How Children Learn a Second
Language
Author:
Linda Halgunseth
Source:
Diversity in Education
Content Contributor
In the 1970s, my early
childhood provider
advised my immigrant
Mexican American mother
to stop speaking Spanish
with me at home. They
were concerned because,
as a 2 year old, I was
not as verbal as my
peers. Worried that she
was causing me harm, my
mother immediately
stopped speaking to me
in Spanish.
I was not alone in this
experience. Back then,
it was a common
assumption that exposure
to more than one
language would confuse
young children and could
lead to developmental
delays (Espinosa, 2008;
Tabors, 2008). Research
on dual language
development has grown
substantially since the
1970s. Information on
the dual language
process and the numerous
benefits for young
children is now more
readily available. My
experience and the
experience of many other
children of immigrants
highlight the importance
of providing parents
with up-to-date, high
quality research so they
can make the best
decisions for their
children.
How Do Children Learn a
Second Language?
In general, there are
two ways in which
children may learn a
second language:
simultaneously or
sequentially (McLaughlin
et al., 1995; Tabors,
2008).
Simultaneous Second Language
Learning
Simultaneous learners
include children under
the age of 3 who are
exposed to two languages
at the same time. These
children may include
those who are exposed to
one language by parents
at home and another
language by providers in
their early childhood
program. Simultaneous
learners are also young
children whose parents
each speak separate
languages to them at
home (e.g., mother
speaks Spanish to child,
father speaks Chinese to
child).
Before 6 months of age,
simultaneous learners
learn both languages at
similar rates and do not
prefer one language over
the other. This is
because they build
separate but equally
strong language systems
in their brains for each
of the languages they
hear. These separate
systems allow children
to learn more than one
language without
becoming confused. In
fact, the pathways
infants develop in their
brains for each of the
languages they hear are
similar to the single
pathway developed by
children who are only
exposed to English.
At 6 months, children
begin to notice
differences between
languages and may begin
to prefer the language
they hear more. This
means that parents must
be careful to provide
similar amounts of
exposure to both
languages; otherwise,
children may begin to
drop vocabulary of the
language to which they
are less exposed
(Espinosa, 2008; Kuhl,
2004; Kuhl et al., 2006;
Tabors, 2008).
Cognitive Benefits of
Simultaneous Language
Development
There are many cognitive
benefits for young
children who are
simultaneously exposed
to more than one
language. For example,
they have greater neural
activity and denser
tissue in the areas of
the brain related to
memory, attention, and
language than
monolingual learners.
These indicators are
associated with
long-term positive
cognitive outcomes for
children (Bialystok
2001, Mechelli et al.,
2004; Kovelman, Baker, &
Petitto, 2006).
Sequential Second Language
Learners
Sequential learners
include children who
have become familiar
with one language, but
are then introduced or
required to learn a
second language. The
classic example of
sequential learning is
when a non-English
speaking child enters an
English-dominant
classroom.
Unlike simultaneous
language learning,
sequential learning of
languages can occur at
any age and can be
influenced by factors
like the child’s
temperament or
motivation.
The Four Stages of
Sequential Second Language
Learning
Stage I: Home
Language Use
For the first few days,
children may persist in
using their first or
native language even if
others do not understand
them.
Stage II: Silent
Period
After children realize
their first language is
not working, they enter
a silent period in which
they barely speak and
rely heavily on
nonverbal means to
communicate with others.
The younger the child,
the longer the silent
period may last.
Stage III: Telegraphic &
Formulaic Speech
Children will start to
speak in the new or
second language. In this
stage, they will only
speak in small
utterances (e.g., Me
Down) or by repeating
the words of others.
Stage IV:
Productive Language
Children are now ready
to express their own
thoughts and construct
their own sentences. In
the beginning, these
sentences may be very
basic or grammatically
incorrect; however, this
improves over time.
Parents of dual language
learners should not be
alarmed if their
children exhibit any of
the above behaviors
(e.g., silent period).
