Experimenting with grammar tasks for young learners iatefl cardiff 2009
Download
1 / 34

Experimenting with Grammar Tasks for Young Learners IATEFL CARDIFF 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 363 Views
  • Uploaded on

Experimenting with Grammar Tasks for Young Learners IATEFL CARDIFF 2009. Danae S. Tsapikidou PhD student in Second Language Acquisition, University of Cambridge email:[email protected] I will present…. An experimental study on Form-Focused Instruction (FFI) in the primary classroom

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Experimenting with Grammar Tasks for Young Learners IATEFL CARDIFF 2009' - Philip


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Experimenting with grammar tasks for young learners iatefl cardiff 2009 l.jpg

Experimenting with Grammar Tasks for Young Learners IATEFL CARDIFF 2009

Danae S. Tsapikidou

PhD student in Second Language Acquisition, University of Cambridge

email:[email protected]


I will present l.jpg
I will present….

An experimental study on

Form-Focused Instruction (FFI)

in the primary classroom

This study is an MPhil thesis supervised by Prof. Neil Mercer


I will outline l.jpg
I will outline….

  • The theory behind the study

  • The methodology

  • The results

  • The factors explaining the results

  • Summary/Conclusion


Form focused instruction l.jpg
Form-Focused Instruction…

  • Accelerates the natural stages of acquisition

  • Correlates with proficiency gains

  • Enhances capacity for complexity

  • Prevents interlanguage stabilisation

  • Pushes towards target-like accuracy



Research questions l.jpg
Research Questions

  • Do young learners benefit from FFI in the context of a story-film?

  • Is explicit FFI better than implicit FFI?

  • Do under-achievers benefit equally from FFI?


Nick ellis definition 1994 l.jpg
Nick Ellis definition (1994)

  • Explicit FFI: Conscious searching, building then testing of hypotheses; assimilating a rule following explicit instruction

  • Implicit FFI: Non-conscious and automatic abstraction of the structural nature of the material arrived at from experience of instances


Research design l.jpg
Research design

  • An experiment with pre-post-delayed tests

  • 83 learners in 4 primary EFL classes in their 5th and 6th year

  • The Simple Past (formation/usage)

  • 6 hours per class

  • April 2008, Thessaloniki, Greece


Experiment l.jpg
Experiment

  • Intact classes in alphabetical order

  • Group comparability set by pre-test means comparison with one-way ANOVA (p=0,202)

  • Random assignment to treatments

  • Target tense was known



Methods of data collection l.jpg
Methods of Data Collection

  • Grammaticality judgement test (GJT)

    eg. Ted was sad because he didn’t find the exhibit

    George sawed a yellow hat .

  • Multiple Choice Test (MC)

    eg. The curious little monkey _____________ happy to play.

    a. were b. was c. did

  • Written Production Test (WP)

    eg This is George. George _was_ (be) a good little monkey and always very curious.

  • Transcripts of audio-recorded oral communication tasks


Explicit treatment l.jpg

Presentation of rules

Explicit focus on accuracy

Controlled practice

Oral and written production tasks

Meaning-based communicative drills

Metalinguistic feedback

Questions/Answers in S.Past,

Cloze test

Fill-in the blanks

Open cloze test

Correct verb recognition

Find the mistake

Jumbled sentences

Identify S. Past forms

Explicit Treatment


Explicit practice l.jpg
Explicit Practice….

  • Did Curious George live in the city?

  • [No, he didn’t. He lived in the jungle]



Simple past cloze l.jpg
Simple past cloze

This is George. George _was_ (be) a good little monkey and always very curious. George was looking for someone to play with. He (1). __________ (wonder) what would happen if he put a crocodile egg in a bird’s nest.


Oral data explicit group l.jpg
Oral Data-Explicit Group

  • Teacher: What did they play?

  • Students: peek-a-boo, peek-a-boo!!!!!

  • Teacher: and the verb?

  • Student 1: He played peek-a-boo

  • Students: jumped, jumped

  • Teacher: Did he…..

  • Student 2: catch the rope!

  • Teacher: in simple past?

  • Student 2: caught..caught!.

