Second Language Acquisition (SLA)

Research Methodology

SHAMSIAH ABDULLAHHUSNOORLAILI HUSAIN

NUR ROZZIENNA RAMLAN

‘Research is a systematic approach to finding answers to questions’ (Hatch and

Farhady 1982)

Part of being systematic is having a well-planned research design.

There are four aspects of research design:i. Methodologyii. Settingiii. Instrumentationiv. Measurement

INTRODUCTION

Qualitative – an ethnographic study in which the researchers do not set out to test hypotheses but rather to observe what is present with their focus and consequently the data, free to vary during the course of the observation.

Quantitative – an experiment design to test a hypothesis through the use of objective instruments and appropriate statistical analyses.

Qualitative vs Quantitative

Qualitative Paradigm Quantitative ParadigmAdvocates the use of qualitative methods

Advocates the use of quantitative methods

Concerned with understanding human behaviour from the actor’s own frame of reference

Seeks the facts or causes of social phenomena with little regard for the subjective states of individuals

Naturalistic and uncontrolled observation

Obtrusive and controlled measurement

Subjective Objective Close to the data: the ‘insider’ perspective

Removed from the data: the ‘outsider’ perspective

Grounded, discovery-oriented, descriptive and inductive

Ungrounded, verification-oriented, inferential and hypothetico-deductive

Process-oriented Outcome-orientedValid: ‘real’ , ‘rich’ and ‘deep’ data

Reliable: ‘hard’ and replicable data

Ungeneralizable; single case studies

Generalize; multiple case studies

Assumes a dynamic reality Assumes a stable reality

It is provided by Reichardt and Cook (1979)

There are two implications:i. It is assumed that if researchers

subscribe to one paradigm over the other and thus view the world differently, they must use different methods of inquiry.

ii. The paradigms are use to be inflexible so that one’s only choice is between the two.

The distinction to exemplify is between longitudinal and cross-sectional studies.

Often called a case study, in SLA field Involves observing the development of

linguistics performance, usually spontaneous speech of one subject, when the speech data are collected at periodic intervals over a span of time.

Characterized by 3 qualitative paradigm attributes:

i. Naturalistic (use of spontaneous speech)ii. Process-oriented (it takes place over

time)iii. Ungeneralizable (very few subjects)

Longitudinal Approach

Linguistic performance of a larger number of subjects is studied and the performance data are usually collected at only one session.

The data usually elicited by asking subjects to perform some verbal task such as describing a picture.

4 characters:i. Obtrusiveii. Controlled environment (use of artificial

tasks)iii. Outcome-oriented (takes place at only one

point in time)iv. Generalizable (larger group of subjects)

Cross-Sectional Approach

Process-oriented vs outcome-oriented distinction should not be associated with one approach.

Must be able to trace change over time, one would allow the researchers to trace the process not just analyze the outcome

The lack of generalizability of findings from single case longitudinal study can be solved by conducting a number of concurrent longitudinal studies

What is important to researchers is not the choice of methodologies but be clear on what the purpose of the study.

Qualitative is an introspective one, with guidance from the researchers, leaners examine their own behaviour.

There are SLA researcher's challenge the validity of introspection insights because they question leaners’ report.

They suggest that it only limited to the study of affective factors such as attitudes and motivation.

Introspection

Researchers take part in the activities they are studying.

That take note whatever they observe and experience.

Notes usually recorded immediately after the activities to allow researchers full participation.

The period is usually long and the number of subjects studied is small.

Participant Observation

A researcher engaged in non-participant observation do not entertain any hypotheses, he only observe the activities.

Usually researcher takes notes or makes tape recording.

The subjects are few in number and the period of study relatively long.

Non- participant Observation

Similar to observational studies since they are too descriptive in nature.

The difference is the researcher wish to narrow the scope of their study to a particular set of variables.

E.g. interaction analysis; researcher observe a language class using a data collection device or instrument to focus and record their observation.

He measures certain leaners’ characteristics (motivation) or characteristics learning environment (amount of native speaker input).

Focused Description

The advantageous is the scope of the researchers'’ task is limited, once the focus has been established, it is maintained.

Usually less time-consuming so more of them can be conducted and more subjects can be observed.

The disadvantageous is he ignores the fact that SLA is multi-dimensional phenomenon.

The other is the use of instrument to help standardizing researchers’ observation but if they investigates behaviour, the data could be biased.