These behaviors are
common for children who
are learning a second
language. Also, research
has found that children
who begin to learn a
second language before
the age of 6 or 7 are
more able to speak the
new language like a
native speaker than
children who didn’t
start until after ages 6
or 7 (Bongaerts, 2005).
The Multiple Benefits of
Learning More Than One
Language
Research strongly
supports the benefits of
bilingualism in
language, literacy,
social, and cognitive
development. For
example, bilingual
children have performed
better than monolingual
speakers on measures of
analytical ability,
concept formation,
cognitive flexibility,
and metalinguistic
skills (Espinosa, 2008;
Hakuta, Ferdman, & Diaz,
1987; Roseberry-McKibbin
& Brice, 2005).
While some teachers and
parents believe that in
order to succeed
academically in the U.S.
all children must learn
English as quickly as
possible, research
demonstrates just the
opposite. In fact,
evidence suggests that
children who continue to
learn academic concepts
in their native language
while gradually learning
English outperform
academically and
socially children who
are immersed in
English-only programs
(Chang et al., 2007;
Restrepo & Kruth,
2003).
How Can Parents Support Dual
Language Development?
-
Ensure that the
environments in which
you introduce languages
to children are
nurturing—whether it is
a school, early
childhood program, or
home (Tabors, 2008).
-
Choose an education
program that is
accepting and supportive
of dual language
learning.
-
If your child is
learning a second
language sequentially,
select a program that
allows children to
continue to learn
academic concepts in
their native language as
they gradually learn the
second or new language (Copple
& Bredekamp, 2008).
-
Volunteer your time
and/or skills in your
child’s classroom. This
would allow dual
language learners the
opportunity to
communicate in their
home language during the
day.
-
Teach vocabulary or
nursery rhymes in your
native language to the
class or teachers,
extending opportunities
to practice a second
language to all children
(Espinosa, 2008).
-
Be prepared for the
possibility that your
children will express
disinterest in their
native language. Support
your children’s interest
in maintaining their
native language by
talking to them about
the importance of dual
language development.
-
Create fun
family-oriented
activities that will
provide opportunities to
converse in the home
language, such as
reading books, singing
songs, or playing games
together.
-
Bring children to
activities in which the
demand to speak the home
language is high, such
as in extended family or
community gatherings
(Tabors, 2008).
Parents play a crucial
role in supporting their
children’s dual language
development. It is a
misconception that
children are just
“natural” learners who
effortlessly store and
maintain knowledge of
languages. Dual language
development requires the
conscious effort,
reinforcement, and
support of parents,
teachers, and family
members (Tabors, 2008).
Linda C. Halgunseth,
Ph.D. is the
Coordinator of
the Office of Applied
Research at the National
Association for the
Education of Young
Children. The goal of
the Office is to
bridge research,
practice, and policy in
the area of early
childhood education.
References
Bialystok, E. (2001)
Bilingualism in
development: Language,
literacy, and cognition.
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Bongaerts, T. (2005).
Introduction: Ultimate
attainment and the
critical period
hypothesis for second
language acquisition.
Internaltional
Review of Applied
Linguistics inLanguage
Teaching, 43(4),
259-267.
Chang, F., Crawford, G.,
Early, D., Bryant, D.,
Howes, C., Burchinal,
M., Barbarin, O.,
Clifford, R., & Pianta,
R. (2007).
Spanish-speaking
children’s social and
language development in
pre-kindergarten
classrooms. Early
Education and
Development, 18(2),
243-269.
Copple, C., & Bredekamp,
S. (2008).
Developmentally
appropriate practice in
early childhood
programs: Serving
children from birth
through age 8.
National Association for
the Education of Young
Children: Washington,
DC.
Espinosa, L. (2008).
Challenging common myths
about young English
language learners.
Foundation for Child
Development Policy
Brief, Advancing PK-3.
Hakuta, K., Ferdman, B.,
& Diaz, R. (1987).
Bilingualism and
cognitive development:
Three perspectives. In
Advances in applied
psycholinguistics:
Reading, writing, and
language learning. Vol
2. ed. S.
