English as a Foreign or Second Language: Selected Topics in the Areas of Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing

Copyright © 2015 by Mohammed S. Assiri.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

www.partridgepublishing.com/singapore

Contents

Preface

Views and Considerations Underlying L2 Acquisition

Is L2 learning similar to L1 acquisition?

The Critical Period Hypothesis

The Monitor Model and its Five Hypotheses

Communicative Competence

An Alternative Theory

Factors that Affect L2 Learning in Adulthood

Native language

Age

Anxiety

Motivation

Methods and Practices of EL2 Teaching

Notions of Approach, Design, and Procedure

Popular Controversies in EL2 Pedagogy

Teacher-centered versus Learner-centered Paradigms

Native English-speaking Teachers versus Non-native English-speaking Teachers

Teach or Not Teach Grammar in L2 Writing

Communicative Language Teaching

Schema Theory and Reading Comprehension

Error Analysis and Correction

The Debate on Whether or Not Grammar Should Be Taught

Teaching English for Specific Purposes

Key Aspects of a Post-method Pedagogy

Using Read-aloud Technique with Child Learners (moviemaking)

Methods and Beginning EL2 Learners

Teaching Pronunciation to High-level EL2 Learners

Teaching Simple Past versus Present Perfect Tenses

Contrastive Rhetoric and Teaching Advanced Writing

Use of Media in EL2 Classrooms

An observation of a Composition Class

EL2 Learning Skills and Strategies

BICS versus CALP

Language Learning and Use Strategies

Strategies for Reading Comprehension

Strategies for Listening Comprehension

Strategies on Language Tests

EL2 Testing and Assessment

Key Terms

Testing Speaking Skills using Authentic Materials

Assessing the Four Skills at Upper Proficiency Levels

Listening

Speaking

Reading

Writing

Language Proficiency and Strategy Use on Reading Tasks

Test-taking Strategy Use on Reading Comprehension Tests

Strategy Use and Test Format

Strategy Use and Proficiency Level

Strategy Use and Test Performance

Strategy Use and Test Validation

Training of Test-taking Strategy Use on Reading Tasks

Formats of Oral Assessment

Student-student Interactions as a Form of Oral Assessment

Personal Views of EL2 Teaching, Learning, and Testing

Philosophy of Language Teaching and Learning

Bringing Behaviorism and Nativism Together

Paradigm Shift from Empiricism to Rationalism

Response to Scholarly Views on the Principle Weaknesses of SLA Research

Grammatical Competence as Part of Communicative Competence

Native Speakers’ Attitudes to Non-native Speakers’ Speech

Use of Teaching Aids in Pre-reading/-listening Activities and Comprehension

Applying Designs of Listening Lessons to Reading Lessons

Computer-assisted versus Computer-based Language Learning

An Interview with an ESL Learner

TESOL Quarterly as a Journal of Second Language Research and Practice

References

List of Figures

Figure 1: Stages of L2 Acquisition in the Monitor Model

Figure 2: Requirements of a post-method condition

Figure 3: Pronunciation and L2 teaching

To my parents, my wife Fatimah, and my three sons Abdullah, Shuaib, and Alwaleed.

Preface

T he fields of English language learning, teaching, and testing have been evolving over decades of practice and research. Specialists in these areas have gained insights from their practical experiences about how to advance their practices and dealings with the various aspects of their professions. Like the other areas in physical and social sciences, research in the fields of English language teaching, learning, and testing has continued to inform the decisions as to the adequacy of applying certain procedures or techniques in actual practice.

A vast amount of theory and research has been injected into the fields of English language teaching, learning, and testing, which goes so much far beyond the scope of a single book. Hence, this book offers a brief review of the theoretical views and empirical findings that have shaped our understanding of salient facets of English language teaching, learning, and testing. Besides its genuine goal of informing the reader of the current state of the literature on these areas, this book communicates my personal views in regard to certain issues. The review here assumes background knowledge of the terminology that is commonly used in the field of applied linguistics. Wherever it shows in this book, EL2 refers to English as an L2, intended to refrain from any specifics that arise from the distinction between EFL and ESL (i.e., English as a foreign language and English as a second language).

