’ performance within a class, although the level of control, creativity or complexity will differ depending on the learners’ level. Each class usually starts with “Contextualized Exercises” or controlled role-plays. At this stage, the teacher takes the central role, such as setting contexts, playing one of the participants in the conversation, developing the conversation using visual aids, prompting learners, giving practice on particular linguistic items, wherever necessary (Walker, 2003). When a good foundation has been laid, the class proceeds to creative role-plays in which learners can more free-

248

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

ly create role-plays. At this point, the teacher becomes more of an observer, only providing feedback when required. Secondly, within “Contextualized Exercises”, Core Conversation is used as a base and it is systematically applied to various contexts with a gradual increase in linguistic, contextual and socio-cultural complexity as shown in Figure 2. CC is first used in Applied Conversations: CCa, CCb, CCc etc. by substitution of vocabulary, participants, situations, and so on. Next, the Applied Conversations are extended to Extended Conversations (EC) by adding conversations which can occur before and/or after the Applied Conversations. These can be further applied to ECa, ECb, ECc etc. and then further extended to Extended Extended Conversations (EEC). The rationale behind this form of systematization is that systematizing tasks will enable learners to repeat the same tasks, which has been shown to be beneficial by second language acquisition researchers (Bygate, 2001; Lynch & MacLean, 2001). Furthermore, as CC is expanded gradually, these systematized tasks help learners to enhance or automate the CC so that, when applied to longer and more complex situations, they can concentrate on processing meaning. In other words, by gradually building up new conversations on top of what has been learned through previous activities, students become able to construct a longer conversation with ease. 

㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌

㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌

Core Conversation (CC) Applied Conversation (CCa, CCb, CCc…) Extended Conversation (EC)



Applied Conversation (ECa, ECb, ECc…) Extended Extended Conversation (EEC)

Fig. 2. Conceptual procedure of expansion of Core Conversations

Thirdly, the use of the CC develops toward “Personalization” in order to maximize the learning outcomes. “Personalization” seems to be very useful for motivating learners particularly when the model conversation in the textbook is not immediately relevant to the students but still necessary to learn for

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

249

academic purposes. In these cases, once the model conversation has been used as a base for learning important target expressions and discourse structures, it is swiftly applied to contexts which are more plausible, which students are likely to encounter, or which students can associate with their personal experience or imagination. By ending PE in such a way students learn how to express themselves in real life situations based on what they have learned. Table 1 illustrates examples of how model dialogues in the textbook currently used in the program were expanded toward “Personalization”. Table 1. Performative exercises based on dialogues from “Minnna no Nihongo”(2002) Model Dialogue from Textbook L14 To Umeda, please. L15 Tell me about your family. L16 Tell me how to use this machine. L17 What seems to be the problem? L19 As for my diet, I’ll start it tomorrow. L20 What will you do for the summer break? L22 What kind of apartment would you like? L23 How can I get to Midori Library? L24 Will you help me?

Main Activities in PE

Functions

Meeting in the Arts Canteen for lunch. Making a friend in a bar in Japan. Helping Japanese tourists at a MRT station. Taking a role as doctor and patient. Talking about Singapore at a company party. Going to Hamazaki Ayumi’s concert. Finding an apartment in Japan. Explaining how to get to the campus MacDonald’s. Helping with your colleague’s move.

requesting, ordering, offering permission, selfintroduction offering, explaining, confirmation advice, prohibition, permission humble talk about oneself casual speech, invitation questioning, explaining, direction, description offering, giving & receiving

3 Study 3.1 Research focus This study investigates the usefulness of memorizing dialogues for PE. The study’s four main research questions were: (1) Do students think that memorizing dialogues is helpful? (2) If they think it is helpful, why is it helpful? (3) Do their views differ depending on the students’ proficiency level? (4) Do their views differ across classes taught by different teachers?

250

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

The next section describes the methods and analysis used to conduct this study. 3.2 Methods 3.2.1 Questionnaire A questionnaire was administered to 146 students1 who had taken the Japanese Module 2 and had completed approximately 140 hours of Japanese lessons at the Centre for Language Studies, National University of Singapore. The majority of the students were Singaporean with a Chinese language background. However, there were a few Malay and Indonesian students as well as one student from Europe. The questionnaire was designed to elicit their subjective responses with regard to the effectiveness of PE in the classroom and was administered during the module’s final evaluation session. The present analysis focuses on a single open-ended question from this survey in which students were asked: “Do you think memorizing dialogues helps you to successfully perform the tasks?” YES, because ________________________________________________ NO, because _________________________________________________

Students were asked to give their names on the questionnaires because it was necessary to identify their teacher and proficiency level to investigate if these factors had affected their perceptions. It is possible that providing names may have biased the students’ responses; however, the overall responses were similar to those found from similar surveys administrated by one of the authors (Walker, 2002), for which the students were not asked to identify themselves. Hence, any such response bias is most likely minimal. 3.2.2 Classroom video 12 hours of PE classes (about 30 minutes to 45 minutes each) conducted by five separate teachers 2 were recorded on video to examine how memorized dialogues were applied in the classes. These include Lessons 7, 10, 22, 23, and 24 of the “Minna no Nihongo: Elementary 1-2” textbook.

1

The total enrollment of the course was 196 but only the 146 students who attended the last lecture filled in the questionnaire. 2 The recorded classes included both the Japanese 1 module taught by five teachers, and the Japanese 2 module taught by three teachers who had moved up from Japanese 1 to Japanese 2. These are the three teachers referred to in Table 2.

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

251

3.3 Statistical methods The authors categorized each student’s response as to why they felt memorizing dialogue was useful into one of seven categories. These categories were determined after collating the survey responses. The respondents’ names were then matched with their academic records, which provided each student’s continuous assessment (CA) grade, as well as identified each student’s teacher. Students were taught by one of three Japanese language teachers responsible for the module. The data was compiled into a contingency table where each student was categorized based on his or her teacher (A, B, C), language proficiency (High and Low) depending on the students’ Continuous Assessment score, and the reason given for the usefulness of memorizing dialogues (see section 4.1). A logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the chance that a student found memorizing dialogues useful based on the teacher and language proficiency. 4 Findings and discussion 4.1 Is memorizing dialogues helpful, and why? Of the 146 respondents, 119 (81.5%) answered “Yes” to the question “Do you think Memorizing Dialogues helps you to successfully perform tasks?”, 16 (11.0%) of them answered “No”, while 11 (7.5%) answered both “Yes” and “No”. 141 (96.6%) students gave reasons why they found MD useful or not useful; 13 students gave 2 reasons for their positive responses, and 11 students offered both positive and negative responses. 5 students did not provide the reasons for their answers (i.e. they answered only “Yes” or “No”). It should be noted that the teacher and language proficiency could not be determined for the seven students who did not provide their names. The results are summarized in Table 2. In total, there were 134 complete responses. The reasons mentioned in the comments were categorized into seven groups and labeled as follows in Table 2. (1) Basis: MD is helpful for providing a basis for communication. (2) Application: MD is helpful for use in similar situations/real-life situations. (3) Fluency: MD is helpful for developing spoken fluency. (4) Understand: MD is helpful in gaining an understanding of the grammatical structure etc. (5) Others: MD is helpful for other reasons.

252

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

(6) Not Flexible: MD is not helpful because it is not flexible. (7) Easy to Forget: MD is not helpful because it is easy to forget the material. Table 2. Descriptive statistics of student responses to the survey question, “Why is memorization of dialogues helpful?” Number of students

Number of Responses

n*

Fluency (%)

Understand (%)

Others (%)

Total

146

165

45 (27.3)

51 (30.9)

21 (12.7)

8 (4.8)

14 ( 8.5)

19 (11.5)

7 (4.2)

Teacher A Teacher B Teacher C

38 (26.0) 60 (41.1) 41 (28.1)

40

11 (27.5) 12 (17.9) 18 (36.7)

9 (22.5) 22 (32.8) 17 (34.7)

7 (17.5) 8 (11.9) 6 (12.2)

2 (5.0) 5 (7.5) 1 (2.0)

4 (10.0) 8 (11.9) 1 (2.0)

7 (17.5) 9 (13.4) 3 (6.1)

0 (0) 3 (4.5) 3 (6.1)

Proficiency ‡High Proficiency ‡Low

88 (60.3)

99

23 (23.2)

29 (29.3)

13 (13.1)

8 (8.1)

11 (11.1)

12 (12.1)

3 (3.0)

51 (34.9)

57

18 (31.6)

19 (33.3)

8 (14.0)

0 (0)

2 (3.5)

7 (12.3)

3 (5.3)

Anonym ous†

7 (4.8)

9

4 (44.4)

3 (33.3)

0 (0)

0 (0)

1 (11.1)

0 (0)

1 (11.1)

67 49

Easy to Forget (%)

n (%)

Application (%)

Not Flexible (%)

MD Not Helpful

Basis (%)

MD Helpful

* 5 students did not justify their responses. 165 responses were made by 141 students. ‡ Student language proficiency was based on students’ average CA. Students whose CA was greater than his or her class average CA were deemed to have ‘High’ proficiency, while students whose CA was less than his or her class average CA were deemed to have ‘Low’ proficiency. † 7 students did not provide their names and their teacher and language proficiency could not be determined.

This analysis showed that whether students found PE exercises helpful or not did not seem to depend on whether the student had high language proficiency (p-value > 0.10), nor did it depend on who taught the students (pvalues for Teachers > 0.08). Further, this analysis showed that the reason students found PE exercises helpful (or not) did not depend on the students’ proficiency (p-values associated with each reason > 0.10), nor did it depend on who taught the class (p-values associated with each reason > 0.08).

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

253

All of these statistical tests were based on logistic regression models in which each reason was a dummy variable, and Teacher was a nominal variable with 3 levels. Comparing those who were taught by Teacher 2 to those taught by Teacher 1, and those taught by Teacher 3 to those taught by Teacher 1, the same results were seen from those above average to those below average, or to those in the bottom 30% to those in the top 30%. These findings support the theory that those who find MD helpful hold this view because, perhaps, it is helpful, and not because the student is naturally proficient or because a particular teacher is better at using memorization in the course. In the following sub-sections, the details of these results are discussed together with the findings from the classroom video recordings. 4.1.1 Helpful for providing the basis for communication One of the most popular comments was that MD was helpful in providing the basis for communication, and 27.3% (45) of students’ comments were similar to those below: - We can consolidate useful phrases that are commonly used. - It helps me to familiarize with the flow of questions in the conversation. - That’s the only way. It gives us the template to follow.

These comments can be interpreted as meaning that students felt that they could familiarize themselves with discourse formats or flow of conversations in the target language by memorizing dialogues. This was further observed on the recorded classroom videos where dialogues provided at least three types of discourse elements: formulaic phrases; discourse markers and back-channel responses; and large discourse units for students to learn the basics for communication. The following is an example containing formulaic phrases: Example 1 3 (This is part of the model dialogue from Lesson 7 where a non-native Japanese couple was invited to a Japanese house and served coffee.) A1 䝁䞊䝠䞊䛿䛔䛛䛜䛷䛩䛛䚹㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌 Do you want a cup of coffee? B1 ࠶ࡾࡀ࡜࠺ࡈࡊ࠸ࡲࡍࠋ㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌 Thank you very much.

3

Boldface is used to highlight the parts discussed in this and the subsequent example dialogues.

254

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

A2 ࡝࠺ࡒࠋ㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌 Please. B2 䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛩䚹㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌 I politely accept (something from you). 㻌

An appropriate translation for A1 into English would be “Do you want a cup of coffee?”. However, if this is directly translated into Japanese, it would be “koohii o nomitai desu ka”, which is grammatically correct but socially inappropriate because in Japanese it sounds like the speaker is forcing the listener to express their favor or intention. In other words, it sounds too direct and rude even between close friends in Japanese. Therefore, an English equivalent of “How about a cup of coffee?”, “koohii wa ikaga desu ka” (A1), needs to be used although it sounds slightly unnatural in English. Furthermore, in Japanese, if the context differs (e.g. in a situation that is more casual or where the participants are more closely related), a totally different form needs to be used to convey the same meaning appropriately. For these types of discourse pattern, or so called formulaic phrases, MD seems to have been helpful because the students did not have to attempt to produce the expression based on their native language models, which was likely to result in misunderstanding or a breakdown of communication. MD seems to be especially useful when a similar expression does not exist in the learner’s native language and culture. For example, B2 is an essential phrase in Japanese culture used before eating or drinking, and not saying it would be considered rude. However, since there is no equivalent in English, memorizing it together with an understanding of the socio-cultural behavior of Japanese would be indispensable. Furthermore, MD seems to have been effective in enabling students to actively role-play these formulaic phrases as in reallife situations because it freed them from the confines of the textbook. MD seems also to have the effect of enabling the students to use “discourse markers” and “back-channel responses”, which do not have meaning by themselves but add essential elements to conversations by displaying the speaker’s emotions, attitude, intention etc., and filling silences. The appropriate use of these expressions can make the flow of the conversation culturally meaningful and socially appropriate. The dialogue in Lesson 22 illustrates such an example:

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

255

Example 2 (This is part of the dialogue from Lesson 22 where a non-Japanese customer looking for an apartment is talking to an estate agent.) A1 䛣䛱䜙䛿䛔䛛䛜䛷䛩䛛䚹ᐙ㈤䛿䠔୓෇䛷䛩䚹 How about this unit? The rent is 䢠80,000. B1 䛖䞊䜣䚹䛱䜗䛳䛸㥐䛛䜙㐲䛔䛷䛩䛽䚹 Ummm. It’s slightly far from the station, isn’t it? A2 䛨䜓䚸䛣䛱䜙䛿䚹౽฼䛷䛩䜘䚹㥐䛛䜙Ṍ䛔䛶䠏ศ䛷䛩䛛䜙䚹 Then, how about this one? This is convenient. It’s 3 minutes walk from the station. B2 䛭䛖䛷䛩䛽䚹䝎䜲䝙䞁䜾䜻䝑䝏䞁䛸࿴ᐊ䛜䠍䛴䛸 You are right. A kitchen-dining room, a Japanese-style room, and ... 䛩䜏䜎䛫䜣䚹䛣䛣䛿ఱ䛷䛩䛛䚹 Excuse me. What is this? A3 ᢲධ䜜䛷䛩䚹ᕸᅋ䜢ධ䜜䜛ᡤ䛷䛩䜘䚹 It’s an oshiire. It’s a cupboard to put futons in. B3 䛭䛖䛷䛩䛛䚹 I see.

When the estate agent shows a unit floor plan and asks for the customer’s opinion, the customer uses a response, “Ummm” (B1). This is often used as a filler to indicate hesitation like “Well …” in English which indicates that the speaker is still thinking or cannot decide on something. However, in many cases, it can actually mean “No” in Japanese and the speaker uses it to avoid confrontation. Next, the customer states his/her opinion, “Chotto eki kara tooi desu ne.” (B1). The literal meaning of “chotto” is “slightly” but it is often used to soften the negative statement as in this example. The estate agent answers, “Ja” (A2), to signal the introduction of other alternatives, as he shows the customer another floor plan. These expressions do not have meaning by themselves, but are very important for meaningful communication. “Soo desu nee” in B2 and “soo desu ka” in B3 are back-channel respon4 ses . The speaker uses both as a response when new information is given, but they express totally different attitudes or emotions. B2 in this context can be interpreted as the speaker receiving the information and agreeing to it, while B3 indicates that the speaker received it as new information with interest or surprise (Jorden & Noda, 1987). Maynard (1990) points out that Japanese display a great deal of back-channel responses as well as other non-verbal signs 4

Although some studies do not consider “soo desu ne” and so forth as back-channel responses because they are sentences, others — including the present study — take a wider view and treat them as back-channel responses because they share similar functions to other back-channel responses.

256

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

such as nodding called “aizuchi” and Japanese speakers may feel uneasy if a listener gives no aizuchi feedback even though they may be listening attentively. Therefore, it is essential for learners to learn the appropriate use of back-channel responses in Japanese for meaningful communication. However, it is often pointed out that inserting aizuchi appropriately is not an easy task, for learners and mastery of aizuchi requires lots of practice and effort (Mizutani & Mizutani, 1987). What was observed from the classroom videos was that the students in this study interacted quite naturally using appropriate back-channel responses or discourse markers not only when they performed Core Conversations but also when using them in different situations. This may be because the model dialogues contain such expressions as illustrated in the example above, and the students had to practice hard to memorize them as well as be encouraged to use them in PE classes. The last case in which MD seems to be important as a basis for communication was in learning “large discourse units”, when multiple sentences must be combined to realize a communicative goal. Typical examples are in the discourse of “explanation”. Walker (2004) investigated the issues learners were facing when they were constructing discourse and found that students felt that the discourse of explanation was the most difficult. The major reason was that such discourse not only required complex linguistic structures, but also much cognitive processing such as selecting and sequencing the information while processing the linguistic requirements for both meaning and form. Let us illustrate this with an example, which was found by students to be the most difficult dialogue in the study. Example 3 (This is from Lesson 23 where a non-Japanese speaker calls a library and asks how to get there. A1 䛿䛔䚸䜏䛹䜚ᅗ᭩㤋䛷䛩䚹 Hello. This is Midori Library. B1 䛒䛾䛖䚸䛭䛱䜙䜎䛷 䛹䛖䜔䛳䛶⾜䛝䜎䛩䛛䚹 Err, could you tell me how to get there? A2 ᮏ⏣㥐䛛䜙䠍䠎␒䛾䝞䝇䛻஌䛳䛶ᅗ᭩㤋๓䛷㝆䜚䛶䛟䛰䛥䛔䚹 Take a No.12 bus from Honda station and get off in front of the library. 䠏䛴┠䛷䛩䚹 It’s the third stop. B2 䠏䛴┠䛷䛩䛽䚹 The third stop, right?

㻌㻌㻌

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

257

A3-1 䛘䛘䚸㝆䜚䜛䛸䚸๓䛻බᅬ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹 Yes. When you get off the bus, you will see a park in front of you. A3-2 ᅗ᭩㤋䛿䛭䛾බᅬ䛾୰䛾ⓑ䛔ᘓ≀䛷䛩䚹 Our library is the white building in the park.