Rosenberg, 284-319. New
York: Cambridge
University Press.
Kovelman, I., Baker, S.,
& Petitto, L.A. (2006).
Bilingual and
monolingual brains
compared: An fMRI study
of a “neurological
signature” of
bilingualism. Paper
presented at the annual
meeting of the Society
for Neuroscience,
October 14-18, Atlanta,
GA.
Kuhl, P. K., Stevens,
E., Hayashi, A., Deguchi,
T., Kiritani, S., &
Iverson, P. (2006).
Infants show a
facilitation effect for
native language phonetic
perception between 6 and
12 months.
Developmental Science, 9
(2), pp. F13-F21.
Kuhl, P. K. (2004).
Early language
acquisition: Cracking
the speech code.
Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 5
(11), 831-843.
McLaughlin, B.,
Blanchard, A., & Osanai,
Y. (1995). Assessing
language development in
bilingual preschool
children. NCELA
Program Information
Guide Series, 22.
Retrieved January 22,
2009, from
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/pigs/pig2.htm.
Mechelli, A., Crinion,
J.T., Noppeney, U.,
O’Doherty, J., Ashburner,
J., Frackowiak, R., &
Price, C.J. (2004).
Structural plasticity in
the bilingual brain.
Nature, 431: 757.
Restrepo, M.A., & Kruth,
K. (2003). Grammatical
characteristics of a
bilingual student with
specific language
impairment.
Communications Disorders
Quarterly, 21,
66-76.
Roseberry-McKibbin, C.,
& Brice, A. (2005).
What’s “normal,” what’s
not: Acquiring English
as a second language.
American
Speech-Language-Hearing
Association. Online:
www.readingrockets.org/article/5126.
Tabors, P. (2008).
One child, two
languages: A guide for
early childhood
educators of children
learning English as a
second language. 2d
ed. Baltimore: Paul H.
Brookes.
A Summary of Stephen Krashen's
"Principles and Practice in Second Language
Acquisition"
By Reid Wilson
First appeared: Language Learning #9
and 10
Bibliographic information:
Krashen, Stephen D. 1981. Principles and
Practice in Second Language Acquisition. English
Language Teaching series. London: Prentice-Hall
International (UK) Ltd. 202 pages.
Quote that captures the essense of the book:
"What
theory implies, quite simply, is that language
acquisition, first or second, occurs when
comprehension of real messages occurs, and when
the acquirer is not 'on the defensive'...
Language acquisition does not require extensive
use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not
require tedious drill. It does not occur
overnight, however. Real language acquisition
develops slowly, and speaking skills emerge
significantly later than listening skills, even
when conditions are perfect. The best methods
are therefore those that supply 'comprehensible
input' in low anxiety situations, containing
messages that students really want to hear.
These methods do not force early production in
the second language, but allow students to
produce when they are 'ready', recognizing that
improvement comes from supplying communicative
and comprehensible input, and not from forcing
and correcting production." (6-7)
Summary of Part I. Introduction: The
Relationship of Theory to Practice
In deciding how to develop language teaching
methods and materials, one can take three
approaches: make use of second language
acquisition theory, make use of applied
linguistics research, and make use of ideas and
intuition from experience. These approaches
should in fact support each other and lead to
common conclusions. This book incorporates all
three approaches, with a hope of reintroducing
theory to language teachers. While "most current
theory may still not be the final word on second
language acquisition," it is hoped that teachers
will use the ideas in this book as another
source alongside of their classroom and
language-learning experiences.
Summary of Part II. Second Language
Acquisition Theory
There are five key hypotheses about second
language acquisition:
1. THE ACQUISITION-LEARNING DISCTINCTION
Adults have two different ways to develop
compentence in a language: language acquisition
and language learning.
Language acquisition is a subconscious process
not unlike the way a child learns language.
Language acquirers are not consciously aware of
the grammatical rules of the language, but
rather develop a "feel" for correctness. "In
non-technical language, acquisition is
'picking-up' a language."