The book is divided into five chapters that range in their foci from theory to practice in the fields of English language learning, teaching, and testing. Chapter one presents the most influential theoretical perspectives that have sought to account for the processes involved in second language acquisition and the roles of the so many variables that affect how a learner acquires a second language. A unique element of this chapter is a whole section that offers a framework for an alternative theory by Michel Long, an often-overlooked vision. The second chapter discusses several methods and practices commonly used in EL2 teaching. It illustrates with specific examples how certain language skills can be taught at specific levels, including teaching an interpersonal communication strategy to novice learners. Chapter three highlights the differences between Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (or BICS vs. CALP) as well as the various categories of language learning and use strategies. In the fourth chapter, the presentation centers on EL2 testing and assessment. It provides the reader with illustrations of how the four language skills (namely listening, speaking, reading, and writing) can be tested at two upper levels of proficiency (i.e., intermediate and advanced). Chapter five is wholly devoted to my personal views on EL2 learning, teaching, and testing. Such views have had their inspiration and support from my experiences both as a learner and as a teacher.

Embedded in the content of this book are views of a number of my former university instructors, colleagues, and friends, as expressed in meetings and seminars, over the years. I acknowledge their constructive ideas and opinions that have been of special import in informing the presentation and discussion all through this publication.

Chapter 1

Views and Considerations Underlying L2 Acquisition

By RajnitsEdit (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

133372.png … Is L2 Learning Similar to L1 Acquisition?

133372.png … The Critical Period Hypothesis

133372.png … The Monitor Model and Its Five Hypotheses

133372.png … Communicative Competence

133372.png … An Alternative Theory

133372.png … Factors that Affect L2 Learning in Adulthood

♦ Native Language

♦ Age

♦ Anxiety

♦ Motivation

Is L2 learning similar to L1 acquisition?

T he fact that L2 learning among adults is qualitatively different from L1 learning is evident across various language learning contexts and explainable in terms of a number of factors. However, there are several aspects that characterize both adult L2 learning and child L1 learning: First, both L2 and L1 develop in similar predictable stages e.g., the order of acquisition of morphemes (Devillers & Devillers, 1973; Dulay & Burt, 1974), negative and interrogative forms (Ellis, 1986). Second, both L2 and L1 spoken languages show shorter utterances, high-frequency vocabulary, and frequent use of gestures (Richard-Amato, 1987). Third, both L2 and L1 are constructed from prior conceptual knowledge. Fourth, both L2 and L1 learner groups go through a silent period before being able to produce meaningful utterances (Asher, 1972). Fifth, both L2 and L1 learning processes have developmental errors, use cognitive strategies, and require practice and comprehensible input.

In contrast, there are several aspects that set adult L2 learning and child L1 learning apart. Besides the fact that L1 is acquired subconsciously in natural settings, whereas L2 is acquired or learned consciously in natural or artificial (classroom) settings, the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis (Bley-Vroman, 1989, Schachter, 1988) claims that learning of an L1 is different from learning of an L2 in a number of ways:

1) L1 learners have the mental facility to acquire any language whereas adult L2 learners do not (e.g., access to universal grammar).

2) L1 learners and adult L2 learners vary in the degree of language attainment since L1 learners have access to universal grammar that adults do not.

3) L1 learners can reach a level of complete and complex knowledge of their L1 that adult L2 learners cannot (Schachter, 1988).

4) L1 learners are endowed with a domain-specific module that guarantees them success that adult L2 learners lack (Bley-Vroman, 1989).

5) Adult L2 learners may reach a plateau (i.e., cease to improve), whereas L1 learners do not.

6) L1 learners can use their L1 grammar more intuitively than adult L2 learners can with respect to L2 grammar.

7) L1 learning does not require formal instruction or lessons, whereas adult L2 learning calls for formal classes especially in non-L2 contexts.

8) L1 learning is not influenced by factors such as personality, motivation, attitude, and aptitude as is adult L2 acquisition.

9) The differences between L1 learning and adult L2 learning manifests itself in different aspects that include internal (cognitive state of adults and children), linguistic (caused by a change in the language faculty), and qualitative (affected by availability of the domain-specific acquisition system).

10) Maturational constraints, including neurological (effect of the critical period) and affective (much of the input for adults is filtered out depending on levels of motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety. (Krashen, 1982; MacIntyre & Charos, 1996).

11) Affective constraints including negative attitudes or beliefs about L2 or its culture or ego boundaries and low or lack of motivation (Gardner and Lambert, 1972).

12) Linguistic constraints, including L1 interference (adult L2 learners transfer patterns from their L1 that lead to an L2 non-target-like usage) and L2 avoidance (adult L2 learners avoid using L2 patterns that are not part of their L1).

L1 transfer that he claims can be positive facilitating L2 learning, negative interfering with L2 learning, or takes the form of avoidance. Lado (1957) claims the positive L1 transfer (facilitation) occurs when the learner transfers patterns or forms of his or her L1 that can help him or her learn L2, whereas the negative L1 transfer occurs when such transferred patterns or forms interfere with L2 learning (interference).