From the classroom video, it appeared that some students tended to have problems with A2 which requires connecting two clauses, A3-1 which requires a conditional clause, and A3-2 which requires starting the sentence with the main topic again as well as connecting a string of modifying clauses when they performed the memorized dialogues. The requirements for linguistic structure and information processing in these types of discourse were so great that students might have felt that memorizing a dialogue was useful to construct such a discourse rather than by building up the discourse from scratch depending on their knowledge. Foster (2001) found that non-native speakers relied heavily on grammar to construct utterances rather than on phrases used for lexicalized routines when they carried out task-based language production. This might cause non-native speakers to build their own memory bank of grammatical but inappropriate expressions. From this point of view, memorizing model dialogues may be helpful because it provides phrases used for lexicalized routines which can prevent students from using inappropriate expressions. The students may also have realized the benefits of memorizing dialogues and this explains why comments like “MD was helpful in providing a basis for communication” were among the most frequently given. 4.1.2 Helpful for transfer to similar real-life situations This was the most popular comment and nearly one third (30.9%) of students’ comments were categorized under this heading. -

We can apply in similar situations. We will be able to apply in real-life situation. It helps to simulate the actual situation in daily life, which is useful. It gives a basic format of related conversations. We can innovate and give variations of conversations based on that format.

These comments can be summarized as meaning that memorizing dialogues (MD) is helpful for transfer to similar real-life situations. The classroom video shows, however, that students were struggling to apply memorized dialogues when they were given new contexts. In fact, their accuracy and fluency dramatically dropped even if they had performed the model dialogue perfectly at the beginning of the class. Presumably therefore, the results seem not

258

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

to be a result of MD itself, but rather to be a reflection of the way PE were conducted, which was by providing ample exercises to learn how to apply model dialogues. Let us take one lesson, Lesson 23, whose model dialogue was discussed in section 4.1.1, to illustrate how MD was used in various contexts. Table 3. Realization of “conceptual procedure of expansion of Core Conversations” and performance time Dialogue Performer

min.: sec

Core Conversation (CC) How can I get to Midori Library A: Hello. This is Midori Library. B: Er, could you tell me how to get there? A: Take a No.12 bus from Honda Station, and get off at Toshokan-mae. It’s the third stop. B: The third stop, right? A: Yes. When you get off the bus, you will see a park in front of you. The library is the white building in the park. B: I see.

Applied Conversation (CCa and CCb) How can I get to Midori Library? CCa: The library was moved to the location across the road in the same map as CC. CCb: The library was moved to the location next to a hospital at the second bus stop. Extended Conversation (EC1) How can I get to MacDonald’s on campus? EC1: Application to real life situations, direction to the McDonald’s on campus. EEC1: EC1 was further extended by adding “How far is it?” “Do I need to show my ID to get a discount?”, etc. Extended Conversation (EC2) How can I get to the University Cultural Centre? etc. EC2a: To the University Cultural Centre EC2b: To the Students’ Recreation Centre EC2c: To the National University Hospital EEC2a, EEC2b: EC2 was further extended by adding “Do I need to show my ID when I get on the bus?”, etc.

CC CC CC CC

HC-HC HC-HC S1-S2 S3-S4

0:35 0:32 0:41 0:36

CCa CCa CCa CCb CCb CCb CCa

S5-S6 S7-S8 T-AC S9-S10 S11-S7 T-AC T-AC

1:36 1:05 0:32 0:35 1:01 0:25 0:25

EC1 EC1 EC1 EC1 EEC1

T-S7 T-S7 T-AC T-AC T-S1

1:35 0:56 0:34 0:14 0:30

EC2a EC2a EEC2a

T-S10 T-S4 T-AC

2:00 1:07 0:35

Pair Work

EC2b EEC2b EC2c EC2c EC2c EEC2b

S3-S8 T-AC S9-S5 T-AC T-AC T-AC

T: Teacher, S1-S11: a specific student, AC: the entire class, HC: half the class

2:35 0:38 1:03 0:40 0:32 0:33

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

259

The left column in Table 3 illustrates how the model dialogue of Lesson 23 was used as based on Figure 2, “Conceptual procedure for expansion of Core Conversations”, introduced in section 2.3.3. In this lesson, CC was used in at least six different conversations, first, CCa, CCb, which were very similar situations to CC, and EC1, EC2a, EC2b, EC2c, etc. which were real-life situations for the students. This table also indicates the performance time of each pair or group as an indicator of fluency. Note that EEC1 and EEC2 are longer than EC1 and EC2, but the time required for these extended sentences is not given in the table. That is to say, while the length of each conversation was more or less the same, the performance time greatly differed. Whenever CC was used in a new context for the first time (underlined dialogues), most students struggled to use it. It was especially difficult when CC was used in reallife situations. Let us look at this using the transcript 5 of Extended Conversation, EC1. 

Example 4 T S7 SS T

S7 SS T S7/SS T SS T

䛒䛾䛖䚸䛣䛾㏆䛟䛻䝬䜽䝗䝘䝹䝗䛿䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䛛䊺㻌 Excuse me. Is there a MacDonald’s nearby? **** **** 䠄Looked at a map on the whiteboard and sought assistance.䠅 䛿䛔䠈䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹㻌 Yes, there is. 䛹䛖䜔䛳䛶⾜䛝䜎䛩䛛䊺䛹䛖䜔䛳䛶⾜䛝䜎䛩䛛䊺㻌㻌 How can I get there? How can I get there? 䛣䛣䛿䝞䝇೵䛷䛩䛽䚹⚾䛿䝞䝇೵䛻䛔䜎䛩䚹 Here is the bus stop, isn’t it? ** **㻌 㐨䜢Ώ䜛䛸 **** Ώ䛳䛶䊺㻌 You cross the road**** After you cross the road Ώ䛳䛶䊺㻌 After cross the road ** 䜎䛳䛩䛠⾜䛟䛸 ** When you go straight, 䜎䛳䛩䛠⾜䛟䛸䚸䛭䛖䛷䛩䛽䚸䜎䛳䛩䛠⾜䛟䛸䊺䛹䛾䛠䜙䛔⾜䛝䜎䛩䛛䊺㻌 When you go straight. That is right. Go straight, and how far should I go? 䛘䛘䛳䊺䠄⇿➗䠅䠍䠌䠌䝯䞊䝖䝹䛠䜙䛔 Haa? (burst into laughter) 100 meters. 䠍䠌䠌䝯䞊䝖䝹䊺䠍䠌䠌䝯䞊䝖䝹䛠䜙䛔䊺㻌 100 meters? About 100 meters?

5 Notations used in the transcription: T – Teacher; SS – No specific students; S – Specific students; ЌRising tone; ** unnaturally short pause (less than 2 seconds); **** unnaturally long pause (more than 2 seconds)

260

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

S7/SS T S7 T

S7 T S7 SS T S7/SS    T SS T SS

䠍䠌䠌䝯䞊䝖䝹䛠䜙䛔Ṍ䛟䛸㻌 walk about 100 meters, and ఱ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䛛䊺㻌 What do you see? **** **** ఱ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䛛䊺㻌 What do you see?㻌 䛘䛘䛸䚸㐨䜢Ώ䛳䛶䠍䠌䠌䝯䞊䝖䝹䛠䜙䛔Ṍ䛟䛸ఱ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䛛䊺 Well, after you cross the road and walk about100 meters, what do you see? ᘓ≀ a building ᘓ≀䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛹䜣䛺ᘓ≀䛷䛩䛛䊺 You will see a building. What kind of building? ** ** ** 㣗ᇽ ** Canteen 㣗ᇽ䊺䛭䛖䛷䛩䛽䚹 㣗ᇽ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛨䜓䛒䠈䝬䜽䝗䝘䝹䝗䛿䊺䛭䛾 Canteen? That is right. You will see a canteen. Then, MacDonald’s is its ᚋ䜝 behind ᚋ䜝䊺ᚋ䜝䛷䛩䛛 䊺 behind? Is it behind? 䛸䛺䜚 next 䛸䛺䜚䊺䛸䛺䜚䛷䛩䛽䚹 next? It is next to it, isn’t it? 䛸䛺䜚䛷䛩䚹㻌 next to it.

In this situation, T played a stranger and asked S7 how to get to MacDonald’s, which is actually located on the university campus. When S7 was asked this, she was first lost for a reply, looked at the map used for CC, and sought help from her peers, and the conversation developed through elaboration from the teacher and the rest of the class. The transcript indicates the fact that although all the utterances necessary to complete this task were only those in boldface, lots of input was given by either the teacher or other students. Some of them were the teacher’s questions to elicit the required expressions, some of them were other students’ responses to the questions, or assistance in support of S7, and some of them were corrections of what S7 said. If we focus on the teacher’s roles, she played various roles such as a conversation partner, a facilitator to elicit responses from S7 and other students by asking questions, and a model by giving appropriate utterances. The conversation was finally completed through this collaboration.

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

261

What should be noted here is that it was not only the students who were engaged in making the conversation at the front of the class but also the other students who seemed to seriously participate in producing the new conversation. They were so enthusiastic probably because they knew that the teacher was trying to give an example by engaging in role-play with a student in front of the whole class while giving the necessary feedback, so that all the students could learn how to apply the CC to a real life situation. They also knew that some of them might be asked to perform the same or a similar role-play next. In this lesson, S7 tried the same conversation again and the whole class repeated it in chorus. Subsequently, the next student, S1, performed the same conversation very fluently as indicated in (5) below, and the teacher even extended the conversation to EEC1 by adding extra questions, such as “When I go into MacDonald’s, do I need to show my student card?”. Example 5 T S1 T S1 T S1

T

S1 T S1

䛩䜏䜎䛫䜣䚹 Excuse me. 䛿䛔䚸䛺䜣䛷䛩䛛䚹 Yes? 䛘䛳䛸䚸䛣䛾䛱䛛䛟䛻䚸䝬䜽䝗䝘䝹䝗䛿䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䛛䊺 Umm, is there a MacDonald’s nearby? 䛿䛔䚸䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹 Yes, there is. 䛹䛖䜔䛳䛶⾜䛝䜎䛩䛛䊺 How can I get there? 䛹䛖䜔䛳䛶⾜䛝䜎䛩䛛䊺** 㐨䜢䚸㐨䜢䜟䛯䛳䛶䚸䜎䛳䛩䛠⾜䛟䛸䚸㣗ᇽ䛜䛒䜚䜎 䛩䚹 How can I get there ** You cross the road, the road, go straight, and you will see a canteen. 㣗ᇽ ** 䛘䛳䚸** 䝬䜽䝗䝘䝹䝗䛿㣗ᇽ䛾䛸䛺䜚䛷䛩䚹 Canteen ** Oh ** MacDonald’s is next to the canteen. 䛒䛳䚸䛭䛖䛷䛩䛛䚹䛒䛾䛖䚸䝬䜽䝗䝘䝹䝗䛿䚸䝬䜽䝗䝘䝹䝗䛻ධ䜛䛸䛝 I see. Umm, MacDonald’s, When I go into the MacDonald’s, Ꮫ⏕ド䜢ぢ䛫䛺䛡䜜䜀䛺䜚䜎䛫䜣䛛䊺 Do I have to show my student card? 䛔䛔䛘䚸ぢ䛫䛺䛟䛶䜒Ⰻ䛛䛳䛯䛷䛩䚹 No, you did not have to show it. ධ䜛᫬䚸ධ䜛᫬䛽䚸ぢ䛫䛺䛟䛶䜒Ⰻ䛔䛷䛩䛛䊺 When I go in, When I go in, you know? I do not have to show it, do I? ぢ䛫䛺䛟䛶䜒䛔䛔䛷䛩䚹 You do not have to show it.

262

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

After this, a new set of contexts, where students were to give directions to reach actual buildings on the NUS campus such as the University Hospital and the University Cultural Centre etc. were given, as in EC2a, EC2b, and EC2c. Although the formats of these conversations were similar to the one already performed by the teacher and a student, the students still needed time to construct a new discourse. Using MD in real-life situations seemed to be much harder for the students than using them in situations that were the same as in the CC. This may be because the students had to comprehend the situation and consider how to process the information at the same time. In other words, they had to reconstruct the whole conversation by, for example, selecting the best way to reach the location asked for, or selecting landmarks to be used, while paying attention to linguistic aspects. For these purposes, MD alone would not be sufficient to enable students to use the dialogue in different contexts. However, the reason why 30.9% of the students’ comments indicated that MD was helpful for application in this study may be because they had the experience that memorized dialogues could be used in various situations through their practice in class. 4.1.3 Helpful for developing spoken fluency 12.7% (21) of the students’ comments indicated that memorizing dialogues improved their fluency and enabled them to react to sudden conversational events. However, examining this from the length of time which was required for performing each conversation, students were not always performing fluently. The following common tendency among most of the recorded classes was noted as follows: Memorized Core Conversation Newly Applied Conversation Repetitions of Applied Conversation

Very fluent Very slow Gradual gain in fluency

The theory of “Automaticity” seems to be able to explain this. Let us examine this using Lesson 23 in Table 3. First, when the students performed Core Conversations (CC) they had prepared before the class, most of the performances were well practiced and smooth. It took between 32 and 41 seconds for each pair to perform the memorized conversation whereas it took as long as 2 minutes and 35 seconds for non-memorized conversations. According to de Bot (1996), “enhancing fluency is one of the most crucial cognitive activities in learning. This means much more than just increased speed of delivery. Fluency serves as an index of automaticity of processing”

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

263

(p. 552). Wood (2001) claims that automatized repertoires of phrases seem to be central to fluent speech because these phrases are accessed as a whole; their retrieval requires minimal processing capacity. Applying these to the context of this study, model dialogues which included useful sets of phrases and patterns of interaction were memorized and automatized, and these enabled students to produce utterances rapidly and easily. Second, fluency was dramatically lowered when memorized dialogues were applied in new situations for the first time, such as CCa (1:36), EC1 (1:35) or EC2a (2:00) in Table 3. This is because students initially did not understand how to construct a new discourse in the first new and unknown context or when the teacher led the conversation into unpredictable situations, and it took time to work out which parts of the model dialogues could be applied to which parts of the new conversation. This may be due to the disadvantage of automatic processing which requires little processing capacity but is not flexible. Once students were faced with a new situation, “controlled processing” (Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977), which is slower but more flexible, had to be activated. How long then would it have taken if the students had not memorized CC at all? Unfortunately, there is no such data in this study but it was observed in the classroom video that it took time to search for appropriate grammatical structures and vocabulary in the new contexts but once they were found, the utterances themselves were quite fluent. In other words, students seemed to be concentrating on processing meaning rather than constructing new grammatical structures. This may be because “fluency on one level allows attentional resources to be spent on higher-level processes” (de Bot, 1996, p. 552). According to Ellis (2000), it is difficult for learners to focus simultaneously on both meaning and form. However, learners can attend to dual processing when they are able to draw on automatized knowledge of the second language. That is to say, students seemed to be able to concentrate on processing meaning rather than on using the limited controlled processing for linguistic aspects because they had stored automatized models which freed up capacity for controlled processing. Finally, it was observed that although student fluency was initially dramatically lowered in the new context, successive performances gained fluency as is shown in Table 3. How can this be explained by “Automaticity”? Segalowitz (2000) suggests that cognitive fluency is important for linguistic fluency, just as in acquiring other expertise and skilled action. To perform, it is necessary to optimize the balance between automatic and controlled processing. Furthermore, in order to promote “cognitive fluency”, “open skills” (i.e. skills

264

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

that can be performed under conditions of environmental unpredictability) are necessary instead of “closed skills” which aim to reproduce the skills in predictable conditions. How then can we promote “open skills”? In particular, open skills require attention to situational variability that might disrupt performance. If learners adopt an open-skill stance while learning a complex skill — that is, if they experience the situation as “open” by engaging in the cognitive operations appropriate for handling contextual variability then learning will be transfer appropriate. (Segalowitz, 2000, pp. 215–216)

Interpreting this to the students’ performances in this study, students may have acquired “open skills” through repeated application exercises based on memorized dialogue. Consequently, “cognitive fluency” might have developed while automatization was further enhanced. To summarize, MD can be helpful in developing fluency. However, MD alone is not enough to handle unpredictable, new situations. It is cognitive fluency that is necessary for these complex tasks, and this can be promoted by providing exercises to handle contextual variability in real life situations. In fact, this is what has been attempted through PE. 4.1.4 Helpful for understanding Eight students’ (4.8%) comments indicated that MD was helpful for understanding grammar and meaning: -

I will get to know some of the correct structure through memorizing. We can understand the meaning. I learn sentence structures more effectively. It allows the learning of some important grammar structures effectively.

These comments imply that there were students who understood structures or meaning better or more effectively through memorizing dialogues. Notably, all of these students were higher proficiency students. In addition, 18 comments (10.9%), categorized under other categories, also mentioned “structures”: - I can use the structure to answer/perform the other related activities. (comment categorized under “Application”) - It helps us remember sentence structures better… (comment categorized under “Basis”)

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

265

These comments imply that these students were aware of the importance of understanding the “structures” for the application of what they had memorized. It should again be noted that these comments were made more frequently by higher proficiency students than lower proficiency students; 11 of these comments stem from higher proficiency students, 6 from lower proficiency students, and 1 from an anonymous student. 4.1.5 Others There were 14 (8.5%) comments which could not be categorized in the previous four groups. Representative examples are shown below: -

It makes performing the task much easier, with much more confidence. We can express ourselves better, without hesitation. Otherwise I'll be too nervous to come up with any response. By remembering beforehand, you do not need to waste time during lesson to try to remember what to say. - Learning language needs to practice more. Memorizing is a useful way for practicing.

These comments may be further divided into two groups: MD as a tool to create positive affective factors such as gaining self-confidence and reducing embarrassment or nervousness when speaking, and MD as a useful learning tool to encourage practice. The latter may be a reflection of the significance of memorization for PE: MD for PE requires not merely rote-memorization but also a highly practiced performance where students can apply the memorized dialogue in various contexts. Both views seem to be important for language learning because they imply that students do memorize dialogues not because it is obligatory, but because they feel that it is beneficial for their learning. Teachers then have to do their best to plan and conduct classes in such a way that learners see that what they memorize is useful in the class and is also useful beyond the classroom in real-life situations. 4.1.6 Why MD is not useful? In all, 15.7% (26) of the students’ comments were categorized under “MD not useful” and the reasons were further divided into two groups as follows: (1) Not flexible (11.5%): - When the situation is changed, then you may not know how to use it. - Without understanding, it will be no use. (2) Easy to forget (4.2%):

266

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

- I will still forget what to say sometimes.