Language learning, on the other hand, refers
to the "concious knowledge of a second language,
knowing the rules, being aware of them, and
being able to talk about them." Thus language
learning can be compared to learning about a
language.
The acquistion-learning disctinction
hypothesis claims that adults do not lose the
ability to acquire languages the way that
children do. Just as research shows that error
correction has little effect on children
learning a first language, so too error
correction has little affect on language
acquisition.
2.
THE NATURAL ORDER HYPOTHESIS
The
natural order hypothesis states that "the
acquisition of grammatical structures proceeds
in a predictable order." For a given language,
some grammatical structures tend to be acquired
early, others late, regardless of the first
language of a speaker. However, as will be
discussed later on in the book, this does not
mean that grammar should be taught in this
natural order of acquisition.
3. THE MONITOR HYPOTHESIS
The language that one has subconsciously
acquired "initiates our utterances in a second
language and is responsible for our fluency,"
whereas the language that we have consciously
learned acts as an editor in situations where
the learner has enough time to edit, is focused
on form, and knows the rule, such as on a
grammar test in a language classroom or when
carefully writing a composition. This conscious
editor is called the Monitor.
Different individuals use their monitors in
different ways, with different degrees of
success. Monitor Over-users try to always use
their Monitor, and end up "so concerned with
correctness that they cannot speak with any real
fluency." Monitor Under-users either have not
consciously learned or choose to not use their
conscious knowledge of the language. Although
error correction by others has little influence
on them, they can often correct themelves based
on a "feel" for correctness.
Teachers should aim to produce Optimal
Monitor users, who "use the Monitor when it is
appropriate and when it does not interfere with
communication." They do not use their conscious
knowledge of grammar in normal conversation, but
will use it in writing and planned speech.
"Optimal Monitor users can therefore use their
learned competence as a supplement to their
acquired competence."
4.
THE INPUT HYPOTHESIS
The
input hypothesis answers the question of how a
language acquirer develops comptency over time.
It states that a language acquirer who is at
"level i" must receive comprehensible input that
is at "level i+1." "We acquire, in other words,
only when we understand language that contains
structure that is 'a little beyond' where we are
now." This understanding is possible due to
using the context of the language we are hearing
or reading and our knowledge of the world.
However, instead of aiming to receive input
that is exactly at our i+1 level, or instead of
having a teacher aim to teach us grammatical
structure that is at our i+1 level, we should
instead just focus on communication that is
understandable. If we do this, and if we get
enough of that kind of input, then we will in
effect be receiving and thus acquiring out i+1.
"Prduction ability emerges. It is not taught
directly."
Evidences for the input hypothesis can be found
in the effectiveness of caretaker speech from an
adult to a child, of teacher-talk from a teacher
to a language student, and of foreigner-talk
from a sympathetic conversation partner to a
language learner/acquirer.
One result of this hypothesis is that language
students should be given a initial "silent
period" where they are building up acquired
competence in a language before they begin to
produce it.
Whenever language acquirers try to produce
language beyond what they have acquired, they
tend to use the rules they have already acquired
from their first language, thus allowing them to
communicate but not really progress in the
second language.
5. THE AFFECTIVE FILTER HYPOTHESIS
Motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety all
affect language acquisition, in effect raising
or lowering the "stickiness" or "penetration" of
any comprehensible input that is received.
These
five hypotheses of second language acquisition
can be summarized: "1. Acquisition is more
important than learning. 2. In order to acquire,
two conditions are necessaary. The first is
comprehensible (or even better, comprehended)
input containing i+1, structures a bit beyond
the acquier's current level, and second, a low
or weak affective filter to allow the input
'in'."
In
view of these findings, question is raised: does
classroom language teaching help? Classroom
teaching helps when it provides the necessary
comprehensible input to those students who are
not at a level yet which allows them to receive
comprehensible input from "the real world" or
who do not have access to "real world" language
speakers. It can also help when it provides
students communication tools to make better use
of the outside world, and it can provide
beneficial conscious learning for optimal
Monitor users.
