Evaluating the transfer-promoting potential of L2 teaching materials

Mark Andrew James

Arizona State University

Mark.A.James@asu.edu

www.drmjames.info

Summary

• Transfer of learning beyond the classroom is a basic goal of L2 instruction. This presentation describes a new tool for use by teachers and researchers to evaluate the transfer-promoting potential of L2 teaching materials. The tool will be demonstrated through an evaluation of a collection of current ESOL textbooks.

Background

• Does L2 teaching have an impact?• ... students’ improved ability in a L2 classroom should transfer to

situations outside that classroom.• ... but, transfer is not an inevitable result of learning, and can be

difficult to promote.

• Do L2 materials like textbooks help to promote transfer?• ... textbooks are common and a major influence on what happens

in many L2 classrooms.• ... therefore, textbooks with strong potential to promote transfer are of

value.

How can a textbook’s transfer-promoting potential be evaluated?

• Transfer can be promoted by teaching that has students:• do sufficient amounts of practice (e.g., Ahmadian, 2011) in

situations that are similar to situations in which transfer is desired (e.g., James, 2008, 2009; Lightbown, 2008), to promote reflexive (i.e., automatic) transfer.

• learn general principles (e.g., pronunciation patterns [e.g., Saito, 2013], grammar rules [e.g., VanPatten & Uludag, 2011], genre characteristics [e.g., Yayli, 2011]), for example by working with varied examples (e.g., Kaur & Hegelheimer, 2005), to promote reflective (i.e., intentional) transfer.

• Therefore, textbooks can be examined to see if they reflect teaching-for-transfer techniques (e.g., Fogarty et al, 1992; James, 2006).

•

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

See activity 2 on p.30 of: Richards, J.C., & Bohlke, D. (2011). Four corners level 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Evaluation results

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

See activity 5 on p.31 of: Richards, J.C., & Bohlke, D. (2011). Four corners level 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

Form

Function

Meaning

See “Language focus” on p.50 of: Clandfield, L. (2010). Global pre-intermediate. London, UK: Macmillan.

See “Talking about illness” box on p.16 of: Dummett, P., Hughes, J., & Stephenson, H. (2013). Life pre-intermediate. Independence, KY: National Geographic Learning / Cengage Learning.

See activity 1 on p.30 of: Richards, J.C., & Bohlke, D. (2011). Four corners level 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

See activity 6b on p.69 of: Clare, A., & Wilson, J.J. (2012). Speakout pre-intermediate (p.69). Harlow, UK: Pearson.

What does the evaluation tool look like?

Evaluation results

Evaluation results

Evaluation results

Conclusion

• By revealing transfer-related strengths and weaknesses of L2 materials, this tool complements existing evaluation frameworks.

• The tool is limited in its focus on transfer-promoting potential.

• But, the information this tool provides can contribute to a stronger understanding of the impact of L2 teaching.

ReferencesAhmadian, M.J. (2011) The effect of 'massed' task repetitions on complexity, accuracy, and fluency: Does it transfer to a new task? The Language

Learning Journal, 39, 269-280.

Clandfield, L. (2010). Global pre-intermediate. London, UK: Macmillan.

Clare, A., & Wilson, J.J. (2012). Speakout pre-intermediate. Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Dummett, P., Hughes, J., & Stephenson, H. (2013). Life pre-intermediate. Independence, KY: National Geographic Learning / Cengage Learning.

Fogarty, R.D., Perkins, D., & Barell, J. (1992). How to teach for transfer. Palatine: Skylight Publishing.

Hutchinson, T., & Sherman, K. (2012). Network 2. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

James, M.A. (2006). Teaching for transfer in ELT. ELT Journal, 60, 151-159.

James, M.A. (2008). The influence of perceptions of task similarity/difference on learning transfer in second language writing. Written Communication, 25, 76-103.

James, M.A. (2009). “Far” transfer of learning outcomes from an ESL writing course: Can the gap be bridged? Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 69-84.

Kaur, J., & Hegelheimer, V. (2005). ESL students' use of concordance in the transfer of academic word knowledge: An exploratory study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 287-310.

Lightbown, P.M. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han (Ed.), Understanding second language process (pp.27-44). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Richards, J.C., & Bohlke, D. (2011). Four corners level 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Saito, K. (2013). Reexamining effects of form-focused instruction on L2 pronunciation development: The role of explicit phonetic information. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 1-29.

VanPatten, B., & Uludag, O. (2011). Transfer of training and processing instruction: From input to output. System, 39, 44-53.

Yayli, D. (2011). From genre awareness to cross-genre awareness: A study in an EFL context. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 121-129.

 

... thank you!

Feel free to contact me with any remaining questions/comments: Mark.A.James@asu.edu

Presentation recording and slides can be downloaded at: www.drmjames.info