Although 11 out of 26 comments were given together with positive comments, such as “We can follow what to say (by memorizing dialogues) but I still forget what to say sometimes”, the justification for why MD is not useful can be helpful in improving teaching. Teachers should make every effort to provide ample opportunities for students to learn how to use memorized dialogues. Interestingly, only lower proficiency students gave comments such as “Without understanding, it will be no use”. This is the opposite view from the comments that MD was useful for understanding grammar mainly given by the higher proficiency students as detailed in section 4.1.4. This suggests that the higher proficiency students perceive MD to be a tool to understand grammatical structures, more so than lower proficiency students. However, this will have to be investigated and verified through further studies. 5 Conclusion This study investigated how students perceived memorizing dialogues (MD) for role-play type activities called “Performative Exercises”. 89.0% of the students responded that MD was helpful and their reasons were categorized as follows: (1) Providing a basis for communication, (2) Applying in similar situations/real-life situations, (3) Developing spoken fluency, (4) Understanding the grammar, structure, etc. These results were further analyzed based on classroom recordings with the conclusions below: The main reason why 89.0% of the students perceived MD as being helpful in their leaning could be that MD under “Performative Exercises” aimed at the acquisition of “open skills” to perform in unpredictable situations which people usually engage in as part of everyday conversation. MD was used not only to familiarize learners with an appropriate discourse format but also to guide them to socially appropriate and contextually relevant language use. Furthermore, practice through MD may develop automaticity and learners could attend to higher order skills such as processing meaning, as cognitive theorists point out (DeKeyser, 1998; McLaughlin, 1987; McLaughlin, 1990). It is difficult, however, to generalize from the results of this study because the survey was administered only to students at a Singaporean university at one particular level with Chinese language backgrounds.

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

267

Within such limitations, if the responses to the questionnaire can be taken as valid indicators, MD in language learning would be a promising area for further research. It would be of interest to examine how memorized dialogues can help learners to construct discourse when they encounter the authentic language used in the real world. The other area for study would be on teaching strategies to promote MD as a variable teaching tool since our findings suggest that practicing MD alone would not be sufficient to enable learners to apply MD. It is hoped that these suggestions will stimulate further research on second language teaching. Acknowledgements We are grateful to Dr. Ayesha Ali, Assistant Professor in the Department of Statistics and Applied Probability, National University of Singapore, for her help with the statistical aspects of our analysis as well as for the useful discussions with her and her feedback on the interpretation of our data. She helped prepare the survey questions and provided invaluable feedback on the conclusions that could be drawn from the data. We would also like to express our appreciation for Mr. Paul Walker’s dedicated support in the completion of this chapter. References Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–45). Harlow, UK: Pearson. Cohen, A.D. (1996). Developing the ability to perform speech acts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 253–267. de Bot, K. (1996). Review article: The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529–555. DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ellis, R. (2000). Theoretical perspectives on interaction and language learning. In R.D. Lambert & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and pedagogy (pp. 3–32). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Foster, P. (2001). Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 75–93). Harlow, UK: Pearson. Gass, S.M. (1995). Learning and teaching: The necessary intersections. In F. Eckman, D. Highland, P. Lee, J. Milcham & R.R. Weber (Eds.), Second language acqui-

268

I. Walker & T. Utsumi

sition theory and pedagogy (pp. 3–20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Howatt, A.P.R. (1984). A history of English and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jorden, E.H., & Noda, M. (1987). Japanese: The spoken language. New Haven: Yale University Press. Littlewood, W. (1992). Teaching oral communication. Oxford: Blackwell. Long. M.H. (2000). Focus on form in task-based language teaching, In R.D. Lambert & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and pedagogy (pp. 179–191). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Lynch, T., & MacLean, J. (2001). “A case of exercising”: Effects of immediate task repetition on learners’ performance. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 141–162). Harlow, UK: Pearson. Maynard, S.K. (1990). An introduction to Japanese grammar and communication strategies. Tokyo: The Japan Times. Mizutani, O., & Mizutani, N. (1987). How to be polite in Japanese. Tokyo: The Japan Times. McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold. McLaughlin, B. (1990). Restructuring. Applied Linguistics, 11, 113–128. Minna no Nihongo Elementary 1 (2002). Tokyo: 3A Corporation. National Foreign Language Center (1993). A framework for introductory Japanese language curricula in American high schools and colleges. Washington D.C. Oppenheim, N. (2000). The importance of recurrent sequences for nonnative speaker fluency and cognition. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 220–240). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Native-like selection and native-like fluency. In J.C. Richards &. R.W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–225). London: Longman Group Limited. Ramsey, R., & Schafer, D. (2002). The statistical sleuth. USA: Wadsworth Group, Duxbury Press. Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory, and the noticing hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283–331. Segalowitz, N. (2000). Automaticity and attentional skill in fluent performance. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 200–219). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R.M. (1977). Controlled and automatic processing: I. detection, search and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66. Steele, R. (2000). Language learning and intercultural competence. In R.D. Lambert & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and pedagogy (pp. 193–205). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Stern, H.H. (1991). Fundamental concept of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Terrell, T.D. (1983). The natural approach to language teaching: An update. In J.W. Oller, Jr. & P.A. Richard-Amato (Eds.), Methods that work (pp. 267–283). Rowley: Newbury House Publishers.

Memorizing Dialogues: The Case for “Performative Exercises”

269

VanPatten, B. (1998). Cognitive characteristics of adult second language learners. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Learning foreign and second languages: Perspectives in research and scholarship (pp. 106–127). New York: Modern Language Association of America. Walker, G. (2000). Performed culture: Learning to participate in another culture. In R.D. Lambert & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and pedagogy (pp. 221–236). Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company. Walker, I. (2002). Semester-end survey for LAJ2201, Japanese 2. Unpublished survey, Centre for Language Studies, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Walker, I. (2003). Methodology and practice of “Performative Exercises” for Japanese language beginners. In The Association of Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language (Ed.), The practice of teaching Japanese as a foreign language (pp. 12–17). Tokyo: The Association of Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language. Walker, I. (2004). The practice and effect of discourse education — A case study of university of Singapore. In The Association of Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language (Ed.), International Conference on Japanese Language Teaching, 2004 (pp. 237–242). Tokyo: The Association of Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language. Wood, D. (2001). In search of fluency: What is it and how can we teach it? Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(4), 573–589. Retrieved October 1, 2004, from http://www.utpjournals.com/product/cmlr/574/574-Wood.html

12 THE WHOLE WORLD COMMUNICATES IN ENGLISH, DO YOU? — EDUCATIONAL DRAMA AS AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO TEACHING ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN JAPAN

Naoko Araki-Metcalfe

1 Introduction Educational structures and curricula are intertwined with the culture to which they belong. Educational systems in each country reflect its people’s perceptions of the world. Japanese education can be seen as unique and different from others. Positive differences include high academic performances in mathematics and science while negative differences include an alarming increase in bullying and school refusers (a group of students who refuse to attend schools because of academic and/or social problems in school). Recently, movements in educational settings in Japan have caused chaos as globalisation takes place at the local, national and international levels. Japanese people’s traditional perspectives have been challenged, and more modern and more international best practice standards are being adopted in the education context. As more Japanese study overseas, travel around the world, work for non-Japanese companies, and visit other countries in the course of their work, they have become more aware of differences and similarities between Japan and other countries. More Japanese educators have also experienced different ways of teaching and learning, and they are now seeking to integrate some of the positive aspects that they have seen overseas into the Japanese education system. It is a challenge for Japanese educators to cater for both traditional and modern aspects in the education system. A major change in recent years in education was the introduction of English language in primary schools in Japan in 2002. Without adequate support and infrastructure, primary school teachers were suddenly required to teach English in their classrooms. In this chaotic situation, there was a great need for alternative teaching methods. To introduce English language education in primary schools using more enjoyable and participatory methods has been a

272

N. Araki-Metcalfe

challenging task. The move to implement English language teaching in primary schools has created benefits for some groups of people but it has also caused concern among others. A participatory method that I will focus on in this chapter is educational drama. In this chapter, the following aspects will be discussed: English language education in Japan, a new educational challenge, and educational drama as an alternative teaching method for primary school students. 2 English language in Japan Learning English in Japan in this international era is a popular exercise. The number of schools for learning English conversation has increased dramatically in recent decades in Japan. These schools are popular among both younger and older Japanese. To cater to the various needs of these language learners, a wide range of materials has been developed to assist those learning the language, including CDs, books, videos, TV programs, and computer programs. Yet, it is often said that many Japanese feel hesitant to speak English and do not seem confident about spontaneously communicating in English. In other words, they only know textbook phrases and some words of English. Visitors to Japan may feel Japan is not as internationalised as they had anticipated. For example, there are few signboards or notices in English that provide detailed directions, and it is not easy to ask public bus drivers for directions when these visitors only speak English. It is said that the world is getting smaller, and as English is the major language of the global village, a certain level of English proficiency, particularly in oral skills, is essential if one desires to profit from all that the global village has to offer. In order to understand the situation of English language education in Japan, the current educational system needs to be carefully examined. 2.1 The current English education system English as a foreign language is taught as an academic subject throughout six years of secondary schooling in Japan. However, it is often heard that many Japanese people “share the view that the teaching of English, particularly the teaching of communication skills, has been a failure” (Hashimoto, 2002, p. 68). One of the reasons for the lack of communication skills seems to lie in the teaching methodology commonly used in English language classes in Japanese schools, i.e. the grammar-translation method (Togo, 2001). Japanese teachers always use textbooks authorised by the Ministry of Education, Cul-

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

273

ture, Sports, Science and Technology (hereafter: the Ministry of Education) and the grammar-translation method. In typical English language classes in schools, teacher-centred approaches have emerged that require the students to digest a large amount of curricular contents within limited timetables. Togo (2001) describes the grammar-translation method as a simple and, in some ways, effective approach for teachers and students to follow because it is mainly concerned with “syntactic structures and relevance to the process of translation” (Moore & Lamie, 1996, p. 81). However this method does not focus on the development of students’ communication skills in English. Memorising vocabulary and learning set grammar patterns have become common features of the English language curriculum in Japanese schools. In the last two decades, an additional approach, the communicative approach, has been introduced in English language classes to focus more on enhancing students’ communication abilities in English (Togo, 2001). This approach demands that teachers be more communicative which requires advanced skills not only in speaking and listening, but also in spontaneously and independently manipulating English according to people and situations. Secondary schools in Japan nowadays include conversation classes in their English curricula, and native English language assistants from the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) program are often invited to assist in these communication-focused language classes. Furthermore, along with the development of the JET program in the early 1990s, the idea of teaching English in primary schools was discussed. The idea has been put into practice in public primary schools since 2002. Unlike in secondary schools, the English language curriculum in primary schools views the teaching of the English language as a step towards international understanding. However, Tomita (2004) sees this approach as problematic, for the Ministry of Education does not provide clear guidance for the teaching of English for the promotion of international understanding. Instead, the ministry tends to lean towards teaching the linguistics elements of the English language. Tomita (2004) further argues that the handbooks published by the Ministry of Education only refer to the teaching of English language, but not to the teaching of international understanding. As the English language curriculum in primary schools was just implemented in 2002, there is a long journey ahead for educators to develop a more complete curriculum that caters to the needs of society, schools, teachers, students and parents.

274

N. Araki-Metcalfe

2.1.1 Introduction to the JET program As the Ministry of Education recognised the importance of oral communication skills in English, the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) Program was introduced. In 1987, the Ministries of Education, Foreign Affairs, and Home Affairs jointly promoted the recruitment of native English speakers from other countries. Moore and Lamie (1996) call this movement “a turning point in English teaching in Japan” (p. 11). Further, for the first time “there was a large number of native English speakers available to act as role models in classrooms for such things as pronunciation, stress, intonation and fluency, to act [as] experts on spelling, punctuation and grammar and, most [importantly], [native English speakers] for students and teachers to talk to” (Moore & Lamie, 1996, p. 11). According to the official website of the JET program, in 2004, the number of non-Japanese from other countries who participated in the JET program was 6,103. This included a very small number of participants from non-English speaking countries. Most participants are from Englishspeaking countries such as The United States of America, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, England and Ireland. One of the qualifications required of these participants is a university degree. As long as they have a degree in any field, they can apply and be accepted without the need to have graduated from teacher training courses. In other words, some JET program participants have never taught before or studied how to teach. Most participants in the JET program become language assistants in public schools and they are called assistant language teachers (ALT). These participants receive brief orientations in Tokyo when they arrive. The orientation offers them basic information on Japanese culture and language and how to teach English language. The number of program participants is increasing every year. However this does fully not satisfy the needs of English language teaching in secondary schools throughout the entire nation. In a city located in Fukuoka prefecture, some Japanese companies also started recruiting native English speakers by themselves as a business venture to send them to local schools as language assistants. These companies are usually contracted to both secondary and primary schools. Matsukawa (2004) expresses a concern regarding ALTs in schools, namely that more workshops and conferences for these assistant teachers are desperately needed to enhance the quality of teaching in large classes using the team-teaching approach with Japanese teachers.

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

275

2.1.2 Responses to the JET program Reviews of the JET program and feedback from both participants and Japanese schools are generally positive (McConnell, 2000; Moore & Lamie, 1996). Slowly but steadily, opportunities for Japanese school students to interact with these native speakers are increasing. On the other hand, many controversies and issues arise, involving participants and schools. It seems that most of these concerns stem from misunderstandings, as some Japanese teachers of the English language cannot speak English very well because they had only learned the language from textbooks, while some native language assistants did not have any understanding of the Japanese culture and language prior to coming to Japan. Takenouchi (2004) points out the need for these assistants to improve their Japanese language skills for better communications with Japanese students and teachers. Although most Japanese English language teachers are able to speak the language, as Hashimoto (2002) puts it, “the emphasis on meaningfulness rather than superficial fluency in speaking English certainly reflects the inferiority complex in use of the language” (p. 68). It is also said that some Japanese teachers leave everything to the nonJapanese assistant teachers (Naoyama, 2004). McConnell’s publication (2000) reveals detailed insights into the program. Hendry (2003) calls it “an interesting anthropological study of the JET program” (p. 93) because it includes the voices of participants, schools and government officials. Native English teachers voiced some criticism, e.g. about exam-oriented English language classes in secondary schools which they see as a concern. They feel that they came to Japan to teach oral communication of English and not to teach a certain type of English just to pass exams. A Canadian teacher describes his/her position as a JET program participant in Japan as a replacement for tape recordings of English dialogues (McConnell, 2000, p. 84). On the other hand, some Japanese teachers feel that valuable time is sacrificed for conversation classes with non-Japanese teachers when students should be preparing for exams (McConnell, 2000). Another interesting point which McConnell (2000) made was that by their very presence in the classroom these non-Japanese teachers challenged the stereotypes of nonJapanese people that the Japanese hold in general. For example, an AfricanAmerican language assistant speaking fluent English became a source of surprise to a Japanese English language teacher.

276

N. Araki-Metcalfe

2.1.3 The JET program and internationalisation Although there are still issues to be discussed for the improvement of the JET program, it would appear that the participants definitely motivate teachers and students in Japan towards English language learning. This is an important step for the Japanese towards internationalisation at a local level. Interacting with these language assistants in schools can be – for some students – the very first experience of communicating with non-Japanese. In other words, students can use the opportunity to gain a sense of internationalisation in their own schools by welcoming these non-Japanese assistants. However, to what extent Japanese society and schools integrate these assistants and make adjustments in the process is unknown. McConnell (2000) presents a critical view in regard to this issue: By defining internationalisation as situational accommodation to Western demands, the JET Program provides a means by which Japan can “do” Westernstyle internationalisation (however defined) while at the same time protecting local meanings and institutions. What the Japanese have done is to meet the guests at the door with a great display of hospitality. Assured that they are only short-term guests, the hosts then focus not on whether the foreigners are integrated into Japanese society but on whether they are treated hospitably and enjoy their stay. (p. 272)

The above quote depicts characteristics of the Japanese, in particular the dual dimensions of tatemae and honne (Hendry, 2003; March, 1990; McConnell, 2000; Rosenberger, 1992; Sugimoto, 1997). Politeness and the great display of hospitality can be seen as a characteristic of the Japanese people, tatemae (public face). The opposite characteristic is honne (private face or inner feeling). Honne seems more complex and is intertwined with various inner feelings. When interaction and communication with non-Japanese arise from honne feelings in ordinary Japanese citizens, Japan will gain a true sense of internationalisation. 2.2 A new attempt: English language education for primary school students While the motivation to learn English language in schools was enhanced through the implementation of the JET program, another attempt to start the English language education in primary schools was finalised in 2002. According to Hattori and Yoshizawa (2002), the implementation of English language education in primary schools was already officially discussed as early as

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

277

1991. Matsukawa (2004) divides the implementation of English language in primary schools into two separate stages. The first stage began in the early 1990s when particular public schools were appointed to teach the language as a trial for ten years. These trial schools formed less than 1% of the total number of 22,800 public primary schools in Japan (Matsukawa, 2004). The second stage started from April 2002 when all public primary schools were allowed to implement the teaching of English language as part of the fairly new subject called Integrated Studies (Sogogakushu). 2.2.1 English language education within the subject of Integrated Studies At the beginning of the discussions on the teaching of English in primary schools, it was thought that the English language should be an independent subject like in secondary schools. However, as the main purpose of teaching the language at primary schools was to provide an enjoyable and experiencebased language learning model, it was decided that English should be taught as part of efforts to promote international understanding within the subject called Integrated Studies. It was also suggested that English language education should start from grade three in primary schools, the starting year for Integrated Studies. In the guide book published by the Ministry of Education, in primary schools, English language “classes can be centred around activities in which students can hear and speak simple expressions and those expressions that they have learned, while playing games, singing, doing quizzes and taking part in make-believe play activities” (2002, p. 3). Tomita (2004) expresses a concern that it would be difficult to expect to produce effective learning outcomes in the long term if only such simple language activities are continually conducted. An important question should be asked regarding the new educational reform: Who teaches English to the primary school students? In secondary schools, qualified English language teachers teach the subject. However, in primary schools, English language is not considered a subject. Therefore, classroom teachers are in charge of creating the curriculum, and determining words to teach and how to teach. In schools that are accepted by the Ministry of Education as model schools for English language education, a nonJapanese ALT from the JET program stays at each school on a full-time basis to teach the language using team-teaching methods. This can be done because of extra funds, resources and support from the government, but the majority of schools cannot provide a rich English language experience like the model schools do (Hattori & Yoshizawa, 2002). Thus, it is common to observe classroom teachers struggling with the teaching of the language without much sup-

278

N. Araki-Metcalfe

port and special training for language teaching (Matsukawa, 2004; Naoyama, 2004). The local public school which I interviewed was not a model school. The teachers showed many concerns and struggles with regard to the teaching of English to their students. The common grievance of these teachers was that they did not know how to teach and what to teach. One female teacher in the local public school said she chose to become a primary school teacher because she did not have to teach English. In 2003, this school decided to allocate ten hours per year for English language classes. In 2002, a similar number of hours were allocated, and activities which these teachers carried out in 2002 were as follows: singing English songs, playing games in English in open space areas, inviting guest teachers who had lived in other countries before (both Japanese and non-Japanese), and studying cultures of other countries. In addition, an ALT came from the nearest junior high school to this primary school a few times a year to interact with all the students from grade three to six, but the school had no native English teachers besides these visits. Matsukawa (2004) shows the importance of designing a curriculum for teaching English in individual schools. It can be a challenge for Japanese primary school teachers to develop a curriculum by themselves as they are used to being given the authorised textbooks and curriculum guidelines for other subjects, though this is not the case for Integrated Studies, including English language teaching (Matsukawa, 2004). The Ministry of Education published two main handbooks for teachers for communication-focused English education in schools in 2001 and 2002. There are other books, including one written by Hattori and Yoshizawa (2002) providing an ideal curriculum and detailed lesson plans. However, all seem to include ALTs in their example lessons. According to the teachers I interviewed, limited workshops for these teachers provided by the local educational authorities also show lessons with ALTs. It seems that this gives an impression to teachers without any experience in teaching English that the English language cannot be taught properly without native English speakers. The principal at this local public school mentioned that students tend to respond better to non-Japanese. The teachers at this school had nothing but concerns about future English language education, especially if there are not going to be ALTs from the JET program, and insufficient support and guidance from the Ministry of Education. Matsukawa (2004) insists on the development of an additional skill in these teachers — the designing of a curriculum by themselves. This will help them to teach the language more confidently with or without the non-Japanese assistant teachers.