Various research studies have been done
comparing the amount of language competance and
the amount of exposure to the language either in
classroom-years or length of residence, the age
of the language acquirer, and the acculturation
of the language acquirer. The results of these
studies are consistent with the above
acquisition hypotheses: the more comprehensible
input one receives in low-stress situations, the
more language competance that one will have.
Summary of Part III: Providing Input for
Acquisition
Once it is realized that receiving
comprehensible input is central to acquiring a
second language, questions are immediately
raised concerning the nature and sources of this
type of input and the role of the second
language classroom.
To what extent is the second language
classroom beneficial? Classrooms help when they
provide the comprehensible input that the
acquirer is going to receive. If acquirers have
access to real world input, and if their current
ability allows them understand at least some of
it, then the classroom is not nearly as
significant. An informal, immersion environment
has the opportunity to provide tons of input;
however, that input is not always comprehensible
to a beginner, and often for an adult beginner
the classroom is better than the real world in
providing comprehensible input.
However, for the intermediate level student
and above, living and interacting in an
environment in which the language is spoken will
likely prove to be better for the student,
especially considering the fact that a language
classroom will not be able to reflect the broad
range of language use that the real world
provides. The classroom's goal is to prepare
students to be able to understand the language
used outside the classroom.
What role does speaking (output) play in
second language acquisition? It has no direct
role, since language is acquired by
comprehensible input, and in fact someone who is
not able to speak for physical reasons can still
acquire the full ability to understand language.
However, speaking does indirectly help in two
ways: 1) speaking produces conversation, which
produces comprehensible input, and 2) your
speaking allows native speakers to judge what
level you are at and then adjust their speak
downward to you, providing you input that is
more easily understood.
What kind of input is optimal for
acquisition? The best input is comprehensible,
which sometimes means that it needs to be slower
and more carefully articulated, using common
vocabulary, less slang, and shorter sentences.
Optimal input is interesting and/or relevant and
allows the acquirer to focus on the meaning of
the message and not on the form of the message.
Optimal input is not grammatically sequenced,
and a grammatical syllabus should not be used in
the language classroom, in part because all
students will not be at exactly the same level
and because each structure is often only
introduced once before moving on to something
else. Finally, optimal input must focus on
quantity, although most language teachers have
to date seriously underestimated how much
comprehensible input is actually needed for an
acquirer to progress.
In addition to receiving the right kind of
input, students should have their affective
filter kept low, meaning that classroom stress
should be minimized and students "should not be
put on the defensive." One result of this is
that student's errors should not be corrected.
Students should be taught how to gain more input
from the outside world, including helping them
acquire conversational competence, the means of
managing conversation.
Summary of Part IV: The Role of Grammar, or
Putting Grammar in its Place
"As should be apparent by now, the position
taken in this book is that second language
teaching should focus on encouraging
acquisition, on providing input that stimulates
the subconscious language acquisition potential
all normal human beings have. This does not mean
to say, however, that there is no room at all
for conscious learning. Conscious learning does
have a role, but it is no longer the lead actor
in the play."
For starters, we must realize that learning
does not turn into acquisition. While the idea
that we first learn a grammar rule and then use
it so much that it becomes internalized is
common and may seem obvious to many, it is not
supported by theory nor by the observation of
second language acquirers, who often correctly
use "rules" they have never been taught and
don't even remember accurately the rules they
have learned.
However, there is a place for grammar, or the
conscious learning of the rules of a language.
Its major role is in the use of the Monitor,
which allows Monitor users to produce more
correct output when they are given the right
conditions to actually use their Monitor, as in
some planned speech and writing. However, for
correct Monitor use the users must know the
rules they are applying, and these would need to
be rules that are easy to remember and apply--a
very small subset of all of the grammatical
rules of a language. It is not worthwhile for
language acquisition to teach difficult rules
which are hard to learn, harder to remember, and
sometimes almost impossible to correctly apply.
For many years there was controversy in
language-teaching literature on whether grammar
should be deductively or inductively taught.