  • Student 3: …he caught the rope


Implicit treatment l.jpg

Interaction in pairs

Focus on task completion

Use of target feature essential for task

Production tasks

Real purpose of communication

Opportunity to notice the gap between TL and the learner’s IL

Story comparison

Role-play

Listening cloze test,

Writing Stage directions task

Picture description/ordering

Picture/sentence matching

Text reconstruction

Implicit Treatment


Implicit practice l.jpg
Implicit Practice…

  • George found a giant banana…but it was a yellow hat

  • George and Ted played peek-a-boo together



Joint writing task l.jpg
Joint Writing Task

Ted: Clovis, I've got a problem. (Ted looked at Clovis, worried)

Clovis: Wait, just a minute. Are you returning him? What? Because I have a strict no-return policy... on any robotic animals I create, unless, of course, you have a receipt. (___________________________________)


Student a ivan l.jpg

Came from Serbia

He was Ted’s apartment manager

He did not allow pets in the apartment.

He found Curious George and kicked Ted out of his apartment.

Name:

Came from:

His job was:

What did he do?

What happened in the end?

Student A: Ivan


Student b clovis l.jpg

Came from the USA.

He was the museum inventor.

He invented the magnificator.

He helped Ted magnify the tiny idol and solve his problem.

Name:

Came from:

His job was:

What did he do?

What happened in the end?

Student B: Clovis


Oral data implicit group l.jpg
Oral Data-Implicit Group

  • Learner 1: Eeeerr ….where did he come from?

  • Learner 2: Eerhh …. he come from Serbia

  • Learner 1: Where did he come from?

  • Learner 2: Eeerrr …Came from the USA


Summary of results l.jpg
Summary of results

  • Significant pre-post test improvement in both Explicit and Implicit groups

  • Gains in both groups significantly remained in delayed post test 2 weeks later

  • No significant difference in improvement between Explicit and Implicit treatments

  • No significant difference between 5th and 6th year groups


5 th year results l.jpg
5th year results

  • 20% improvement rate from pre to post test in both groups, fully retained in the delayed post test 2 weeks later


6 th year results l.jpg
6th year results

  • 22% and 28% pre-post test improvement rate, largely retained in the delayed post test


5 th year ability comparison l.jpg
5th year ability comparison

  • Learners who scored below the group mean demonstrated 44% rate of improvement from pre to post test, largely maintained in delayed post test


6 th year ability comparison l.jpg
6th year ability comparison

  • Learners who scored below the group mean demonstrated 74 % rate of improvement from pre to post test, lost by just 20% in delayed post test


Qualitative data l.jpg
Qualitative Data

  • 75 audio-recorded pair exchanges

  • 417 out of 482 utterances were grammatically correct

  • Task preparation time + teacher feedback was given before acting out

  • Learners may have monitored their oral performance for the audio-recording


Discussion l.jpg
Discussion

  • Explicit and Implicit FonF are equally beneficial for young learners

  • Story familiar context provides facilitation

  • Learner motivation

  • Task preparation, build-on model and presentation (audio-recorded) of interaction tasks led to monitoring, restructuring, pushed output


Support for output hypothesis l.jpg
Support for Output Hypothesis

  • Output practice that leads learners to notice gaps in their IL systems, test their existing knowledge, reflect consciously on their own language, and process language syntactically is expected to be the most beneficial for L2 development (Swain, 2005)


Limitations l.jpg
Limitations

  • Lack of oral assessment data

  • Role of prior knowledge

  • Insufficient test piloting

  • Meaningful context of the story was common for both treatments – hence all learners could make form-function-meaning connections


Conclusion l.jpg
Conclusion

  • Explicit and Implicit Form-Focused Instruction are both equally beneficial and complement each-other

  • Ideal for remedial teaching or recycling of known structures

  • Frequency and salience of target structures through the story facilitate conversion of input to intake


References l.jpg
References

  • DeKeyser, R. (Ed.). (2007). Practicing in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology: Cambridge University Press.

  • Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook on research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471-484). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Ellis, R. (2001). Form-focused instruction and second language learning. Malden, MA ; Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


ad