Researchers attempt to establish a casual relationship between treatment and consequences.

Two criteria must be satisfied:i. There must be experimental and

control groupii. Subjects must be randomly assigned

to one of these group. One type of it is called the one-group

pretest-posttest design.

Pre-experiment

Quasi-experimental designs do not require random assignment of subjects to groups but do include one or more control group.

Time-series designs are quasi-experiment since they improve upon the one-group pretest-posttest design.

Thus, subjects in one group serve both as control group and as an experimental group.

Quasi-experiment

There are two criteria:i. There must be experimental and

control groupii. Subjects must be randomly assigned to

one of these group. The purpose is one group is treated in

one manner and another in a different manner.

Since their behaviour is differ, conclude that as consequence of their different treatments.

Experiment

From this also, a cause-effect relationship between treatment and consequence can be determine.

Sometimes inappropriate for studying human behaviour because of the progress acquiring SL, subjects receiving restricted input compared with that control group receiving normal input.

SETTING Needs to truly understand the acquisition process in its natural state. Instructions could alter natural language processing & thus contaminate SLA data. Selinker (1972) – characteristics of learner errors were specifically textbook or teacher-induced Kasper (1982) – identified teacher-induced errors in the discourse behaviour of German students of advanced English 2 settings:(a)Instructed Setting – organised according to

the presentation rules in classroom(b)Naturalistic Setting – no formal articulation of

rules & emphasis in on communication of meaning.

Instrumentation: Production Data Elicitation

Qualitative Methodologies – reject the use of instruments to elicit data Quantitative Methodologies – choose to use instruments in the studies Impossible to study all aspects of a learner’s developing performance Learners will often not reveal to researchers their entire linguistics range Researchers face limitation to describe what arose spontaneously for a given subjects There are 12 Appropriate Elicitation Procedures in SLA Research

INSTRUMENTATION

(a)Reading AloudHas been used in studies researching pronunciation (Beebe 1980a; Flege 1980)

Procedures:(i) Subjects – read aloud the word lists, sentences or passages (which are an abundance of particular sounds in representatives environment)

(ii) Subjects’ performance is recorded – future analysis

(b) Structured Exercises Exercises have been utilized:(i) Transformation Exercise(ii) Fill-in-the-blanks with correct form(iii)Sentence-rewrite(iv)Sentence-combining(v) Multiple Choice Procedures:(i) Subjects – perform some grammatical

manipulation(ii) Researchers – study subjects’

performance with regard to specific morphemes or syntactic patterns.

(c) Completion Task Procedures:(i) Subjects – listen to or read the beginning

of a sentence(ii) Subjects need to complete it using their

own words Richards (1980) – to study infinitival &

gerundive complements Bialystok (1982) – Natalicio and Natalicio (1971) – Berko (1958) -

(d) Elicited Imitation Procedures:(i) Researcher – reads to subjects a particular

set of sentences (contain examples of the focused structure)

(ii) OR researcher – play a taped reading (for better aspects of delivery’s rate)

(iii)Subjects – imitate each sentence after been read

Based on an assumption by Naiman (1974) who suggested 15 syllables:

(a)Subjects are unable to repeat the sentence by rote because their short-term memory will be taxed.

(b)So, subjects need to understand and reconstruct the sentence using his or her own grammar.

(e) Elicited Translation Procedures:(i) Subjects – get a sentence in their

native language(ii) Subjects – translate into their second

language or vice versa Subjects’ performance will approximate

natural speech production because:- the procedures require both decoding of

the stimulus sentence & encoding of the translation

(f) Guided Composition Procedures:(i) Subjects – produce oral OR written

composition in response to some set of organized stimuli

Richards (1980) – used picture sequnces which tell story as stimuli

Ioup (1984a) – gave an arrangement of content words & then subjects are asked to write a composition

(g) Question & Answer (with stimulus) Procedures:(i) Subjects – look at a picture OR series of

pictures(ii) Answer questions designed to elicit

particular structures relate to the study Bialystok (1982):(i) Subjects – listen to 16 personalized

situations which are described in a few sentences & end with a question

(ii) Subjects – give a contextually appropriate response.