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

279

3 Educational drama and language learning It seems that there is a gap between the English language which Japanese learn in Japan and that which is actually used overseas, particularly in native English-speaking countries. This gap can become a source of surprise when Japanese travel to other countries. One reason could be that the grammartranslation method does not teach students “real-life” conversational skills. Despite the introduction of the JET program and English language education in primary schools, they have been slow to impact positively on the development of oral English language skills. Another reason could be that there is a lack of awareness about the importance of gestures in real communication. This is not viewed as a vital skill in teaching languages in Japan. In oral communication, many skills are required beyond knowledge of English grammar and vocabulary. An understanding of appropriate gestures that accompany sentences and phrases is vital if one is to be successful in achieving fluency in the language. “Physical tools” including gestures, facial expressions and use of voice can be difficult to learn if an English language class is taught only using a teacher-centred method. This method does not employ experience-based activities. Drama, however, can provide experience-based activities for language learners as it has a “unique balance of thought and feeling [that] makes learning exciting, challenging, relevant to real-life concerns and enjoyable” (Wagner, 1998, p. 9). Most language students need opportunities to practise their language skills in a variety of situations so that they can understand and experience how the language works. It is possible to create real-life situations in second language classes with the help of drama activities. 3.1 Educational drama Drama is an academic subject in many countries. Australia, for example, is a leading country in drama education. It is incorporated in the curriculum from primary school years. Tertiary educational institutions also offer educational drama training courses for student teachers. One form of drama, educational drama, often occurs in the classroom; it is not a theatre performance which most people who are not familiar with this area of study might picture in their minds. Wagner (1998, p. 5) clearly differentiates educational drama from theatre performances. Furthermore, Ewing and Simons (2004) state that theatre performances including acting, role-playing, playing of games, reading of scripts and stories, and presenting performances on stage reflect elements of educational drama. However “they do not capture its essence” (p. 3). O’Mara

280

N. Araki-Metcalfe

(2003) expresses her concerns that “there are misconceptions about how the subject operates” (p. 18). Providing an accurate definition of educational drama seems difficult, as people perceive educational drama differently according to their experiences, the way they implement it in the classroom, and the dynamics of the participants. Wagner’s definition of educational drama below seems to describe the main ideas of educational drama, particularly for people who do not know much about this form of drama: In educational drama, the participants encounter a situation or problem, but the dialogue and gestures they produce are a response to the circumstances the group is imagining and improvising. This kind of drama is something all [participants] can do and benefit from, not just those who might have a natural gift for theatrical performance. (Wagner, 1998, p. 6)

The description provided by Ewing and Simons (2004) also helps us to understand educational drama from another perspective: “[Educational drama is] a method of teaching/learning and a body of knowledge in its own right. Essentially it’s about enactment: using the body in time and space to explore issues, questions, perspectives or ideas” (2004, p. 3). Kinaesthetic skills and movements can easily be taken for granted in daily life, and educational drama can provide an opportunity to increase the awareness of this “body of knowledge” (Ewing & Simons, 2004, p. 3). The process of educational drama involves the unfolding of a story, with all participants’ efforts and ideas put together. Drama in the classroom consists of “a sequence of scenes through which a story unfolds, human relationships change and problems are explored” (Winston & Tandy, 2001, p. xi). In educational drama, participants work in an imagined world where they are free from restrictions of time, place and identity. Yet, there are rules for drama which provide the framework, and all participants create artistic work within these agreed boundaries. “Such rules are not restrictive or oppressive … [educational drama in classroom] demands a wide range of behaviour patterns from [participants], ranging from high energy action, to talk, to stillness and attentive silence, each appropriate to different tasks” (Winston & Tandy, 2001, p. x). Like any activity in the teaching of academic subjects, drama too needs rules in order for the participants to produce successful outcomes. 3.2 Educational drama as a teaching method for foreign language classes The benefits that drama can provide to second/foreign language learning are not fully recognised by many language teachers. They tend to take for granted

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

281

our kinaesthetic functions in communication including using the mouth for talking, moving the hands in gestures, and manipulating muscles on the face for expressing emotions. These movements become natural functions in daily life: they are inadvertently omitted. However, learning a second/foreign language is similar to a baby learning his/her mother tongue. Second/foreign language learners have to start to develop not only linguistic skills but also communication skills in the new language. When babies cannot express themselves in words, they try to communicate using hands, bodies and facial expressions: “Movement and gesture, even before vocalization, are the beginning of communication.” (Wagner, 2002, p. 11) The next stage that babies go through is probably a mimicking stage, and eventually they start vocalising their thoughts and feelings in their own ways. In common second/foreign language classrooms, learners frequently get to listen repeatedly to the second/foreign language but do not get to make many spontaneous responses. These language learners need “to talk themselves” (Wagner, 2002, p. 4) to become independent speakers of that particular second/foreign language. Implementing educational drama in second/foreign language classrooms can deliver a specific learning environment for the learners to respond with their own words. 3.2.1 Similarities in drama and second/foreign language learning There are two distinctive similarities in both drama and second/foreign language. One is that in both subjects one needs the skills of observation. Before babies use gestures and words, they observe. They watch what others do in certain situations. Students in drama need to develop the skill of observation in order for them to assume a role and to act accordingly to imaginary situations. In second/foreign language learning, observation skills are important. For example, language learners observe their teachers’ ways of pronouncing words, using the lips and the tongue, and speaking the target language in class. Another similarity between drama and second/foreign language learning is that both areas share the same goal of achieving “a modification of our very selves” (Wagner, 2002, p. 5). Most second/foreign language learners probably make new discoveries about their first language as they study more about their second/foreign language. Wagner (2002) explains the significance of this experience which learners “undergo”: When a person learns another language, something is “undergone.” We “undergo” when we allow our encounters to modify our established conceptions. When we undergo an experience, we ultimately have to change ourselves and our way

282

N. Araki-Metcalfe

of looking at the world. This is what true learning is — modification of our very selves. (p. 5)

Drama offers a similar experience for students as they engage with improvisational drama activities. 3.2.2 Role-play A common drama activity that is incorporated in foreign language classrooms is role-play. The form of role-play that language teachers use differs from role-play used by drama trained teachers. It is common for language teachers to provide a set script for the learners to read or memorise, and simply ask them to read their individual lines to other learners. This type of exercise focuses on linguistic proficiency and does not involve the use of body language. Well-known drama educators, Heathcote and Bolton (1998), point to effective ways of introducing role-play in language classroom by adding extra tasks, including giving specific descriptions of characters and even adding adjectives that describe emotions. An example suggested by these drama educators was a scene at a restaurant. Instead of only giving a conversational script between a waiter and a customer, more specific descriptions can be added, e.g. by stating that the customer is the father of the waiter’s girlfriend or that the customer is a blind person. By adding adjectives that describe emotions, teachers can provide more specific information about the characters. For example, the waiter is angry because of a disagreement with his boss. In this way, other learners can enjoy watching different situations and characters although they all work on the same script. They can also guess what sort of characters or emotional stages the presenters are in after watching their presentations. This usually encourages active class discussions after the presentations. It is important to note what the word “role” refers to. Wagner (1998) believes that “role” refers to “the persona taken on in an improvisational exchange, not in its original sense of the role an actor plays when interpreting a written script” (p. 4). This improvisation seems to become a key for real language learning as far as oral communication is concerned. Second/foreign language learning involves not only the abilities to speak, listen, read and write, but it also requires learners to learn how to observe, predict, analyse and present information in different ways. Drama activities in the language classroom can offer opportunities for the development of other important abilities in communication as well as the four basic forms of literacy. In real life, we determine the appropriate use of verbal language and body language according to whom we communicate with. In any language, there is

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

283

an appropriate language for appropriate people and situations. It seems that there are not enough opportunities for language learners to practise using different forms of language in the classroom. Many Japanese feel unable to communicate in English even after learning the language for six years. Traditional teaching methods including the grammar-translation method used in Japan do not seem to provide the flexibility required by modern language learners. Ewing and Simons (2004) suggest that improvisation can facilitate “the use of conversational language for … speakers of English” (p. 4) as a second/foreign language. 3.2.3 Story-focused drama for foreign language learners As Ewing and Simons (2004) say, role-play is just one aspect of drama. There are other rich forms of classroom drama which are currently being used. Drama that occurs in classroom is called educational drama, process drama or creative drama which are referred to differently across countries (I have called it educational drama in this chapter). These are all story-focused activities and show an effective way of using picture books and stories, instead of teachers just reading them to their students. In this method, illustrations in stories also play a very important part. Here, both language and illustration become powerful tools for language learners to establish their imagined world in class as a whole. Miller and Saxton (2004) warn that teachers need to be selective, and stories with “gaps” which students can explore and can be engaged with are the most appropriate. “Exploring possibilities” means that not everything is revealed in the story, and therefore the readers’ imagination is stimulated to explore further possibilities. An extensive account of the use of story-focused drama in teaching English language to non-English speakers was presented by Kao and O’Neill (1998). They used a term called process drama which is synonymous with educational drama. In teaching English to Taiwanese university students, stories and picture books were used as the main teaching resources. These materials are called “pre-text” (Kao & O’Neill, 1998). It was found that language students not only developed their linguistic abilities, but their social competence also improved through their participation in drama activities. In Kao and O’Neill’s research (1998), it was clear that English was used as a tool to communicate and was not a goal to achieve with provided vocabularies and sentence structures. “Language acquisition arises from the urge to do things with words, and this need becomes paramount in process drama, when participants are required to manipulate the dramatic circumstances to achieve their own goals” (Kao & O’Neill, 1998, p. 4).

284

N. Araki-Metcalfe

In educational drama, teachers become “co-creators of the dramatic world, and roles they adapt within this world enable them to diagnose the students’ language skills and understanding, support their communicative efforts, model appropriate behaviours within the situation, question their thinking and extend and challenge their responses” in the language classroom (Kao & O’Neill, 1998, pp. 12–13). The clear difference between a typical second/foreign language class and a drama-oriented lesson is that drama-oriented classes focus on problem-posing and resolution, which arises from participants working together based on picture books and stories. Thus, language is used in “meaningful, authentic situations” (Kao & O’Neill, 1998, p. 12). Liu (2002) suggests using educational drama as an additional teaching method where students can demonstrate their linguistic knowledge and experience spontaneously in class. Educational drama consists of various drama activities that involve pair work, small group work, large group work and whole class work. Ewing and Simons (2004) give clear definitions of various drama activities used in classrooms and provide some example units. These example units can be used for second/foreign language classes. 3.3 Drama method for younger language learners in Japan As Japan is currently undergoing a major change in terms of English language education, teachers are looking for alternative teaching methods for primary school students. In trial English language classes at a public primary school in Japan, I used educational drama as an alternative method. I decided to embark on this project as some research have shown that educational drama is effective in teaching primary school students (Ewing & Simons, 2004; Moore, 1998) and in teaching second and foreign language (Brauer, 2002; Byram & Fleming, 1998; Kao & O’Neill, 1998; Liu, 2002). The book used for Year Five students in this particular Japanese primary school was a well-known book called The Hungry Little Caterpillar by Eric Carle. Although many students already knew the story as it was translated into Japanese many years ago, it was the first time most of them had heard the story in English. About half of these students learned English language after school hours in private conversational English language schools nearby. However most of them were considered to be at the beginners’ level in the English language. It took a while for these students to become familiar with the requisite drama concepts given that drama education is not fully recognised or even introduced into the educational setting in Japan. Winston and Tandy (2001) stress that the success in educational drama in classroom depends on the stu-

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

285

dents “knowing what is expected of them” (p. x). Because these Japanese students did not know the expectations of a drama-oriented English language classroom, they showed some concern in early lessons. However, once they understood the expectations, much improvement was seen in their confidence level and in their use of English for their social interactions with other students and teachers. Another significant change was their enhanced learning, including the use of related and extended vocabulary from the text, The Hungry Little Caterpillar. Although their limited English was a hurdle for these students, they were motivated to act and talk spontaneously and freely in this drama world: they became independent learners. For example, these students were motivated to use resources around them for words that they wanted to know in English. The resources were teachers, dictionaries, and classmates who had more knowledge and experience than them in the English language. These students also realised that they were able to communicate with limited English words by using gestures, facial expressions and hand movements: communication is a combination of literacy and kinaesthetic skills. Their motivation for learning the English language was fully stimulated through engagement with various drama activities such as exploring the imaginary life of a caterpillar as a class, or assuming the role of other animals and experiencing their feelings. This unit definitely achieved all three aims that were stated in Practical Handbook for Elementary School English Activities of the Ministry of Education (2001): developing positive attitudes in students to communicate with others; enhancing abilities of self-expression; and engaging with various activities to become interested in and understand the culture and lifestyle of other countries. This official handbook encourages teachers to use types of learning that are heavily based on experiences and problem-solving. The aims here are for students to develop abilities to find problems by themselves, learn spontaneously, think by themselves, act by themselves, and solve problems creatively and independently (Ministry of Education, 2001, p. 2). Educational drama using the text The Hungry Little Caterpillar obviously catered to the aims set by the Japanese Government for English language education in primary schools. 4 Conclusion There is a great need for the exchange of ideas and teaching methods across the curriculum to improve our practice in education. In this chapter, two different areas of study, educational drama and second/foreign language teach-

286

N. Araki-Metcalfe

ing, were discussed. By combining the two distinctive areas of study, an effective and alternative approach emerged. Particularly with younger language learners, this method can be used more frequently. There are not many published studies that focus on the use of educational drama to teach second/foreign languages to primary school students. However, it is very clear that this method is as effective for younger students as it is for older ones because children “bring with them to the classroom the universal human ability to play, to behave ‘as if’; many children spontaneously engage in such dramatic play from as young an age as ten months” (Wagner, 1998, p. 9). Japan’s new challenge has just started by the introduction of English language education to primary schools. In 2005, English language education in primary schools was reviewed to determine whether it should remain part of Integrated Studies or become a separate subject. For now, it remains part of Integrated Studies until another review which will be held in the near future. An alternative teaching method like educational drama has much potential for the creation of successful English language communicators in Japan. References Brauer, G. (Ed.). (2002). Body and language: intercultural learning through drama. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing. Byram, M., & Fleming, M. (1998). Language learning in intercultural perspective: approaches through drama and ethnography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carle, E. (1969). The very hungry caterpillar. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Ewing, R., & Simons, J. (2004). Beyond the script: take two: drama in classroom. Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association. Hashimoto, K. (2002). Implications of the recommendation that English become the second official language in Japan. In A. Kirkpatrick, Englishes in Asia: communication, identity, power and education (pp. 63–74). Melbourne: Language Australia. Hattori, T., & Yoshizawa, J. (2002). Eigowo tukatta sougoutekina gakushuuno jikan: shougakkouno jyugyou jissen. Tokyo: Taishuukan. Heathcote, D., & Bolton, G. (1998). Teaching culture through drama. In M. Byram & M. Fleming, Language learning in intercultural perspective: approaches through drama and ethnography (pp. 158–177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hendry, J. (2003). Understanding Japanese society. Third edition. London: Routledge Curzon. The JET Programme. The Japan Exchange and Teaching Programme. (n.J.). Available at http://www.jetprogramme.org/ Kao, S., & O’Neill, C. (1998). Words into worlds: learning a second language through process drama. Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing. Liu, J. (2002). Process drama in second- and foreign-language classrooms. In G. Brauer (Ed.), Body and language: intercultural learning through drama (pp. 51–70). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

Educational Drama as an Alternative Approach to Teaching English Language

287

March, M.R. (1990). The Japanese negotiator: subtlety and strategy beyond Western logic. New York: Kodansha America. Matsukawa, R. (2004). Asuno shougakkoueigokyouikuwo hiraku. Tokyo: Apurikotto. McConnell, D. (2000). Importing diversity: inside Japan’s JET Program. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Miller, C., & Saxton, J. (2004). Into the story: Language in action through drama. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2001). Practical handbook for elementary school English activities. Tokyo: Kairyudo Publishing. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2002). Handbook for teamteaching. Revised edition. Tokyo: Gyosei Corporation. Moore, G., & Lamie, J. (1996). Translate or communicate? English as a foreign language in Japanese high schools. New York: Nova Science Publishers. Moore, T. (1998). Phoenix texts: A window on drama practice in Australian primary schools. Australia: NADIE (National Association for Drama in Education). Naoyama, Y. (2004). Shougakkoueigokatsudoo ekiari gainashi, yottehitsuyouari, tadashijyoukenntsukide. The English Teachers’ Magazine, 53(2), 12–14. O’Mara, J. (2003). Repositioning drama to centre stage: drama, English, text and literacy. NJ: Drama Australia Journal, 27(2), 17–26. Rosenberger, R.N. (1992). Japanese sense of self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sugimoto, Y. (1997). An introduction to Japanese society. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. Takenouchi, O. (2004). Shougakkou eigokatsudoga seikoosurutoki shippaisurutoki. The English Teachers’ Magazine, 53(2), 27–29. Togo, K. (2001). Nazeanatawa eigogahanasenainoka. Tokyo: Chikuma Shinsho. Tomita, Y. (2004). Kokusairikaikyouikuno ikkanntoshiteno gaikokugokaiwakouteiron. In Y. Otsu (Ed.), Shougakkkoudeno eigokyouikuwa hitsuyouka (pp. 149–186). Tokyo: The University of Keio Press. Wagner, B.J. (1998). Educational drama and language arts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Wagner, B.J. (2002). Understanding drama-based education. In G. Brauer (Ed.), Body and language: intercultural learning through drama (pp. 3–17). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing. Winston, J., & Tandy, M. (2001). Beginning drama 4–11 (2nd ed.). London: David Fulton Publishers.