Nevertheless, there are differences between child L1 learning and adult L2 learning that favor the latter to the former: 1) Adult L2 learners can benefit from L1 positive transfer (facilitation). 2) Adult L2 learners can make use of appropriate learning styles and strategies. 3) Adult L2 learners have more background knowledge of the world. 4) Adult L2 learners have more control of L2 input (e.g., ask for repetition, negotiate meaning, and change the topic). Therefore, when comparing L1 acquisition and L2 learning, we usually compare/contrast L1 child acquisition and L2 adult learning. Although there are some similarities between L1 child acquisition and L2 adult learning (Ervin-Tripp, 1974; Ellis, 1986), the important differences must be taken into account.

L1 and L2 learners develop language in similar, predictable stages. In reference to Krashen’s (1973) Natural Order Hypothesis. Bailey, Madden, and Krashen (1973) found that adults and children followed similar order in learning a second language; Dulay and Burt (1974) found a universal order in L2 morpheme acquisition, and R. Brown (1973) and Devillers and Devillers (1973) reached the same conclusion in regard to L1 morpheme acquisition; and Cazden (1972) and Ellis (1986) noticed that L1 order of the acquisition of the transitional forms of negative and interrogatives is similar to the case of L2 acquisition. Also, Henzl (1973), Long (1981), and Richard-Amato (1987) discovered shared aspects in L1 and L2 speech: shorter sentences, high-frequency vocabulary, indirect correction, frequent gesture, and lack of over attention to formL1 and L2 constructed from prior conceptual knowledge. L1 acquirers benefit from a silent period before they begin to produce meaningful utterances (Krashen, 1973); however, Asher (1972), Gary (1975), and Postovsky (1977) also observed that if L2 speakers experience the silent period they also benefit from it.

According to Krashen’s (1973) Acquisition-learning Hypothesis, children are not taught to learn a language. They acquire a language naturally and subconsciously whereas adults have two different ways: to acquire and to learn. The former is similar to L1 child acquisition and the second is through learning in formal classes. The two forms of adult L2 development are not overlapped. Schachter (1988) upholds the view that children are capable of learning any language. Given exposure to language (or linguistic input), a child will learn it. No language is easier to learn than another, and all languages are equally learnable by all children. This is, however, not the case for adult L2 learners. The Fundamental Difference Hypothesis argues that what happens in child language acquisition is not the same as what happens in adult second language acquisition. This hypothesis starts from the belief that with regard to language learning, children and adults are different in many important ways. For instance, the ultimate attainment reached by children and adults differs. In normal situations, children always reach a state of complex knowledge of their native language. In second language acquisition, at least in adult second language acquisition, not only is complete knowledge not always attained, it is rarely, if ever, attained.

Fossilization representing a non-target language stage is frequently observed with L2 adult learners. Thus, the major difference between childhood L1 acquisition and adulthood L2 acquisition is the lack of general guaranteed success (Bley-Vroman, 1989, p.43) on the part of L2 learners. All children achieve perfect mastery of L1; however, the same cannot be stated about L2 learners. In spite of years of classroom instruction, exposure to L2 input, and motivation, many adults L2 learners are not able to acquire the target language. If universal grammar were operative during the process of L2 learning, such a lack of guaranteed success would not occur. This lack supports Bley-Vroman’s (1989) claim that L2 acquisition is guided by general human cognitive learning capacities rather than by the same domain-specific module which guarantees child success in first language acquisition (p. 44). There is also substantial variation in degree of attainment, in course of learning, and in strategies of learning (Bley-Vroman, 1989, p. 45). Such a degree of variation in the ultimate attainment of the L2 further supports Bley-Vroman’s contentions that universal grammar is not available to adult L2 learners and that no domain-specific cognitive mechanisms are utilized by these learners.

Unlike children, L2 adult learners set up different goals as to their desired level of L2 mastery. For instance, some adult learners may be satisfied with a basic level of L2 proficiency that allows them to survive in the target language culture; others may wish to acquire an L2 only to be able to read in the target language. Children do not experience this type of flexibility because their goals are not under control. Adult L2 learners also differ from children acquiring an L1 in terms of fossilization. Adult learners may reach a certain plateau that cannot be surpassed no matter how hard the individual tries to overcome. Also, adult L2 learners at the very advanced level of proficiency do not exhibit the same level of intuition about grammaticality of sentences that native speakers do. Children, unlike adults, do not require formal grammar lessons to acquire native language. They simply need exposure to linguistic input. Children’s success in L1 development is not affected by such factors as personality, motivation, attitude, and aptitude, which play important roles in adult L2 acquisition.