(h) Reconstruction Hulstijn and Hulstijn (1984) – story

retelling Connor and McCagg (1983) –

paraphrase recall Procedures:(i) Subjects – read OR listen to a story

(Larsen-Freeman 1983a) OR(ii) Subjects – watch a movie (Godfrey

1980)(iii)Subjects – retell OR reconstruct the

story orally OR in writing

(i) Communication Game Procedures (Scarcella and Higa; 1981):(i) Native English Speakers combined

with child & adolescent ESL learners(ii) Each pair – asked to use pieces of

plastic to replicate a picture given(iii)Their conversations were audiotaped

& transcribed(iv)Transcriptions were analysed

Procedures (Lightbown, Spada and Wallace; 1980):

(i) Each subject got 10 sets of cards(ii) Each set consisted of 4 pictures

(differed from each other minimally)(iii)Subject – asked to choose 1 of the 4

& described to the researcher (researcher would know which been selected)

(iv)Pictures – specifically designed to provide contexts in which the structures under study would be likely occur

(j) Role Play Act as a useful way to study learners’

pragmatic competence Speech act can be kept constant while

the contextual features are varied Many dimension of the learners’

pragmatic competence may be explored Procedures:(i) Subjects – asked to participate in a

more or less structured role play with the researcher OR

(ii) Researchers – used puppets to do role play (subjects are children)

(k) Oral Interview Some researchers use exercise control over the

topic – they can steer the subjects Other researchers allow subjects to choose their

own topic Subjects tend to involve in the subject matter

been discussed & produce more spontaneous speech

(l) Free Composition No interference by researchers e.g:(i) Researcher – studies something related to

grammatical morphemes(ii) Subjects – need to relate the writing with past

time expressions (but not guarantee subjects will do so using past time morphemes)

Variability Problem Subjects performance varies from task to

task. Logic – if subjects had acquired a particular

structure, then they should be able to use it in all contexts & modalities.

Tarone (1983) – task variability happens when a task elicits a relatively more careful style, that the style may contain more target language forms or more prestige native language variants than the relatively more casual style elicited by other tasks.

Researchers need to control task in their studies to ensure the task used & those from other researchers are the same before comparing findings across studies.

Instrumentation: Intuitional Data Elicitation

This kind of data has been referred to on a variety of ways.

Some call it data on learners’ competence;

Others refer to it as metalinguistic judgement data or intuitional data.

There are 4 elicitation procedures which SLA researchers have utilised in an attempt to get at learners’ intuitions:

(a)Error Recognition & Correction(b)Grammatically Judgements(c)Other Judgement Tasks(d)Card Sorting

(a) Error Recognition & Correction Procedures:(i) Subjects – ask to locate an error in a

particular sentence produced by themselves

(ii) They also been asked the reason they thought they had made the errors

But, sometimes they are given correct sentence and they are asked to judge it.

(b) Grammatically Judgements Refer to a speaker’s intuition concerning the

nature of particular utterance Subjects are asked whether or not a given

utterance is well formed.

(c) Other Judgement Task Tucker and Sarofin (1979) – asked subjects to

rate deviant & well-formed sentences in terms of their social acceptability

Walters (1979) – subjects need to make judgements relate to relative politeness of request strategies

(d) Card Sorting Procedures:(i) Pictures or sentences are placed on cards(ii) Subjects – need to categorise or rank-order

them To test the ability of children to discriminate

gender differences.

Instrumentation: Use of Miniature Language

Miniature Language – often elicit both linguistic production & intuitional data

FLA Research, Smith and Braine (1972):- Subjects are exposed to a set of sentences

of a miniature artificial language created by the researcher

- Subjects are asked to recall or recognise the sentences after some exposure

- Recall they are actually being asked to produce sentences

- Recognise ask to make grammatically judgement based on the regulations induced from the sentences

SLA Research, Dunkel (1948) – use the concept to experiment on the effect of instructions.

- He used a portion of a real language- Used a short series of lessons in Farsi was

constructed in alternate forms- Evaluate both visual & auditory

presentation- One group got visual, another group got

auditory results were compared.

McLaughlin (1980) – made the case for the use of miniature artificial languages to study the process of second language acquisition.

Instrumentation: Affective Variable

Instrumentations used in SLA to study affective variables such as attitudes & motivation.