13 FROM ORAL INTERVIEW TEST TO ORAL COMMUNICATION TEST: ALLEVIATING STUDENTS’ ANXIETY

Satomi Chiba and Yoko Morikawa

1 Introduction McNamara (2000) once described an oral test with the following words: “A chair outside the interview room and a nervous victim waiting with rehearsed phrases to be called into an inquisitional conversation with the examiners” (p. 3). The victim, who has prepared himself or herself for a perfect scenario for the test, defies the stormy questions and recalls memorized sentences under pressure. Even after the door is shut and the ordeal over, suffering persists. The traumatized victim remains haunted by the inerasable memory. Today, the nature of testing is becoming less impositional and more humanistic (McNamara, 2000, p. 78). Such “inhumane” oral interview tests, however, still predominate, frequently as the curricular climax of a language course. Despite the fact that the purpose of oral testing is to assess the students’ oral ability in natural situations, it has been empirically shown that some students cannot demonstrate the ability they have acquired due to anxiety and the test setting that causes it. In order to allow students to demonstrate their skills fully, teachers will have to create a new form of oral test. I was so scared that I kept saying the wrong things. I think I got a very bad grade for it. But I don’t think my (oral) ability is very bad since I am quite fluent and accurate when tutors ask me questions in tutorials in Japanese. (A student at the National University of Singapore)

The fear of making errors and obsession with fluency are the most frequently mentioned causes of anxiety for Singaporean students. Such anxiety might derive from the proficiency-oriented language education these students have experienced in the past, where the measure of achievement was based too heavily on accuracy and fluency, rather than communicative ability.

290

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

The student’s feedback above touches on two critical problems in the traditional oral interview test. One is the students’ anxiety, which is considered to affect their performance seriously (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991; Phillips, 1999). The problem stems from the students’ lack of awareness of the cause(s) of this anxiety. The student quoted above explains her poor performance with anxiety. The problem of anxiety remains unresolved and becomes possibly a chronic mental block that affects her every performance. Anxiety is thus an important factor in the language learning process and should not be neglected. The repeated experiences of anxiety cause students to associate this mental condition with language performance. Once anxiety becomes a trait, it can have pervasive negative effects on a student’s efforts to communicate (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1993; Oxford, 1999a). Speilberger (1983) calls this trait anxiety and defines it as the tendency to become anxious in anticipation of any threatening situation. The other problem is students’ perceptions of oral communication abilities. Students think that oral skill is about answering a teacher’s question with grammatical accuracy or fluency. Obviously, this is a negative influence from the traditional oral interview test, which puts too much emphasis on accuracy and fluency (Cohen, 1994). In addition, in most cases, these tests consist of one-sided questions, although it is common knowledge that “human communication is never one-way” (Ong, 1982, p. 176). Even in the multiple-task format, the communication between the tester and testee is a superficial exchange of words, not emotional interactions for true engagement. Ong (1982) states: In real human communication, the sender has to be not only in the sender position but also in the receiver position before he or she can send anything … I have to be somehow inside the mind of the other in advance in order to enter with my message, and he or she must be inside my mind. (pp. 176–177)

Thus, the problem of the traditional test is its neglect of the fact that “communication is a shared responsibility between speaker and listener, and the listener’s preparedness to understand” (McNamara, 2004, p. 767), which narrows the view of communicative ability. In this chapter, we propose an alternative to the traditional oral test, which reduces anxiety and emphasizes communicative ability, rather than accuracy, and position the oral communication test as an extension of meaningful classroom activities conducted to promote students’ self-development through the process. We also report on a formative evaluation study conducted on the test to observe students’ test performances, gather feedback on their anxieties and refine the asessment guidelines.

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

291

2 The oral communication test 2.1 Background The participants of the evaluation study described in the following were 300 students in the Japanese 1 module (Semester 2 of 2003) and 146 students in Japanese 2 (Semester 1 of 2004) at the National University of Singapore (NUS). The population consisted of undergraduate students from Arts and Social Sciences as well as from other faculties including Science, Engineering, Computing, Business and others. The modules are compulsory for students majoring in Japanese Studies and electives for cross-faculty students. The modules comprise one lecture (2 hours) and three tutorials (TA, 2 hours; TB, 2 hours; and TC, 1 hour), totaling seven hours a week. In the abovementioned semesters, the lectures were conducted in two groups of 150 each for Japanese 1 and 73 each for Japanese 2. There were 20 tutorial classes in Japanese 1 and 11 tutorial classes in Japanese 2, and each tutorial had about 15 students. Due to the large lecture group size, the teachers looked to provide interactive opportunities in the tutorials. Japanese 1 forms the first part of elementary level Japanese and Japanese 2 is a continuation of Japanese 1. The objective of the modules is to help students develop a basic foundation in the four skills of speaking, listening, reading, and writing Japanese. The development of oral communication skills is emphasized. Specifically, students learn basic sentence patterns/vocabulary at the survival level in interactive situations common to daily life, and are taught the hiragana, katakana, and kanji (about 110 characters per semester) writing systems. In order to enhance the thinking skills in Japanese, writing composition tasks and reading tasks with short passages were incorporated in the modules. 2.2 Format of the oral communication test Traditionally, the test is in the format of an oral interview test, in which a teacher asks a student questions, or a student performs a task using specific sentence patterns. The new Oral Communication Test, introduced in Japanese 1, is designed to assess students’ oral communication ability using alternative criteria, while alleviating anxiety and motivating them positively through the learning process. It has the format of a paired conversation, where a student discusses topics given on the spot with a peer partner. The topics are from real-life situations in the context of what the students learned in class, such as movies, karaoke and sports in Japanese 1, and hobbies, childhood, school life and studying Japanese in Japanese 2. In order to provide options, more than

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

292

one topic is given on topic cards for the test, e.g. “childhood and/or hobby” or “if you go to Japan and/or your major” (see Fig. 1). Ꮚ࡝ࡶࡢ࡜ࡁ

᪥ᮏ࡬⾜ࡗࡓࡽ

(childhood) and/or ㊃࿡ (hobby)

(if you go to Japan) and/or ᑓ㛛 (major) Fig. 1. Topic Cards

Unlike the traditional oral test, which tends to be isolated in the curriculum, the new oral test is situated as an extension of classroom activities, one performance out of numerous communication projects. Students are paired in advance with classmates with approximately the same level of ability, and the pairs are encouraged to practice in preparation for the test. All students are asked to meet for at least half an hour to practice and come to the same classroom at the same time as usual to warm up. Each pair is called into the room just before the previous pair begins the test and is allowed to watch the previous pair’s performance before their own test. Without any help from the teachers, students have to cooperate, and initiate and maintain a conversation for five minutes, preceded by warm-up questions. This setting creates a nonthreatening and comfortable atmosphere which reduces anxiety and allows students to enjoy the communication more. After the test, students are to write a short self-reflection using a Progress Card (see Appendix 2) and will receive feedback from the teachers in the following week. As opposed to the traditional oral test where students’ partners are commonly native Japanese teachers, which creates a power relationship, there is less social, psychological and intellectual distance between peer performers. Hence, the conversation is more likely to be interactive, communicative, developmental and, most importantly, authentic, since it is unpredictable and includes pauses, ambiguous responses and possibly some errors. In order to understand each other, the performers are sometimes required to infer from what a peer has said and guess what he or she is going to say by applying their acquired knowledge. The most distinctive attribute of the new communication test is that more humanistic communication can be observed in the sense that the performers have opportunities to exchange emotions such as empathy and compassion during the test. Unlike the traditional oral tests or achievement tests conducted once at the end of the semester and requiring serious study only once, the new test incor-

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

293

porates a performance assessment which puts emphasis on the process of learning rather than the result (McNamara, 1996). The students are encouraged to prepare for the test by practicing with their partners outside the classroom, to monitor their self-development during the test, and to reflect on their own performance after the test. Traditional oral tests put emphasis on knowledge, tend to assess specifically what students cannot do, and over-emphasize grammatical accuracy and fluency. Our new oral test excludes the criteria of accuracy and fluency. This is because students will never be freed from the obsession with accuracy and fluency so long as they are in the criteria. The oral interview test based on traditional approaches uses the “native speaker” as a perfect model of communication to measure students’ achievement or sociolinguistic appropriateness. Savignon (1997) criticizes such an assessment and argues that not too much emphasis should be put on grammatical accuracy, and that educated native speakers’ competence should not be expected of second language learners. The specific ability assessed in our test is communicative competence, i.e. the “ability for use” (Hymes, 1972, p. 283), which includes discourse competence (content and development of conversation) and strategic competence (Canal, 1983). The emphasis of our new oral communicative test lies in the content of the conversation as well as the ability of humanistic communication. We define humanistic communication as the sharing of emotions and building of rapport among the participants, so as to establish a better human relationship, which will eventually lead to the formation of a community. Ong (1982) asserts that a “human being’s distinctiveness is to form true communities wherein person shares with person interiorly” (p. 177). The ability to form community should not be neglected as one of the skills in communicative ability (cf. Table 2). Table 1 provides a comparison between the traditional oral interview test and our oral communication test.

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

294

Table 1. Oral interview test versus oral communication test Oral Interview Test Traditional Approaches Teacher-centered Isolated in the curriculum Individual Interview, role play, tasks Unrelated to the students’ life Unrealistic situation from textbook Teachers create the situations The context is limited by the teachers One way-flow, no discourse development Predictable — possible to memorize A “native Japanese” like conversation with a perfect actor Anxiety, stress

Approach Curriculum Format Topic

Conversation

Affect

Teacher Native (level) language ability Social, psychological, and intellectual distance Power relationship Separate special space under high tension A cold threatening ambiance ---

Partner

---

Feedback

Place Ambiance Self-reflection

Oral Communication Test (Communication Performance) Performance-based approaches Humanistic Approach Learner-centered A part of classroom activities Pair Free conversation on given topics Related to students’ daily life Authentic/normal situation, real-world Students create the situations Students develop and extend the topic Interactive, communicative, developmental Unpredictable — impossible to memorize Real/natural conversation (hesitation, pauses, ambiguity, errors) Empathy, compassion, joy, less anxiety Familiar classmate Same language ability Equal stratum Common interest The classroom as usual, nonthreatening Comfortable learning community Students self-reflect to monitor development Teacher self-reflects to improve teaching/curriculum Beneficial feedback TeacherЍStudent: Praise, encouragement, constructive comments Student ЍTeacher: Constructive opinions

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

295

Table 1. Oral interview test versus oral communication test (continued) Achievement test What the student cannot do is assessed. Emphasis on knowledge One time at the end of semester One-time hard work Emphasis on result Proficiency: Emphasis on knowledge, what they don’t know Emphasis on grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence Accuracy/fluency/sociolinguistic appropriateness Nurture trait anxiety

Assessment

Ability assessed

Criteria Washback

Performance assessment What the student can do is assessed. Emphasis on ability for use Continuous/development during semester Long-term collaboration amongst teachers and students Emphasis on process Communicative competence: Emphasis on ability for use, what they know Emphasis on discourse competence, strategic competence Conversation development / content / language / humanistic communication Enhance motivation Establish classroom learning community Students learn communicative skills to contribute to their future in work

2.3 Evaluation The first preparatory data collection was conducted through the survey system of the LAJ1201 course website in the Integrated Virtual Learning Environment (IVLE) after the first oral communication test in Japanese 1 (Semester 2 of 2003). It was a voluntary survey of students’ views of the test. The students were asked two open-ended questions (“What do you think about the Oral Test? Did you feel anxiety?”). Since the survey revealed that anxiety level was extremely high among students, the teachers felt the necessity to examine more details of students’ anxiety for the purpose of revising the test. The second set of data was collected from 146 students taking Japanese 2 in 2004 Semester 1 after the second oral communication test. The students were asked to answer a questionnaire (see Appendix 1). A five-point Likert scale was employed for participants to indicate their level of anxiety, and they were also asked to elaborate on their anxiety, followed by individual interview. Data was also collected from the students in the form of their self-reflections, and comments on and suggestions for the test in a portfolio called the Ayumi Card (Progress Card) for the purpose of revising the test procedure and format, taking into consideration the students’ views (see Appendix 2). A portfolio is a purposeful collection of work that tells the story of a student’s efforts, progress or achievement (Stiggins & Conklin, 1992) and allows students to

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

296

monitor the progress of their learning. After every oral performance throughout the course including the oral test, students were required to write: (1) A self-reflection (What did you think about your performance? How can you improve?); and (2) Comments on/Suggestions for the project/activity (What do you think about the project? What is needed to improve the project?). 3 The first oral communication test — Japanese 1 3.1 Excerpts An oral communication test was conducted at the end of Japanese 1 in Semester 2 of 2003. Below is one part of a pair of students’ conversation. The pair was given the topic card, “My Room”. Excerpt 1: 1. A: Bࡉࢇࡣᑅ࡟࠸ࡲࡍ࠿㸽 (B san wa ryoo ni imasuka?) (Do you live in a dormitory, Mr. B?) ࡣ࠸ࠋPGP࡟࠸ࡲࡍࠋ 2. B: (Hai, PGP ni imasu.) (Yes. I live in PGP.) ࡑ࠺࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ⚾ࡶPGP࡟࠸ࡲࡍࠋ 3. A: (Soodesuka? Watashi mo PGP ni imasu.) (Really? I live in PGP, too.) 4. B: ࡑ࠺࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋࢃࡓࡋࡢ㒊ᒇࡣࢱ࢖ࣉB࡛ࡍࠋBࡉࢇࡣ㸽 (Soodesuka? Watashi no heya wa Taipu B desu. B san wa?) (B: Is that so? My room is type B. How about you, Mr. B?) ࢃࡓࡋࡢ㒊ᒇࡣࢱ࢖ࣉC࡛ࡍࠋ 5. A: (Watashi no heya wa Taipu C desu.) (My room is type C.) ࠶࠶ࠊࢱ࢖ࣉC࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋࢱ࢖ࣉCࡣࢱ࢖ࣉBࡼࡾ኱ࡁ࠸࡛ࡍࡡࠋ 6. B: (Aa, Taipu C desuka? Taipu C wa Taipu B yori ookii desu ne.) (Ah, you live in type C. Type C is bigger than Type B, isn’t it?) 7. A: ࡣ࠸ࠋ࡛ࡶࠊࢱ࢖ࣉCࡢ࡯࠺ࡀࡕࡻࡗ࡜㧗࠸࡛ࡍࠋ (Hai. Demo Taipu C no hoo ga chotto takai desu.) (Yes. But type C is a little more expensive.) ࠶࠶ࠊࡑ࠺࡛ࡍ࠿ࠋ 8. B: (Aa, soodesuka. Hahaha…) (Really? [Laughter])

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

297

Amazingly enough, despite being beginners, the pair found they had something in common and continued their conversation spontaneously, with laughter and expressions of surprise. They did not hesitate to express emotions during the “test”. As such a drama unfolded with the sharing of emotions, the oral test, which usually tends to be a torturous event, turned into a true occasion for humanistic communication. More interestingly, some of the pairs of differing proficiency levels made conscious attempts to understand each other better. In order to make themselves understood, some employed communicative strategies such as paraphrasing, although they had not been taught that skill. For example: Excerpt 2: 1. A: ࡈ඗ᘵࡀ࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ (Gokyoodai ga imasu ka?) (Do you have siblings?) 2. B: (↓ゝ) (silent) ࠾඗ࡉࢇࡀ࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ࠾ጜࡉࢇࡀ࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ 3. A: (Oniisann ga imasuka? Oneesann ga imasuka?) (Do you have elder brothers? Do you have elder sisters?) 4. B: ࡣ࠸ࠊ࠸ࡲࡍࠋ඗ࡀ୍ே࠸ࡲࡍࠋ (Hai imasu. Ani ga hitori imasu.) (Yes, I do. I have one elder brother.) 5. A: ጒࡉࢇ࡜ᘵࡉࢇࡀ࠸ࡲࡍ࠿ࠋ (Imooto san to otooto san ga imasuka?) (How about younger brothers and sisters?)