The Fundamental Difference Hypothesis not only described differences between child and adult language acquisition, but also asserts that these differences are internal (cognitive states of adults and children), linguistic (caused by a change in the language faculty), and qualitative (the domain-specific acquisition system is not just attenuated). Long (1999) gives an account of maturational constraints that affect language acquisition process, combining neurological and affective aspects: 1) L2 learners lose some of their earlier abilities, such as speaking native-like according to the Critical Period Hypothesis which proposes that language learning needs to take place before puberty; otherwise, it will become difficult later and a foreign accent will emerge. (Lenneberg, 1967). 2) L2 learners exhibit increased inhibitions and anxiety, and are afraid of making errors (MacIntyre & Charos, 1996). 3) L2 learners may also have poor attitude and lack of motivation (Gardner & Lambert; Deci). 4) Interference may occur with structures that are different from L1 to L2 (Newmark, 1983; Lado, 1957), 5) L2 learners may try to avoid using certain structures because they are not part of their L1 repertoire (Schachter, 1974; Kleinman, 1977).

Nonetheless, because learners are usually older when acquiring an L2, they are more cognitively developed when compared to L1 learners. In fact, they have advantages in several areas: 1) L2 learners have an L1 from which they can transfer strategies and linguistics; 2) Knowledge of more than one culture gives them advanced information about expectations, discourse in general, and how to get things done with language. 3) L2 learners typically have more background knowledge of the world than their L1 counterparts; 4) L2 learners have more control over the input they receive (e.g., ask for repetition, renegotiate meaning, change the topic … etc.); 5) L2 learners can learn, comprehend, apply rules, and so tend to learn more quickly; and 6) L2 learners have their own personal variables, such as their learning styles and strategies, and motivation that may produce remarkable language learning results. Due to these considerations, older learners demonstrate much greater variation in their rate of acquisition and in their degree of ultimate proficiency than do young learners (Richard-Amato, 2003).

Because language development involves learning processes, be it L1, L2 …or L3, adult L2 learning and child L1 learning share a number of aspects some of which have empirically been confirmed. First, both L1 and L2 develop through similar stages in that some grammatical aspects have shown to be learned in the same order in both L1 and L2 learning (e.g., the rate of acquiring grammatical morphemes) (Devillers & Devillers, 1974; Dulay & Bert, 1973), and the acquisition of negatives and interrogatives (Ellis, 1991). Second, similar aspects tend to characterize both L1 and L2 speech, for example, high-frequency vocabulary and frequent use of gestures. Third, both L1 and L2 benefit from conceptual knowledge about the world (Amato-Carlos, 1986). Fourth, both L1 and L2 exhibit what is called the silent period―a period during which a child or a learner does not speak until she is ready for meaningful utterances (Asher, 1972). Finally, there are similar processes that have been observed in both L1 and L2 such as developmental errors, cognitive strategies, and need for practice and comprehensible input.

However, despite the above-mentioned similarities, there are a variety of aspects that favor child L1 learning to adult L2 learning. First, L1 is acquired subconsciously in a natural setting, whereas L2 is acquired or learned consciously in a formal or artificial setting. The majority of scholars agree that children are endowed with a mental ability or facility that enables them to acquire any language; however, adults learning an L2 lack this facility and so some of them end up with native-like speech and some do not. It is this language facility that also enables children to achieve higher level of L1 attainment than do adults learning an L2. This language facility is sometimes equated with universal grammar to which children have fuller access than that allowed for adults. Children can also achieve a high level of mastery and knowledge of their L1s that adults are unable to attain in an L2. Another advantage favoring children is that they have a domain-specific language module which promises children success in their L1 learning endeavor; such an aspect is almost lacking in the case of L2 adult learners. Children can use their L1 grammar intuitively without ever having to rely extensively on formal grammar instruction as is the case in adult L2 learners. L1 is not influenced by such factors as psychological, affective, and social as is L2.

In conclusion, it is obvious that when comparing child L1 learning to adult L2 learning, we have to consider not only the aspects that favor the first to the latter, but also the advantages that the later have over the former. This is important in order to keep the adult L2 learners motivated and encouraged in such a tremendous undertaking as language acquisition.

The Critical Period Hypothesis

The twofold aim of this section is to survey the literature on the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) and highlight its implications in second language acquisition (SLA). In order to achieve this purpose, this section