5 ways commonly used to study this area:

(a)Questionnaires(b)Sociometry(c)Matched Guise Technique(d)Diary Study(e)Focused Introspection

(a) Questionnaires To get language learners to self-report their

attitudes or personal characteristics

(b) Sociometry Use indirect means for young children because

direct questions concerning their attitudes are inappropriate

Strong (1984):(i) Children need to nominate classmates who

speak different native languages(ii) Identified subjects’ allegiances & plot the

group structure in diagrammatic maps called sociograms

Sociograms – useful in studying attitudes towards minority-group members within a group

(c) Matched Guise Technique Use to elicit attitudes towards speakers of

other languages.

(d) Diary Study Use to study both second language

teaching & second language learning

(e) Focused Introspection To confront the subjects with audio or video

recordings of themselves To seek information from the subjects on

what they were feeling during the interaction, their attitudes towards the interlocutor, etc.

Instruments from Other Disciplines Use to analyse learners characteristics SLA researcher have used various tests:(i) To discover subjects’ cognitive styles(ii) Personality assessment measures From neurolinguistics SLA researchers

have borrowed dichotic listening tests & eye movement observation to study brain functions and hemisphericity

Measuring Learner Performance

Before embarking on SLSA study we must define what we mean by language/language proficiency and determine how will we know when it is required.

MEASUREMENT

Defining Language Proficiency Language proficiency could be

divided into unrelated skills (L-S-R-W)and knowledge of language component.

Oller (1976) hypothesizing that language proficiency is a unitary and indivisible trait.

Oller and Perkins (1979) claimed this global proficiency factor was strongly related to IQ.

Cummins (1980,1981) finds value in the notion of a global language-proficiency factor ‘which can be assessed by a variety of reading, writing, listening and speaking tests and which is strongly related to general cognitive skills…and to academic achievement’.

Cummins- CALP (Cognitive/academic language proficiency) and BICS (Basic Interpersonal Skills)

Canale and Swain (1980) suggested that there were 3 components to communicative competence: grammatical, sociolinguistic and strategic competence.

Larsen-Freeman (1981) – 5 areas of communicative competence; linguistic form, pragmatic/functional competence, propositional content, interactional patterns and strategic competence.

Canale (1994) include 4 components of communicative competence: grammatical, sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic competence.

Bachman and Palmer (1985) identified two subordinate types: grammatical, discourse, illocutionary and sociolinguistic.

Defining an Acquisition Point

Definition – Cazden’s (1968) “the first speech sample of three such that in all three the inflection is supplied in at least 90% of the contexts in which it is really required”

Hakuta (1995) “ the point of acquisition is the first of three consecutive 2 week samples in which the morpheme is supplied in over 90% of obligatory context.

Limitation of these 2 definition;1. Sometimes obligatory contexts are

easy to identify.2. It is often desirable to know how

learners are using a particular structure long before the learner have acquired it, in the sense of attained native-like control.

Task vs Test Test are devised to measure what

the learner knows and does not know of the target language.

Task is devised to reveal what a learner knows.

Corder continues that “we may sometimes be able to infer about the learner’s rules, systems and categories from test results, but that is not what the tests are devised to reveal.

An Index of Development

Several researchers have used native-speaker judgements to gauge learner proficiency.

Scores on standard examinations, or proficiency scales have been used as a measures of second language proficiency.

Sometimes it is determined by teacher’s evaluation or by level of course.

Larsen-Freeman and Storm (1977)

Examined ESL’s students compositions and determined that the written measures which seemed most suitable were the average length of T-units and the total number of error-free T-units per composition.

In 1978, added another measure: the average number of words per error-free T-Units.

In addition to having it be valid for all subjects, in 1983 Larsen-Freeman listed another desirable characteristics of an SLA index of development: that it be readily available, work for all speakers of different native-language backgrounds and for different target languages.( include ages, edu. backgrounds, etc)

Pienemann and Johnston 1987

Construct a non-normative language developmental sequence based upon observed learner behavior which based on speech-processing complexity, rather than the accuracy with which learners produce certain target-language structures.

Both qualitative and quantitative research has a role to play in enhancing our understanding of SLA.

SLA began their quest for an understanding of the “natural” SLA process in hopes that language learning would be enhanced when language teaching harmonized with it.

CONCLUSION

We raised the question of whether any data collected foe research purposes could be said to be truly “natural”, and we submitted that well-designed instruments could make production, intuitional and effective data collection more efficient.

Finally, we dealt with the nettlesome problem of language proficiency. We pointed out the value in having the means to study structures as they are developing.