Such strategies are not often observed in the traditional oral interview test for basic level learners. Their performance demonstrated some quite fundamental communicative strategies, which they knew without explicit classroom instruction. One of the students said, “I was a bit surprised by what I could say impromptu”. The oral communication test seemed to have had great impact on the students. The positive comments on the test were as follows: - The oral test was very difficult but very challenging. - It was good because the test was similar to normal lessons and we performed with a peer partner. Engaging in a conversation with a partner is much better than being “interrogated” by invigilators. - It was very interesting and gave us a chance to speak in Japanese. It was quite useful. - This oral test was good because it tested our ability to speak Japanese.

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

298

- It was a good experience.

The feedback from the students was mostly favorable, and their performance encouraged us to further develop our oral communication test. There were, however, negative comments that manifested a fundamental problem of “oral tests” even in the paired free conversation format — students’ anxiety. 3.2 Students’ anxiety and their perceptions of oral communication Language teachers may have observed in traditional oral tests that good speakers might not always perform as they have done in the classroom. Although the teachers are more or less aware of students’ anxiety, they may not know how much it impacts the students’ performance. Anxiety and fear of errors as expressed in the students’ comments are characteristic of our students. The students’ feedback after the first oral communication test showed that the degree of anxiety is much higher than we expected, with some describing it as “nerve-wrecking”, “super frightening” and “panic”. The comments below express how they believe anxiety affects their performance. - I think I have done very badly for the oral test because I was really anxious and suddenly went blank in my mind. I couldn’t think of anything during the oral test. - Oral test was quite scary for me. I had lots of things to say, just that at that moment, I was too nervous to say anything extra than just answering the questions posed by my partner. - It was a nerve wrecking experience, such that I could not even put together a simple sentence. - I felt super nervous! To the extent that I forgot all the vocabulary and sentence structure at that instant. In addition, I was feeling quite nervous which further hindered my thinking of what to say in Japanese. Though I was aware of what was going on, I was not able to deliver my thoughts fluently. - Frankly speaking, the Oral Test was quite simple, but I was too anxious and uptight, that's why I couldn’t speak properly and forgot all ... - I was too nervous during the oral test that I did not do well. - I was nervous, that’s why I used the wrong particles and expressions.

3.3 Causes of anxiety MacIntyre (1999) draws on previous research to examine the potential origins of language anxiety. Early studies demonstrated three main causes of anxiety:

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

299

(1) communication apprehension (Daly & McCroskey, 1984); (2) fear of negative evaluation by others; and (3) test anxiety (Horwitz, 1986). More potential sources of anxiety stem from the learner’s personal problems (such as introvert personality, low self-esteem, lack of confidence and fear of losing one’s sense of identity) were examined by Lalonde and Gardner (1984), and MacIntyre and Charos (1995). Unrealistic learner expectations such as beliefs about a perfect accent and pronunciation may also be causes of anxiety (MacIntyre & Charos, 1995; Young, 1991). In addition, intimidating instructional practices of the teacher’s such as harsh error correction, peers’ behaviors such as laughter, the setting such as the frequency and quality of contact with native speakers have been studied as possible causes (Clément, 1980; Oxford, 1999b). Methods of testing were also investigated as possible causes (Madsen, Brown & Jones, 1991). MacIntyre (1999) concludes that the language anxiety would appear to be partly derived from personality and partly from negative experiences inside and outside the classroom, which create pervasive negative effects on a learner’s self-perception of proficiency (Aida 1994; Clément, Dörnyei & Noels, 1994; Young 1991). The evaluation of students’ feedback seems to indicate that the abovementioned causes of anxiety associated with a learner’s personality and negative experiences are applicable to the NUS students — similar to the results of previous research conducted in other countries. The forms of anxiety listed below appeared most frequently in the students’ feedback. (1) Exam fright (2) Afraid of making errors (3) Unfamiliarity with partner (4) Obsession with fluency The main cause of the NUS students’ anxiety stems from past experience. A student commented on the cause of his anxiety: “Because it was a TEST”. Obviously, the testees were haunted by their past test-taking experiences. Interestingly enough, however, the majority of the students who expressed anxiety mentioned that the test itself was interesting, with comments such as the following: “Starting was a bit nervous. After a while, it was interesting,”; “Anxious, but it turned out fine”. Considering the contradictory comments, it is apparent that the anxiety caused by their past test-taking experiences becomes trait anxiety (Speilberger, 1983), and presumably appears in every test. “Afraid of making errors” and “Obsession with fluency” are the second and fourth most frequently mentioned forms of anxiety respectively. The students’ reflections on their performances were clearly focused on accuracy of grammar and fluency:

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

300

- I felt nervous because I had to think of the correct sentence structures. - I was afraid I might use the wrong words and sentences. - I was not able to speak fluently. Helpless.

The possible cause also seems to be rooted in past experience, i.e. proficiency-oriented language education where accuracy and fluency were overemphasized, as we have mentioned in the introduction. The format of the oral communication test requires students to be paired with a peer partner. While the feedback with regard to the peer partner was favorable (e.g. with statements such as “Having a partner makes the anxiety less”), some reported anxiety arising from their relationship with their partners: - As I didn’t know my partner in advance, so it was uneasy for us to communicate well enough. - The person I was talking to is not familiar.

As the oral communication test was conducted in a class where the students spend only 45 minutes per week together, students might have felt some psychological distance from their partners. Unlike the previously mentioned trait anxiety, which may occur in any situation, the anxiety arising from the unfamiliarity with the partners seems to be situation-specific and is a result of the format of this test, which requires students to be tested together with a peer. Only a few students mentioned other forms of anxiety such as communication apprehension, which is fear or anxiety associated with communication with another person (Daly & McCroskey, 1984). This may have been because the students were not aware of the source of their anxiety at that point. 4 The second oral communication test — Japanese 2 4.1 Revision of the test 4.1.1 Principles Being aware of the seriousness of the students’ anxiety and their perception of oral communication as a series of “correct utterances and responses”, we revised our oral communication test based on the humanistic approach. One of the basic principles of the humanistic approach is that feelings are considered critical in learning. Oxford (1999a, p. 67) suggests ways to diminish language anxiety, including the following: x Boost the self-esteem and self-confidence of students for whom lan-

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

x x x x

301

guage anxiety has already become a long-term trait by providing multiple opportunities for classroom success in the language. Reduce the competition present in the classroom. Be very clear about classroom goals and help students develop strategies to meet those goals. Give students permission to use the language with less than perfect performance. Help students realistically assess their performance.

4.1.2 Revision Our revision of the oral communication test took the above suggestions into consideration. The decisions and modifications we made concerning the setting and process are as follows: (1) Stop calling the oral communication test a “test” since this gives the students exam-fright. As one student stated: “Maybe, it should not be called a test, so that we would not be too nervous”. Implementation: Position it as an activity called “Oral Communication” in the course, not as an isolated test. Other activities to boost students’ communicative competence and self-esteem, such as short speeches, skits and project work to explore and discover the Japanese culture, were also incorporated into the course. (2) Discontinue the practice of setting up a special occasion and place. Implementation: Assess them in the classroom in the usual setting and a more relaxed atmosphere. (3) Ensure students are paired with those familiar to them, with approximately the same ability. Students’ constructive feedback such as the following was taken into account: “The most important thing is to have a partner of about the same standard”. Implementation: Incorporate collaborative work as mentioned above to establish rapport and form pairs with similar level of ability in advance. (4) Let students participate in the assessment of their performance. Implementation: Keep a portfolio for each activity and project done in the course, so that the students can assess their performance continuously and monitor their development. (5) Help students reflect on what makes communication meaningful and enjoyable. Implementation: Have feedback sessions where both teachers and

302

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

peers discuss what aspects of the conversation were/could have been more interesting and meaningful. (6) Assist students in learning communicative strategies. Implementation: Make a conscious effort to show examples to the students in class. (7) Remove the criteria of accuracy and fluency from the scales of assessment. Implementation: Develop a new rating scale that incorporates “humanistic communication” (See Table 2). 4.2 The design of the second oral communication test The revised oral communication test in the form of free conversation in public was conducted in the sixth week (around mid-term) of Japanese 2. 4.2.1 Promoting self-reflection on communication Prior to the conversations, an orientation session was held to explain the format and to encourage the students to think about humanistic communication. To enhance the students’ awareness about communication, several questions were posed. Examples of the questions: (1) What do you think is important for communication? (2) What do you do if you don’t know how to answer someone’s question? (3) What do you do if you cannot make yourself understood? (4) How can you improve communicative competence? While discussing the meaning of humanistic communication, rapport and empathy, the teacher was seated, keeping the same eye-level with the students, to create a relaxed, non-threatening atmosphere. Some suggestions for communicative strategies, such as asking for clarification or paraphrasing, were given to the students. Then, the teachers asked some students to perform in front of the class and gave constructive feedback from the viewpoint of communication (e.g. what words were effective to establish rapport). The examples and feedback helped the students to reflect on how they can make communication meaningful and enjoyable. The teacher also pointed out that while memorization of textbooks might be effective for short-term memory, it would not work well to enhance communicative competence. Because the students realized that it is necessary to communicate with their friends in Japanese both in and out of the classroom, this process helped to promote students’ independent learning.

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

303

4.2.2 Test task: Free conversation on “My Favorite Things” Since the students are still at the basic level and do not possess sufficient vocabulary to discuss abstract topics, they were asked to bring in their favorite things to start a conversation. Students brought a variety of things to the classroom, including photos, CDs, comic books, brand-new mobile phones, childhood treasures such as old ballet shoes, Hello Kitty dolls, and others. Some of them came wearing their favorite T-shirts. Forming pairs, the students talked about their favorite things. These tangible objects inspired the students’ interest and curiosity, and were effective in developing free conversation. They also enhanced active listening since the students confided their personal memories or history to one another. After each performance, the teachers gave feedback to the students. The students were then asked to do a self-evaluation and to answer a survey. The performances were videotaped for the purpose of revising the assessment criteria as well as for the teachers’ self-reflection. Students could also schedule an individual tutorial to improve their oral skills or to view the video. 4.3 Students’ feedback Overall, the students’ feedback was very positive. 4.3.1 Enhancing awareness of communication The activity helped enhance the students’ awareness of communication. It became a good opportunity to apply what they had learned in real situations: - This is a good way of being aware of our communicative abilities and assessing the candidate’s command of the Japanese language. - More conversation, less factual questions to focus on content and communication. - Made it more natural conversation instead of coming from the textbook. - I have to improve communicative competence. - We could learn not only Japanese but communicative skills.

4.3.2 Anxiety Despite such positive comments, some students still expressed anxiety. However, only a few students mentioned “exam fright” and “stage fright”. Some of them were still anxious about errors although they were told that errors and fluency count less, as the following comments show:

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

304

- I was afraid I might use the wrong word and sentences. - I felt nervous because I had to think of the correct sentence structures. - I couldn’t form a sentence quickly.

It appears that Singaporean students’ mindset nurtured by their long-time study history is difficult to change. However, there were some differences in the reasons for their feelings of anxiety between this and the initial survey. Some found the source of their anxiety in the fear of communication, e.g.: - I didn’t know how to continue the conversation. - I didn’t know what to say. - Fear of loss of words. - … let down my friend because of poor conversation ability.

Anxiety also arose from their perceived deficits in vocabulary. Many who possess a high oral ability claimed that their anxiety was caused by the discrepancy between their thoughts and the Japanese vocabulary they possess: - Vocabulary is not strong, so I couldn’t really relate well. - The idea was too complicated to express in Japanese. I couldn’t express myself.

This contrasts with the reasons stated by students, whose oral ability is low, for their anxiety: - Very afraid I could not understand what my friend is saying. - I was afraid I might not be able to answer the questions my partner asked me.

There were eight students who attributed their anxiety to a personal lack of confidence or a lack of confidence about their Japanese ability. Other causes mentioned were: “No preparation” and “I was the first”. Overall, the students were aware of the anxiety, which was present to some extent, and began to face it positively to control it. As one student put it: “Need to think carefully before answer, stay calm”. Furthermore, some students decided to take positive actions to overcome the anxiety: “I have to overcome anxiety and have confidence”. Therefore, it would appear that being aware of anxiety leads the students to practice more and contemplate steps to increase confidence, which would be a positive effect of the oral communication test. 4.3.3 Peer partner Some might be concerned that students’ concern about the peer partner’s poor performance (such as incorrect pronunciation and grammar mistakes, or differences in ability) may cause anxiety. However the feedback provided by

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

305

students seem to indicate the contrary. Almost all students said it was easier and more comfortable for them to converse with their peers. - I think having a partner is a good idea as it makes the whole performance less intimidating. - Feels like everyday life. I can be more natural. - Easier to expand the topic. - We already have the same feeling. We have an understanding that we know our partner’s ability.

Interestingly, during the performances, the students were supporting each other to generate continuous flows of conversation: - He tried to make the conversation flow better, asked more questions and was very encouraging.

When one student does not know how to continue the conversation, the partner may try to help. This explains why communication strategies such as repetition and paraphrasing occur more frequently in the communication performance with a peer partner compared to the oral interview test with a teacher. Such a psychological factor is critical for the students to perform and may put them at ease: - I know the other person, that’s why I’m not that stressed up.

Moreover, conversation with a peer partner helped to build empathy and motivated the students to study further outside the classroom. - The person can help me as we have already built some rapport. - I see my friends often, so we can practice (conversation) more.

Of course, there were some students who were reluctant to accept a peer partner and worried about their performance being affected. - When our friends make mistakes, we won’t be able to understand what they are saying. - What should I do if my partner does not understand me or if I cannot understand what my partner said?

Therefore, it is necessary to discuss further how they can use communication strategies effectively.

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

306

4.3.4 Summary (1) The students’ feedback shows that the overall anxiety level decreased considerably from Japanese 1 (J1) to Japanese 2 (J2). As Fig. 2 shows, the percentage of students who rated their anxiety as 5 (Highest) decreased dramatically from 57% (J1) to 13% (J2), while the percentage of anxiety ratings of 1 (Lowest) and 2 increased from J1 to J2. Almost half of the J2 students (42%) indicated an anxiety level of 3. The students’ anxiety did not disappear completely even after the revision of the test. However, as the students’ feedback after the second test show (see section 4.3.2), the nature of anxiety shifted from mere fear such as exam fright or stage fright to a positive tension, caused by the students’ desire to communicate better. Such tension with a certain level of anxiety, deriving from the performers’ desire to improve their skills, may be necessary for language learning. (2) The students became more positive toward overcoming anxiety, recognizing that continuous practice will enable them to decrease anxiety and nurture confidence, as the following comments seem to indicate: - I need more practice to speak with confidence. - Having more practice and confidence will reduce my anxiety.

Anxiety Level: 1 (Lowest) to 5 (Highest) 60% 50% 40%

J1 J2

30% 20% 10% 0% 1

2

3

4

5

Fig. 2. Anxiety: Oral communication test (Japanese 1 vs. Japanese 2)

(3) Compared to the self-assessment conducted for previous activities in the Japanese 2 course (such as student speeches) where the students gave only general, brief comments such as “good”, “relatively good” or “my Japanese is bad”, the specification of assessment criteria by the teacher

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

307

helped the students to discern specifically which skills they were lacking. The students paid more attention to factors such as taking the initiative in the conversation: - I still need to improve on the way I initiate the conversation.

In addition, they are now more concerned about the conversation flow instead of fluency: - I would provide more questions to facilitate the flow.

The comments have become more specific and positive, and the students also realized how they could improve. - Need to train up my ability to paraphrase. - I am not good at follow up questions. I have to improve on that. - I should improve humanistic communication and use more communicative strategies.

(4) (5)

(6) (7)

This is proof of the shift in students’ focus from worrying about the errors they have made in trying to improve their communication skills. Thus, it would appear that the awareness of communication has been enhanced. Students mentioned their desire to acquire more vocabulary to express themselves better. Unlike the survey for the first oral communication test in Japanese 1, there was only one comment which said the partner was “an unfamiliar person”. This may be an indication that the attempts to establish rapport through communication activities have worked. Students acquired a positive perception of their proficiency and they were aware of their improvements. Overall, the students’ feedback (see the following comments) suggests that the oral communication test can promote independence and trigger the motivation to improve: - I shall practice more every day Japanese conversation. - I will listen to the tapes every day.

The comments were consistent with findings of previous research, which pointed towards a positive effect of language anxiety, i.e. students who experience anxiety feel the need to make up for the negative effects of anxiety by increased effort at learning (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1994).

308

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

5 Implications and consequences 5.1 Assessment guidelines for teachers After the communication tests, the teachers had a meeting and studied the students’ performances on videotape. The study of the videos produced new observations such as non-verbal communication like nods and other gestures. A more specific assessment scale relating to humanistic communication was needed to increase the reliability of the assessment (see Table 2). The rating scale was revised several times during the semester based on the video study until reliability reached an acceptable level after the second communication test. In this table, the left column indicates the criteria of assessment. The emphasis of our test lies in the content of the conversation rather than accuracy and fluency, and the ability of humanistic communication, as mentioned previously (see section 2.2). Therefore, four criteria were laid down: (1) conversation development; (2) content; (3) language; and (4) communication. Specifically, under conversation development we assess if students are able to take the initiative in conversation, and how the conversation develops. Conversation flow and coherence are also taken into account. Grammatical knowledge is assessed under the criterion of language. The students’ ability to use what they have learned is also assessed. Since the main purpose of the test is to assess the students’ ability in humanistic communication, i.e. in sharing emotions and building rapport to establish a better human relationship, the rapport, empathy, emotions and interest/curiosity shown in their conversation as well as the communicative strategies used are also assessed. Non-verbal behaviours such as gestures are also taken into consideration as an element of communication. Specific behaviors and actions observed on video are listed in the right column of the table. Each criterion is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being the lowest and 5 the highest score), with a total score of 20. For example, if students can initiate the conversation without waiting for questions, guess what the partner was going to say next, or talk about relevant experiences, teachers will check the score of 5 (Highest) for conversation development.

