Week 6 Lecture Slides
description
Transcript of Week 6 Lecture Slides
Purpose of Observation
Adapted from TESOL Link @ http://www.ne.jp/asahi/kurazumi/peon/observe.html
Observation
Through what media? What kind?
Pre-observation Conference
School Catalog Course
Description/Syllabus Post-Observation
Conference
Demographic Information
Administrative Info Goals/Objectives Time Frame Levels Teaching Method Materials
Structure of a Lesson
Presentation
How do you present a lesson?Text-Multimedia Materials-Internet? Should grammar rules be presented
explicitly? (Focus on form) Example: Faerch (1986) typical
sequence:Problem Formulation InductionTeacher’s rule formulationExemplificaiton
Practice
Questions to consider: What’s task? (less-controlled realistic
use of L2) What’s activity? (more general use)
Activity (Valvarcel et al. (1985) and
Edelhoff (1981))
Instructional
Sequencing and
Motivation
Input Control
Focus/Working
Transfer/Application
Tasks
Provide opportunities for both comprehensible input and output
Information gap activities - promote negotiation
Shared info, knowledge, or assumptions may lessen the amount of negotiation necessary
Recycling of info is helpful“convergent” (consensus-building –single-
solution) tasks allow for more negotiation, while “divergent” (open-ended) tasks seem to induce longer turns (more output) and greater syntactic complexity
Same task – different activity
Historical Overview of Error Correction
View of Learning
Error Error treatment
Behaviorist Undesirable Overt & immediate correctionGiving correct answers
Cognitive InevitableEvidence of language developmentInformational hypothesis-testing
Intentionally ignoredNo treatment
Interactional Error-making and its repairing are parts of interactionNegotiation of meaning
Self-repairOther-repair (teacher, peer)NNS-NNS peer correction is also beneficial
Fig. Adapted from TESOL Link @ http://www.ne.jp/asahi/kurazumi/peon/error.html
Views on Error Treatment
Hendrickson (1978) : Based on errors
Long (1977): Based on teacher’s behavior and acts
Should errors be corrected?
When? Which errors? How? Who?
Ignore or treat errors? When? What treatment? Who?
Views on Error Treatment
Question Answer Research
Should errors be corrected?
No: based on the natural L2 development theoriesYes: students need and want error correction but over-correction is not desirable
Dulay & Burt (1974)Krashen (1983)Cachart & Olsen (1976)Chenoweth et al. (1983)
When? 2 Criteria: a.At what point of interaction?b.At what stage of L2 interlanguage development Immediate correction may interrupt learner and inhibit willingness to practiceDelayedPostponed to a future lessonWait time is important
Vigil & Oller (1976)Day et al. (1984)Funselow (1977)Van Lier (1988)Pienemann (1984)Long (1977)
What? Three options to inform learners of errors:a.Commission of errorb.Location of errorc.Identity of error
Long (1977)Chaudron (1977)Alwright (1985)
Which errors?
Global & local errorsSocially stigmatized errorsLexical, phonological, morphological, syntactical errorsDepending on course content
Burt & Kiparsky (1974)Corder (1967)Chaudron (1977)
Who? Self-repairPeer repair: negotiation of meaningTeacher-repairNS other-repair
Schegloff (1977)Long & Porter (1985)Varonis & Gass (1985)
Characteristics of Instructional SettingsCharacteristics Natural
AcquisitionStructure-Based Instruction
Communicative Instruction
T-S T-S S-S
Learning 1 thing at a time
Errors
Frequent feedback on errors
Genuine Questions
Display Questions
Negotiation of Meaning
Metalinguistic Comments
Ample time for learning
Variety of discourse types
Pressure to Speak
Access to Modified Input