Learner Generated Attention to Form

《Learner Generated Attention to Form》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Learner Generated Attention to Form（6页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、Attached is an excerpt from an article entitled Learner-Generated Attention to Form by Jessica Williams published in Language Learning (49:4,pp 583-625). Read the excerpt and write an essay in which you do the following:Choose some major aspect of Williamss excerpt that you find relevant to EFL educ

2、ation in Taiwan. Accurately summarize this aspect of the Williams excerpt and the background which Williams provides for it. Analyze its relevance to EFL learning or teaching in Taiwan. Be as specific as possible in your discussion. This is, narrow your consideration to some particular aspect of the

3、 Williams excerpt AND its relevance to some specific group of learners or educational setting in Taiwan (e.g., high school English, university English classes, or whatever.)Note: Assume the reader has NOT read the Williams article. Carefully attribute the information in your essay to the appropriate

4、 source. Your summary and any other use of the material from the Williams source must be your own words ( paraphrase or summarize ) or appropriately quoted.Language Learning 49:4, December 1999, pp583-625Learner-Generated Attention to FormJessica WilliamsUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoRecent studi

5、es have suggested that the incorporation of some attention to form into meaning-centered instruction can lead to improved performance in processing input and increased accuracy in production. Most have examined attention to form delivered by instructors or instructional materials. This study examine

6、s the production of 8 class-room learners of 4 levels of proficiency to determine the extent to which learners can and do spontaneously attend to form in their interaction with other learners. Results suggest that the degree and type of learner-generated attention to form is related proficiency leve

7、l and the nature of the activity in which the learners are engaged. They also indicate that learners overwhelmingly choose to focus on lexical rather than grammatical issues. Findings of a wide range of immersion and naturalistic acquisition studies suggest that when second language learning is sole

8、ly experiential and focussed on communicative success, some linguistic features do not develop to target-like accuracy (see e.g., Harley, 1992; Harley & Swain, 1984; Spada & Lightbown, 1989). This occurs in spite of years of meaningful, comprehensible input and opportunities for interaction. Recent

9、studies point to the inclusion of some degree of focus on form (Long, 1991; Long & Robinson, 1998), in classes that are primarily focussed on meaning and communication, as particularly helpful in promoting accuracy in second language acquisition (see Doughty & Williams, 1998; Spada, 1997, for review

10、s.) Long (1996) took the view that instruction that includes focus on form has at least two advantages over purely meaning-focused instruction: It can increase the salience of positive evidence, and it can provide often essential, and it can provide often essential evidence; in the form of direct or

11、 indirect negative feedback. There is converging support for this position from both laboratory research (e.g., de Graaff, 1997; DeKeyser, 1995; N. Ellis, 1993; Mackey & Philp, 1998; Robinson, 1996,1997) and classroom-based studies (e.g., Doughty & Varela, 1998; Jourdenais, Ota, Stauffer, Boyson, &

12、Doughty, 1995; Leeman, Arteagoitia, Fridman, & Doughty, 1995;Long, Inagaki, & Ortega, 1998; Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Muranoi, 1996; Spada & Lightbown, 1993; Swain & Lapkin, 1998; L. White, 1991; Williams & Evans, 1998). Alongside a growing concern for formal accuracy, emphasis has also recently been on

13、 increasing learner autonomy in the learning process and on learner-centered approaches to both learning and teaching. The terms cooperative and collaborative learning are variously used and understood (see Adams & Hamm, 1996; Johnson & Johnson, 1991; Slavin, 1983, 1987; and McGroarty, 1993; Oxford,

14、 1997, for specific applications to L2 learning and instruction), but the primary features on which most will agree is that such approaches entail learners taking responsibility for their own learning by working together to achieve both individual and common goals. This moves classroom interaction b

15、eyond mere group work in which learners work in physical proximity, but may not consistently derive the greatest benefit from working together. By involving learners actively in their own learning in a supportive environment, proponents of collaborative learning believe that educational outcomes can

16、 be improved. There appears to be empirical support for both collaborative learning activities and for some degree of focus on form, yet it is not clear how the goals of increasing learner participation, cooperation, and autonomy might be meshed with the integration of an increased attention to lang

17、uage form within a communicative second language curriculum. Leow (1998) claimed that there is a greater facilitation of intake and improved accuracy with what he called “learner-centered exposure” to grammatical form which he defined as “learners participation in a problem-solving task that is care

18、fully constructed to promote noticing the form or structure in the L2”(p.51)than when the teacher directs and controls the attention to form. He found that learners who were exposed to verbs with irregular morphological changes by means of a crossword puzzles performed better on a variety of subsequ

19、ent productive and receptive tasks than did those who had a more traditional teacher-fronted presentation of the same material. Successful completion of the crossword required that participants figure out the irregular morphology. The greater gains demonstrates by the learner-centered group on recog

20、nition as well as production tests were sustained for 3 1/2 months after initial exposure. Beyond the general statements that some degree of focus on form appears to have a facilitating effect on second language learning (though see Krashen, 1992, 1993, 1994, for a recent version of the opposite vie

21、w) and the broadly converging evidence from the studies cited above, there is no clear agreement on definitions and procedures. For instance, it is not yet clear whether focus on form is necessary to push learners toward target like second language levels, or if such a focus is not absolutely necess

22、ary, but rather part of a more efficient approach to language learning in that it can accelerate natural acquisition processes (Doughty & Williams, 1998). Indeed, even definitions of focus on form vary. It was defined narrowly by Long and Robinson (1998) as involving “an occasional shift in attentio

23、n to linguistics code featuresby the teacher and/or one or more studentstriggered by perceived problems with comprehension or production”(p23). This is generally interpreted as meaning a reactive, or unplanned, approach to drawing the learners attention to form (Spada, 1997), though a planned focus

24、is not explicitly excluded. Other researchers and practitioners have embraced a broader definition of the concept, allowing for advanced planning in attracting learner attention to form, the provision of explicit positive and negative evidence, including the use of metalinguistic explanation, and so

25、me separation of meaning-oriented and form-oriented instruction (e.g., DeKeyser, 1998; Harley, 1998; Lightbown, 1998; Swain & Lapkin, 1998). Spada (1997) used the cover term form-focussed instruction to describe “any pedagogical effort to draw the learners attention to form, either implicitly or exp

26、licitly”(p.73). Thus, the optimal degree of explicitness of attention to form has yet to be determined (see Doughty & Williams, 1998; Spada,1997, for further discussion).Learners Role in Drawing Attention to Form Terms such as form-focussed instruction and focus on form are generally based on the as

27、sumption that the degree of attention given to form is controlled by the teacher or instructional materials, albeit presumably in response to learner needs. For example, the teacher might realize that students are making systematic errors on a given form and respond accordingly, perhaps with a recas

28、t, perhaps with a brief explanation. Or, the teacher might surmise that the learners are grasping for a form or word they do not know and provide it at the appropriate juncture. In a more proactive approach, exporesure to and use of forms would be determined in advance, for instance, with the use of

29、 structured or enhanced input. If, however, the most effective instances of focus on form arise out of learner need, as Long (1996) claimed, it may be useful or even crucial to examine ways learners themselves focus on questions about language. The present study is based on the assumption that some

30、degree of focus on form facilitates the development of targetlike use and addresses one question in the attention-to-form debate: What role might learners play in fostering an increased awareness of form and accuracy? Indeed, can they play a role, or does the responsibility for orchestrating attention to form rest primarily, or even solely, with