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

309

Table 2. Rating scale 5 (highest) 4 3 2 1 (lowest) 5㸫initiates the conversation without waiting for questions 5㸫conjecture/collaboration 5㸫relates to own experience 5㸫completion of dialogue - Initiative 4㸫initiates positive/frequent questions - Continuity 4㸫able to use proper responses/aizuchi (frequency of responsive/ - Flow reactive token) - Coherency 4㸫developmental conversation flow 3㸫initiates questions 3㸫continuance of discourse from the beginning to the end 3㸫speech act (permission, prohibition, request) 2㸫few questions 2㸫continuance of discourse for several lines 1㸫waits for questions passively 1㸫continuance of discourse for a few lines 1㸫incoherent/irrelevant 2. 5㸫provides new information positively without being asked Content 5㸫specific questions Question/Answer 5㸫elaborative/detailed answer  5㸫adds relevant comments (detailed reasons/explanations/descriptions)         5㸫expresses disagreement㸦⚾ࡣࡑ࠺ᛮ࠸ࡲࡏࢇ㸧 4㸫relevant questions/follow-up questions 4㸫adds relevant comments (simple reasons/explanations/information/descriptions) 4㸫expresses opinions (㹼࡜ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍ/ࡑ࠺ᛮ࠸ࡲࡍ) 3㸫general questions (5w࠸ࡘ/࡝ࡇ࡛/ࡔࢀࡀ/ ࡞࡟ࢆ or 㹼ࡀዲࡁ࡛ࡍ࠿) 3㸫answers questions (sentence level) 3㸫adds simple reasons㸦㹼࡛ࡍ࠿ࡽ㸧 2㸫too general questions 2㸫uses question words only 2㸫short answer (sentence level) 1㸫cannot ask questions 1㸫answers only Yes/No or with simple words 3. 5㸫proper use of variety of new sentence pattern/vocabulary (e.g. used Language 㹼ࡓࡽࠊ㹼࡚ࡶ) 4㸫some new sentence pattern/vocabulary 3㸫less new sentence pattern/vocabulary 2㸫insufficient sentence pattern/vocabulary (Japanese1 level) 1. Conversation Development

310

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa Table 2. Rating scale (continued)

4. Communication - Rapport - Empathy - Emotions - Interest/ Curiosity - Communicative strategy (if necessary)

- Non-verbal communication

5㸫expresses humor/jokes, compassion, empathy 4㸫emotions (surprise, admiration) (ᮏᙜ࡛ࡍ࠿/ ࡍࡈ࠸࡛ࡍࡡ) 4-3㸫shows rapport (ࡇࢇ࡝࠸ࡗࡋࡻ࡟ ⾜ࡁࡲࡏࢇ࠿) 3㸫shows interest/curiosity 3㸫expresses emotions (agreement) (࠸࠸࡛ࡍࡡ/ ࡑ࠺࡛ࡍࡡ/ࡑ࠺࡛ࡍ࠿) 1㸫exchange of words with no emotions 5-3㸫can handle the situation when unable to make him/herself understood 5-4㸫able to paraphrase 3㸫can handle the situation when unable to understand the partner 3㸫asks for specific clarification (඗ᘵࡣⱥㄒ࡛ఱ࡛ࡍ࠿) 2㸫asks for repetition (ࡍࡳࡲࡏࢇࠋࡶ࠺୍ᗘ࠾ 㢪࠸ࡋࡲࡍ) 2㸫asks for clarification with repetition strategy (඗ᘵ?) 2㸫cannot handle inability to make himself/herself under stood 1 – cannot handle inability to understand the partner gestures (movement of hands)/facial expressions/ responsiveness (nodding)/eye contact are taken into consideration 5 4 3 2 1

5.2 Suggestions for alleviating anxiety Recognizing the causes of anxiety, acknowledging anxiety, and recording self-reflection are important for the learners to overcome anxiety (Oxford, 1999a). However, it is difficult to leave these tasks completely to the learners. Support from teachers and peers are effective as the evaluation study shows. Teachers can provide ample opportunities for performances and feedback/advice to the learners. Specifically, having feedback sessions between students and teachers before and after the performances and demonstrating communication strategies appear to be effective measures. The curriculum needs to be revised constantly by teachers according to the feedback from the learners suffering from anxiety. Applying a peer-based performance assessment instead of a native speakers’ standard to oral test is effective. Asking the learners to participate in self-assessment using the same criteria can also help to reduce the learners’ fear.

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

311

Table 3. Summary of process to overcome anxiety What can teachers do?

What can students do for peers?

Feedback Self-reflection

Feedback Self-reflection Have feedback sessions with students before and after performances. Provide sufficient instructions and objectives of the activity/task. Enhance understanding of why the communication activity/task is necessary for effective language learning. Help students learn communicative strategies. Provide opportunities for communication activities such as pair work, collaborative work, question/answer sessions involving the whole class. Provide lenient error & fluency policies. Do not apply native speaker standard. Show the rating scale clearly. Stop one-time oral testing and employ continuous performance assessment.

What can students do for themselves?

Performance Cooperate and support each other. Praise peers. Ample practice before the activity/task. Results: A competition-free environment and rapport with class members are developed. Every member is appreciative of other students’ performances. A learning community where students can perform with less anxiety is established. Assessment Peer-review.

Recognize the causes of anxiety. Acknowledge anxiety. Record their self-reflections. Result: Anxiety is overcome and confidence gained.

Self-assessment of one’s performance. Results: Change to a positive learning attitude. Try to improve communicative ability. Be liberated from error and fluency obsession.

6 Conclusion This chapter detailed the development of our oral communication test using formative evaluation with the specific purpose of reducing students’ anxiety during the performance. The new test can be a superior instrument that reduces anxiety. This process turned out to be a piece of collaborative work between teachers and students, as we minimized anxiety and discussed what factors contribute to humanistic communication and how we can communicate better.

312

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

The evaluation study and the data collected point to the positive effect of natural communication between peers and the oral communication test led students to acquire a feeling of improvement while increasing their motivation. In today’s language classroom, the language educator’s role should be to provide students with a process through which they can build rapport and communicate with others. We believe that this will eventually create a learning community where students will enhance both their communicative competence and their learning motivation. We must come to realize that students and teachers can work together to better understand, monitor and assess the learning — and testing — process. References Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwits, and Cope’s construct of foreign language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. Modern Language Journal, 78, 155–168. Canal, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J.C. Richards & R.W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2–27). London: Longman. Clément, R. (1980). Ethnicity, contact, and communicative competence in a second language. In H. Giles, W.P. Robinson & P.M. Smith (Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 147–154). Oxford: Pergamon Press. Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence, and group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44, 417–448. Cohen, A.D. (1994). Assessing language ability in the classroom. (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Daly, J.A., & McCroskey, J.C. (Eds.) (1984). Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and communication apprehension. Beverly Hills: Sage. Gardner, R., & MacIntyre, P. (1993). On the measurement of affective variables in second language learning. Language Learning, 43, 157–194. Horwitz, E.K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a foreign language anxiety scale. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 559–562. Hymes, D.H. (1972). On Communicative competence. In J.B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: selected readings (pp. 269–293). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Lalonde, R.N., & Gardner, R.C. (1984). Investigating a casual model of second language acquisition: Where does personality fit? Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 15, 224– 237. MacIntyre, P.D. (1999). Language Anxiety: A Review of the Research for Language Teachers. In D. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 24–45). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. MacIntyre, P.D., & Charos, C. (1995, June). Personality, motivation and willingness to communicate as predictors of second language communication. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Canadian Psychological Association, Charlottetown PEI.

From Oral Interview Test to Oral Communication Test

313

MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1991). Language anxiety: Its relationship to other anxieties and to processing in native and second languages. Language Learning, 41, 513–534. MacIntyre, P.D., & Gardner, R.C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44, 283–305. Madsen, H.S., Brown, B.L., & Jones, R.L. (1991). Evaluating students’ attitude toward secondlanguage tests. In E.K. Horwitz & D.J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 65–86). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. McNamara, T. (1996). Measuring second language performance. London; New York: Longman. McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McNamara, T. (2004). Language testing. In A. Davis & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 763–778). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Ong, W.J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the world. London; New York: Methuen. Oxford, R.L. (1999a). Anxiety and the language learner: New insights. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 58–67). New York: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R.L. (1999b). “Style wars” as a source of anxiety in language classrooms. In D. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 216–237). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Phillips, E.M. (1999). Designing language anxiety: Practical techniques for oral activities. In D. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning: A practical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. 124–143). Boston, MA: McGrawHill. Savignon, J.S. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice (2nd ed.). Savignon; New York: McGraw-Hill. Speilberger, C.D. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Stiggins, R., & Conklin, N. (1992). In teachers’ hands: Investigating the practices of classroom assessment. Albany: State University of New York Press. Young, D.J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does the anxiety research suggest? Modern Language Journal, 75, 426–439.

S. Chiba & Y. Morikawa

314

Appendix 1: Questionnaire Self evaluation good bad Conversation Development (flow/initiative) 54321 Content / Question & Answer 54321 Language (new vocabulary/sentence patterns) 54321 Communication (rapport/strategy: paraphrase, etc.) 54321 the most difficult the least difficult Difficulty 54321 the most interesting the least interesting Interest 54321 high low Anxiety 54321 Elaborate on your anxiety: Did you like that your partner was a peer partner in your class? Yes No Why?

Appendix 2: Ayumi Card (Progress Card) 1. Speech

Self-reflection Comments/Suggestions Teacher’s Comments

2. Skit

3. Presentation

4. Oral Communication

AUTHORS AND THEIR AFFILIATIONS

Naoko Araki-Metcalfe. Department of Language, Literacy and Arts Education, The Faculty of Education, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. e-mail: [email protected] Anna Uhl Chamot. The George Washington University, Department of Teacher Preparation and Special Education and National Capital Language Resource Center, 5316 MacArthur Blvd, Washington, DC 20016 USA. e-mail: [email protected] Wai Meng Chan. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Ing Ru Chen. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Satomi Chiba. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Kwee Nyet Chin. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Wenhua Hsu. I-Shou University, No.1, Alley 2, Lane 475, Freedom 3rd Road, Kaohsiung City (813), Taiwan. e-mail: [email protected] Christina Kuhn. University of Jena, Institute of German as a Foreign and Second Language, Ernst-Abbe-Platz 8, D-07743 Jena, Germany. e-mail: [email protected] Danli Li. Hong Kong Baptist University, English Department, 224 Waterloo Road, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong. e-mail: [email protected]

316

Authors and their Affiliations

Yoko Morikawa. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore117570. e-mail: [email protected] Shameem Rafik-Galea. University Putra Malaysia, Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, 43400 UPM, Serdang, Selangor D.E., Malaysia. e-mail: [email protected] Titima Suthiwan. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Mayumi Usami. Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Graduate School of Area and Culture Studies, 3-11-1 Asahi-cho, Fuchu-shi, Tokyo 183-8534, Japan. e-mail: [email protected] Tomoko Utsumi. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Izumi Walker. Centre for Language Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore, 9 Arts Link, Singapore 117570. e-mail: [email protected] Hong Wang. Jiangsu Institute Of Education, Foreign Language Education Department, 77, Beijing Xilu, Nanjing 210013, China. e-mail: [email protected] Bee Eng Wong. University Putra Malaysia, Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, 43400 UPM, Serdang, Selangor D.E., Malaysia. e-mail: [email protected] Yujia Zhou. Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Graduate School of Area and Culture Studies, 3-11-1 Asahi-cho, Fuchu-shi, Tokyo 183-8534, Japan. e-mail: [email protected]

Index

absolute politeness 15, 45, 53, 56–7 accuracy Chinese language teaching 16, 105 English for Business Purposes 224, 227–8, 229, 231 grammatical 34, 61, 119 language anxiety 113 oral communication tests 290, 293, 299–300, 302 adult professional learners 74, 76, 77 affective strategies 148 Aida, Y. 109, 111, 128 ALTs see assistant language teachers Anderson, J.C. 146 anxiety 17, 109–33 definition of 110 learners’ beliefs 112–13, 114, 116–17, 119–20, 122–7, 132 oral communication tests 21, 289–90, 295, 298–300, 303–4, 306, 310–11 positive effect of 307 self-esteem 111–12, 113–14, 116–17, 119–20, 122–9, 132 self-perception of speaking proficiency 112, 114, 116–17, 119–20, 122–6, 128, 132 Arabic Gross Language Product 3–4 learning strategies 31, 37 as “top league” language 8 United States 2 Araki-Metcalfe, Naoko 20–1, 271–87 assessment learning strategies 40 oral communication tests 21, 289–314 text anxiety 110, 299 see also self-evaluation

assistant language teachers (ALTs) 274, 275–6, 277, 278 Audiolingual Method 245 Australia 279 authenticity 100, 193–4, 196, 222 automaticity 262–3, 266 back-channels Discourse Politeness Theory 46, 47, 49, 57, 58, 62 memorizing dialogues 254, 255–6 Bailey, P. 111, 129 BALLI see Belief About Language Learning Inventory BCS see business case study Bednar, A.K. 193 behaviourism 12 Beijing Language University 96, 97, 98, 99 Belief About Language Learning Inventory (BALLI) 112–13, 119 beliefs 17, 112–13, 114, 116–17, 119–20, 122–7, 132, 299 benefits of foreign language competence 1 Bengali 3–4 Bi, J. 99 Bian, J. 99 bilingual learners 41 blended learning 88, 89 body movements 280–1, 285 see also non-verbal communication Bolton, G. 282 Brett, P. 195, 196 Brophy, J. 10 Brown, P. 46, 47, 50–1, 52–3, 64 Bruner, Jerome 136 Burden, R.L. 137 business cards 76–7

318

Index

business case study (BCS) 19, 218–21, 222–31, 234–7 see also vocationally-oriented language learning CALLA see Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach Carle, Eric 284 CBI see content-based instruction CC see Core Conversations CEF see Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching Celce-Murcia, M. 15 Centre for Language Studies (CLS) 4 Chamot, Anna Uhl 14–15, 29–44, 146 Chan, Wai Meng 18–19, 191–215 Charos, C. 299 Chen, Ing Ru 18–19, 191–215 Chiba, Satomi 21, 289–314 China Confucius Institute 9 English language teaching 5, 6 language anxiety 118, 128 language journals 103 peer scaffolding 17–18, 135, 139 pragmatics 16–17, 93–107 Chinese Confucius Institute 9 course enrolments 4 Gross Language Product 3–4 politeness 60 pragmatics 16–17, 93–107 school education 6 as “top league” language 8 United States 2 Chinese as a Second Language (CSL) 101 Chinese Proficiency Test (HSK) 9 Chun, D.M. 191–2, 195 classroom practice 14, 18–21, 99–100 CLS see Centre for Language Studies Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA) 15, 35, 39–40

cognitive development 135–6 “cognitive fluency” 263–4 cognitive psychology 146 cognitive strategies 150–3, 160, 161–3, 173, 174–5 Cohen, A.D. 147 Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching (CEF) 78–81, 82, 83, 85 communication apprehension 110, 111, 115, 118, 132, 299, 300 Communicative Approach 245, 273 communicative competence 12 anxiety impact on 109 Common European Framework of Reference 80 oral communication tests 290, 293, 301, 312 politeness 15, 61 scenarios 84 workplace requirements 73, 74, 76 see also intercultural competence compensation strategies 150–1, 153–4, 160, 163–5, 173, 174 competitiveness, national 2–3, 5 comprehension 30, 31, 32, 33 computer technology 18–19, 194–6, 197–213 Interactive Situation Simulation 200–8, 213 Movie Studio 208–12, 213 My Vocab Book 197–9, 213 see also information and communication technologies Confucius Institute 9 constructivism 12–13, 18–19, 191–6, 199, 208, 213 content-based instruction (CBI) 19, 78, 217, 218–20, 221–2, 223–36 “contextualized exercises” 244, 247–8 conventions 47, 48, 95 conversation conversational strategies 61–2, 63

Index Core Conversations 246–9, 256, 259–62, 263 English language teaching in Japan 273 fluency 262–4 improvisation 283 Interactive Situation Simulation 204–8 Movie Studio 208–12 oral communication tests 292–3, 294, 296–7, 303, 305, 308–9 see also oral communication Core Conversations (CC) 246–9, 256, 259–62, 263 Crookall, D. 127 CSL see Chinese as a Second Language cultural studies 11 culture 7–8 Chinese language teaching 99–100, 104 “contextualized exercises” 244 educational structures 271 Japanese 254 Korean 9 language anxiety 128 learning strategies 36–7 politeness 57–8, 59–63, 65 sociopragmatic failures 95 vocabulary learning strategies 159, 173–4 workplaces 87 curriculum cultural context 271 English language teaching in Japan 273, 278 learning strategies 36, 40 vocationally-oriented language learning 16, 75–8 Daley, C.E. 111 de Bot, K. 262, 263 dialogues 19–20, 243–69 discourse analysis 15 discourse-level practices 48, 62, 63, 65 discourse markers 254, 256

319

Discourse Politeness (DP) 15, 45 definition of 48, 54 Discourse Politeness Theory (DPT) 15, 45–70 associated research 58–9 cross-cultural pragmatics 57–8, 59–61, 65 discrepancy in estimation value 51–2, 53, 64 DP default 48, 49–50, 53, 54–8, 59–61, 63, 64–5 future issues 63–4 marked and unmarked behavior 50, 54–5 marked and unmarked politeness 50–1, 54, 57, 60, 64 second language acquisition 61–3, 65 speech-level shifts 54–5 as theory of interpersonal communication 64–5 three types of politeness effects 52–3, 55, 63–4 Donato, R. 137, 138 Dornyei, Z. 147 DP see Discourse Politeness DPT see Discourse Politeness Theory drama, educational 20–1, 279–86 e-learning 88–9 e-mail 72, 205, 211 EAP see English for Academic Purposes EBP see English for Business Purposes educational drama 20–1, 279–86 EFL see English as a Foreign Language Ellis, R. 13, 136, 222, 263 emotions oral communication tests 292, 297, 310 role-plays 282 empowerment 40 English back-channels 62 Discourse Politeness Theory 48 dominance of 4–5, 7–8

320

Index

educational drama 20–1 Gross Language Product 3–4 Japanese education 271–86 language anxiety 113, 118, 119 learning strategies 32, 33, 34 peer scaffolding 17–18, 135, 139–43 politeness 56–7 pragmalinguistics 94 school education 6–7 social norms 47 sociopragmatics 95–6 workplace requirements 72, 74 English as a Foreign Language (EFL) 135, 139–43, 236 English as a Second Language (ESL) 31, 33 The English Company (engco) 3, 4, 8 English for Academic Purposes (EAP) 217 English for Business Purposes (EBP) 19, 218–21, 224–37 see also vocationally-oriented language learning English for Science and Technology (EST) 220 English for Specific Purposes (ESP) 217– 18, 220, 223 errors 94–5, 229–30, 238–9 ESL see English as a Second Language ESP see English for Specific Purposes EST see English for Science and Technology ethnicity sociolinguistics 12 vocabulary learning strategies 159, 161–74 European Union (EU) 1–2, 72 see also Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching Eurydice 1 Ewing, R. 279, 280, 283, 284 exams see assessment Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) 50, 51, 53, 64

Farsi 2 fear of negative evaluation 110, 111, 115– 16, 118, 132, 299 feedback oral communication tests 21, 294, 297– 8, 300, 301–2, 303–5, 310, 311 from teachers 10 FLCAS see Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale fluency memorizing dialogues 245, 259, 262–4 oral communication tests 290, 293, 299–300, 302 use of gestures 279 Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) 111, 112, 113, 118 formal rituals 76–7 formulaic phrases 253–4 Foss, K.A. 112 Foster, P. 239, 257 France 8 Fraser, B. 51 French course enrolments 4, 5 Gross Language Product 3–4 learning strategies 31, 32, 34 school education 6, 7 United States 2 workplace requirements 72 Frohlich, M. 147 FTAs see Face Threatening Acts Funk, H. 85 Gage, N.L. 10 Ganschow, L. 127 Gardner, R.C. 110, 299 Gass, S.M. 243 GCIC see German Chamber of Industry and Commerce gender language anxiety 128 sociolinguistics 12 German course enrollments 4, 5

Index Gross Language Product 3–4 network-based technologies 192, 196–213 “Profile Deutsch” 82 school education 6, 7 textbooks 76–7 workplace requirements 72 German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (GCIC) 81 Germany 8 gestures 279, 280, 281, 285, 308 Giddens, A. 71 globalization 3, 9, 71, 271 global networks 72 promotion of foreign language learning 5 workplace requirements 16, 73, 89 GLP see Gross Language Product Good, T.L. 10 Grabe, W. 221, 235 grammar Chinese 97–8, 99, 102–3 communicative competence 12 English language teaching in Japan 273 learning strategies 29 memorizing dialogues 257, 264, 266 pragmalinguistics 94–5 sentence-level accuracy 61 grammar-translation method 272–3, 283 Greenberg, J. 111, 128 greetings 76 Gross Language Product (GLP) 3–4 group work 239 Gu, Y. 148, 149 Habermas, J. 12 Hashimoto, K. 272, 275 Hatch, E. 145 Hattori, T. 276, 278 Heathcote, D. 282 Hendry, J. 275 heritage language learners 37 Heyde, A.W. 111, 119

321

higher education China 96 Taiwan 217 vocabulary learning strategies 149–50 Hindi Gross Language Product 3–4 as “top league” language 8 history of language teaching 11 Hong Kong 34 honorifics 12, 15, 46, 47, 48, 53, 62, 63 Horwitz, E.K. 110–11, 112, 119, 127 HSK see Chinese Proficiency Test Hsu, Wenhua 19, 217–41 humanistic communication 292, 293, 300, 302, 308 Hutchinson, T. 235–6 Hymes, D. 12, 61 ICT see information and communication technologies Ide, S. 47 Ikeda, M. 33 immersion programs 31, 41 improvisation 236, 244, 282, 283 information and communication technologies (ICT) 5, 16, 71, 72, 89 see also computer technology; technology information society 73 Integrated Studies 20–1, 277–8, 286 Interactive Situation Simulation 200–8, 213 interactivity 19, 194, 208, 212, 213 intercultural competence 60–1, 73, 77, 244 see also communicative competence Interlanguage Hypothesis 13, 14 internal/external frame of reference (I/E) model 114 internationalization 276 see also globalization Internet Movie Studio 212 resources 195 VOLL teacher training 86, 87–9 workplace requirements 72, 73

322 interviews, traditional oral test 290, 291, 294–5 Issing, L.J. 196, 208, 212 Italian 3–4 Japan educational drama 284–6 educational system 271–3 English language teaching 5, 6 implementation of English language education 276–7, 286 Integrated Studies 277–8 Japan Foundation 8–9 lack of English conversational skills 279, 283 learning strategies 31, 32–3 Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) program 273, 274–6, 277, 278 Japanese course enrolments 4, 5 Discourse Politeness Theory 48, 49 Gross Language Product 3–4 honorifics 12, 15, 46, 47, 53 increase in Japanese learners 8–9 language anxiety 112, 114 memorizing dialogues 243–69 oral communication tests 21, 291–307, 309–10 politeness 54–5, 56, 58–9, 60, 61–3 school education 6, 7 United States 2 Jasper series of videos 194, 195 JET see Japan Exchange and Teaching program Jonassen, D.H. 193, 195, 213 Jordan, R.R. 224 journals 103 Judd, Elliot L. 96, 104 Kao, S. 283–4 keigo 12 Kim, D.H. 195–6 kinaesthetic skills 280–1, 285 Kitano, K. 112, 119

Index Kiyama, S. 58 knowledge business case studies 222 constructivist pedagogy 191–2, 193, 194, 196 content 220–1, 229, 231–2, 234, 235, 238 EBP 3-in-1 framework 218–19 learning strategies 30, 31, 38 procedural and declarative 146 knowledge-based society 5 Korea 5, 6, 9 Korean increase in Korean learners 9 Taiwan 7 United States 2 Kozma, R.B. 213 Krashen, S.D. 13, 111 Kudo, Y. 148, 149 Kuhn, Christina 16, 71–91 Lalonde, R.N. 299 Lamie, J. 274 Lasley, T.J. 10, 11 learner-centered instruction learning strategies 40 oral communication test 294 vocationally-oriented language learning 86 learning computer technology 195–6, 212–13 constructivism 12–13, 18–19, 192–4, 213 content-based instruction 221 educational drama 281–2 oral communication tests 293 second language acquisition 13 self-directed 200 sociocultural theory of 17, 135–6 vocabulary 18 learning strategies see strategies Lee, E.M. 59 Leech, G. 56–7, 94 Levinson, S. 46, 47, 50–1, 52–3, 64

Index Lewin, Kurt 11 lexical acquisition 145 see also vocabulary Li, Danli 17, 135–44 Lin, G. 99 linguistics 11–12 Chinese 102–3 discourse analysis 15 pragmalinguistics 11–12, 94–5, 101, 102 sociolinguistics 12, 15, 293 listening 31, 32 literature 11, 20 Littlewood, W. 244 Liu, J. 284 Lü, Bisong 99 Lu, Jianmin 98–9 Lü, Shuxiang 99 Lü, Wenhou 98 MacIntyre, P.D. 110, 298–9 Mader, J. 82 Malay 3–4 Malaysia 18, 149–50, 155, 156, 160, 173 Marsh, H.W. 114, 125 Martel, A. 192 material authenticity 100 Matsukawa, R. 274, 277, 278 Maynard, S.K. 255–6 McConnell, D. 275, 276 McCroskey, J.C. 110 McNamara, T. 289, 290 meaning business case studies 223 constructivist pedagogy 191 memorizing dialogues 245, 248, 256, 263, 264 scaffolding 140, 141, 143 task-based learning 222 vocabulary learning strategies 153, 156, 163–4, 167–9 media competence 85, 88 memorization dialogues 19–20, 243–69

323

learning strategies 29, 30, 34, 147–8, 150–1, 156–8, 160–1, 167–70, 173, 174–5 My Vocab Book 198, 199 textbooks 302 Met, Myriam 2–3 metacognition constructivist pedagogy 193, 196 metacognitive awareness-raising 32, 34 metacognitive learning strategies 31, 37, 40, 148, 150–1, 154–6, 160, 165–7, 173, 174–5 My Vocab Book 199 Miller, C. 283 Misanchuk, E.R. 208, 212 Mizutani, N. 62 modeling 38, 39 Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) 37 monitoring 30, 31 Moore, G. 274 Morikawa, Yoko 21, 289–314 motivational factors 12, 21 Movie Studio 208–12, 213 MSA see Modern Standard Arabic Müller, K. 192 multimedia technology 195, 196, 197–213 Interactive Situation Simulation 200–8, 213 Movie Studio 208–12, 213 My Vocab Book 197–9, 213 My Vocab Book 197–9, 213 Naiman, N. 147 National Foreign Language Center 2, 244 National Office for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language (NOTCFL) 9 national security 3, 9 National University of Singapore (NUS) 4, 192, 196, 213, 243, 250, 291 needs analysis 78, 84–5, 86–7, 89 negative evaluation, fear of 110, 111, 115–16, 118, 132, 299 network-based technologies see computer technology

324

Index

news broadcasts 139–42 newspapers 155, 166 Nodari, C. 83 non-verbal communication 77, 308, 310 normative politeness 46 NOTCFL see National Office for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language note taking 30, 151, 153, 161–2 noumenon, research on the 102 NUS see National University of Singapore Oh, M.T. 114, 126 Ohta, A.S. 137 Olivieri, C. 58–9 Olshtain, E. 15 O’Malley, J.M. 146 O’Mara, J. 279–80 O’Neill, C. 283–4 Ong, W.J. 290, 293 Onwuegbuzie, A.J. 111, 115 oral communication educational drama 279, 282 Japan Exchange and Teaching program 274, 275 learning strategies 32 tests 21, 289–314 see also conversation Ornstein, A.C. 10, 11 other-regulation 141, 143 Otsuka, Y. 58 Oxford, R.L. 127, 147, 148, 149 Oxford Writing Project 34 Pally, M. 232 paraphrasing 156, 167, 168–9, 297, 305 Pawley, A. 245 PE see performative exercises Peacock, M. 113, 126 pedagogy 11 constructivist 12–13, 18–19, 191–6 peer assessment 310, 311 peer scaffolding 17–18, 135, 138–43

performative exercises (PE) 20, 243, 246–9, 252, 258, 264, 266 Perkins, D.N. 193 personalization 248–9 philosophy 11, 12–13 planning 78, 83–4, 220, 236 Plass, J.L. 191–2, 195 polite insolence 51, 53 politeness 15, 45–70, 276 cross-cultural pragmatics 57–8, 59–61, 65 definition of 46, 64 Face Threatening Acts 50, 51 marked and unmarked 50–1, 54, 57, 60, 64 pragmatic 46–7, 48, 55, 56, 65 relative 15, 45, 49–50, 53, 64, 65 second language acquisition 61–3 social norms 47 three types of politeness effects 52–3, 55, 63–4 portfolios 295–6 Portuguese 3–4 pragmalinguistics 11–12, 94–5, 101, 102 pragmatic politeness 46–7, 48, 55, 56, 65 pragmatics 16–17, 93–107 cross-cultural 57–8, 59–61, 65 lack of competence 100–2 pragmalinguistics 11–12, 94–5, 101, 102 sociopragmatics 94, 95–6, 103 Price, M.L. 112, 113, 127 primary education 6 educational drama 284–5, 286 European Union 1–2 Japan 271–2, 273, 276–8, 284–5, 286 memory strategies 156 productive strategies 175 “Profile Deutsch” 82, 83 pronunciation 113, 127 see also fluency psychology 11, 12, 17

Index Rafik-Galea, Shameem 18, 145–88 reading learning strategies 33, 36 workplace requirements 74–5 real-life situations 257–8, 267, 279 receptive strategies 175 Reeves, T.C. 195, 213 Reitzel, A.C. 112 relative politeness 15, 45, 49–50, 53, 64, 65 Resnick, L. 193 Rogoff, Barbara 136 role-plays educational drama 282–3 memorizing dialogues 243, 244–5, 247–8, 260–1 Rose, K. 104 Rubin, Joan 30, 147 Russian course enrolments 5 Gross Language Product 3–4 school education 6 United States 2 Sarason, I.G. 110 Savignon, J.S. 293 Saxton, J. 283 scaffolding 17, 135–44 constructivist pedagogy 193 definition of 136 learning strategies 35, 39 scenarios 82–4, 87 Schmitt, N. 148, 149 Schwier, R.A. 208, 212 second language acquisition (SLA) 13 Chinese 102 Interlanguage Hypothesis 14 memorizing dialogues 245–6 politeness 61–3, 65 pragmatic competence 95 scaffolding 137–8, 143 vocabulary learning 18, 145–6 secondary education 6–7, 156, 277 Segalowitz, N. 263–4

325

selective attention 30, 148 self-confidence 265, 300–1, 304 self-esteem 17, 111–12, 113–14, 116–17, 119–20, 122–9, 132, 300–1 self-evaluation Interactive Situation Simulation 200, 207–8 learning strategies 39–40 oral communication tests 21, 295–6, 301, 303, 306–7, 310, 311 see also assessment self-initiation strategies 148 self-perception of speaking proficiency 17, 112, 114, 116–17, 119–20, 122–6, 128, 132, 299 self-reflection 294, 295, 302, 310, 311 self-regulation 140, 141, 142, 143 Selinker, L. 14 SEM see structural equation modeling SILL see Strategy Inventory for Language Learning Simons, J. 279, 280, 283, 284 Singapore 37 see also National University of Singapore Skehan, P. 19, 220, 222, 233, 236, 239 skills kinaesthetic 280–1, 285 observation 281 “open” and “closed” 263–4 teachers 10–11 thinking 234 SLA see second language acquisition social class 12 social norms 47, 48 social strategies 148, 150–1, 158–9, 160, 170–2, 173–4 socializing 87 sociocultural competence 15 see also intercultural competence sociocultural theory 17, 135–6 sociolinguistics 12, 15, 293 sociology 11

326

Index

sociopragmatics 94, 95–6, 103 South Korea 5, 6, 9 Spanish course enrolments 5 Gross Language Product 3–4 learning strategies 37 school education 6, 7 United States 2 workplace requirements 72 Sparks, R. 127 speech acts 11–12, 96, 104–5, 244 speech-level shifts 46, 47, 48, 49, 54–5, 57, 58–9 Speilberger, C.D. 290 Stern, H.H. 11, 147, 244 Stoller, F. 221, 235 story-focused drama 283–4 strategic language use 47 strategies 14–15, 29–44 CALLA framework 35, 39–40 classroom organization 36 Common European Framework of Reference 81 conversational 61–2, 63 cultural context 36–7 curriculum objectives 36 descriptive studies 30–1 future research 40–1 guidelines for teaching 38 identification of 30 instructional models 34–5 language of instruction 37–8 oral communication tests 297, 302, 305, 310 SLA theories 13 studies 31–4, 41 teacher’s style and disposition 35–6 vocabulary learning 18, 145–88, 199 Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) 32 structural equation modeling (SEM) 115, 120, 123–5, 128–9 Syder, F. 245 systematization of tasks 248

Taiwan 5, 6–7, 217 Takenouchi, O. 275 Takeuchi, O. 33, 36 Tandy, M. 280, 284–5 task-based learning (TBL) 19, 78, 218–21, 222, 223–36 teacher education learning strategies 41 vocationally-oriented language learning 16, 86–9 teachers Chinese language teaching 104–5 educational drama 282, 284 Japan Exchange and Teaching program 274, 275–6 Japanese primary education 277–8 learning strategies 14–15, 35–6, 37, 38, 39–40, 41 oral communication tests 308, 310 skills and attributes 10–11 speaking proficiency 126 vocationally-oriented language learning 84–9 technology 18–19, 191–215 constructivist pedagogy 194–6 Interactive Situation Simulation 200–8, 213 Movie Studio 208–12, 213 My Vocab Book 197–9, 213 see also information and communication technologies Terrell, T.D. 13 terrorism 3 test anxiety 110, 299 see also anxiety testing see assessment textbooks Chinese 97–8, 100 Japan 272–3 memorization of 302 vocationally-oriented language learning 76–7 thinking skills 234 Thomas, J. 56–7, 95, 101

Index

327

Todesco, A. 147 Togo, K. 273 Tomita, Y. 273, 277 training see teacher education Tschirner, E. 18

teacher qualifications 84–6 teacher training 16, 86–9 see also business case study; English for Business Purposes Vygotsky, L.S. 17, 135–6, 138

United Kingdom 8, 34 United States 2–3, 35, 62 Ur, P. 11 Urdu Gross Language Product 3–4 as “top league” language 8 United States 2 Usami, Mayumi 15, 45–70 Utsumi, Tomoko 19–20, 243–69

Wagner, B.J. 279, 280, 281–2, 286 Walker, Izumi 19–20, 243–69 Wang, Hong 16–17, 93–107 Wang, N. 113, 127 Waters, A. 235–6 Watts, R.C. 51 Wei, C. 99 Welles, E.B. 9 Wenzao College of Languages 217, 225 Wertsch, James 136 Wesche, M.B. 19 Weskamp, R. 11 Wheatley, G.H. 191, 194 Widdowson, H.G. 220 Williams, M. 137 Willis, J. 222, 236 Winston, J. 280, 284–5 Wong, Bee Eng 18, 145–88 Wood, D. 136, 263 work-related learning see vocationallyoriented language learning “Working in Europe” brochure 81

Van Patten, B. 233 Vanderbildt University 194 videos 194, 195 visualization 38, 156, 169 vocabulary Chinese 97, 98, 99 English for Business Purposes 218 English language teaching in Japan 273 ethnicity 161–74 Interactive Situation Simulation 200–3 learning strategies 18, 34, 145–88 Movie Studio 208–9 My Vocab Book 197–9, 213 oral communication tests 304, 307, 309 “Profile Deutsch” 82 vocationally-oriented language learning 74–5, 87 vocationally-oriented language learning (VOLL) 16, 71–91 Common European Framework of Reference 78–81, 82, 83, 85 communicative requirements 72–3 curriculum and course design 75–8 learners 74–5, 86–7 lesson planning 78 “Profile Deutsch” 82 scenarios 82–4

Xie, Y. 58, 60 Yoshizawa, J. 276, 278 Young, D.J. 109, 111, 112, 127 Zhang, D. 96 Zhang, Z. 99 Zhao, J. 98 Zhou, Yujia 17, 21, 109–33 Zhou, Zumo 97–8 Zimmerman, C.B. 145 zone of proximal development (ZPD) 17, 135, 136, 137, 138, 142, 143