However, as both of these methods involve
language learning and not language acquisition,
this issue should not be central for language
teaching practice. There has similarly been
controversy as to whether or not errors should
be corrected in language learners' speech.
Second language acquisition theory suggests that
errors in ordinary conversation and Monitor-free
situations should not be corrected, and that
errors should only be corrected when they apply
to easy to apply and understand grammatical
rules in situations where known Monitor-users
are able to use their Monitor.
There is a second way in which the teaching
of grammar in a classroom can be helpful, and
that is when the students are interested in
learning about the language they are acquiring.
This language appreciation, or linguistics,
however, will only result in language
acquisition when grammar is taught in the
language that is being acquired, and it is
actually the comprehensible input that the
students are receiving, not the content of the
lecture itself, that is aiding acquisition.
"This is a subtle point. In effect, both
teachers and students are deceiving themselves.
They believe that it is the subject matter
itself, the study of grammar, that is
responsible for the students' progress in second
language acquisition, but in reality their
progress is coming from the medium and not the
message. And subject matter that held their
interest would do just as well, so far as second
language acquisition is concerned, as long as it
required extensive use of the target language."
And perhaps many students would be more
interested in a different subject matter and
would thus acquire more than they would in such
a grammar-based classroom.
Summary of Part V: Approaches to Language
Teaching
Popular language teaching methods today
include grammar-translation, audio-lingualism,
cognitive-code, the direct method, the natural
approach, total physical response, and
Suggestopedia. How do these methods fare when
they are evaluated by Second Language
Acquisition theory? Each method will be
evaluated using the following criteria:
Requirements for optimal input --
comprehensible -- interesting/relevant -- not
grammatically sequenced -- quantity -- low
filter level -- provides tools for
conversational management
Learning restricted to: -- Rules that are
easily learned and applied, and not acquired yet
-- Monitor users -- Situations when the learner
has adequate time and a focus on form
1. GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION
Grammar-translation usually consists of an
explanation of a grammatical rule, with some
example sentences, a bilingual vocabulary list,
a reading section exemplifying the grammatical
rule and incorporating the vocabulary, and
exercises to practice using the grammar and
vocabulary. Most of these classes are taught in
the student's first language. The
grammar-translation method provides little
opportunity for acquisition and relies too
heavily on learning.
2. AUDIO-LINGUALISM
An audio-lingual lesson usually begins with a
dialogue which contains the grammar and
vocabulary to be focused on in the lesson. The
students mimic the dialogue and eventually
memorize it. After the dialogue comes pattern
drills, in which the grammatical structure
introduced in the dialogue is reinforced, with
these drills focusing on simple repetition,
substitution, transformation, and translation.
While the audio-lingual method provides
opportunity for some acquisition to occur, it
cannot measure up to newer methods which provide
much more comprehensible input in a low-filter
environment.
3. COGNITIVE-CODE
Cognitive-code is similar to
grammar-translation except that it focuses on
developing all four skills of language:
speaking, listening, reading, and writing.
Communicative competence is focused upon. Since
the cognitive-code approach provides more
comprehensible input than grammar-translation
does, it should produce more acquisition, but
other newer methods provide even more and have
better results. Learning is overemphasized with
this method.
4. THE DIRECT METHOD
Several approaches have been called the
"direct method"; the approach evaluated here
involves all discussion in the target language.
The teacher uses examples of language in order
to inductively teach grammar; students are to
try to guess the rules of the language by the
examples provided. Teachers interact with the
students a lot, asking them questions about
relevant topics and trying to use the
grammatical structure of the day in the
conversation. Accuracy is sought and errors are
corrected. This method provides more
comprehensible input than the methods discussed
so far, but it still focuses too much on
grammar.
5. THE NATURAL APPROACH
In the Natural Approach the teacher speaks
only the target language and class time is
committed to providing input for acquisition.
Students may use either the language being
taught or their first language. Errors in speech
are not corrected, however homework may include
grammar exercises that will be corrected. Goals
for the class emphasize the students being able
use the language "to talk about ideas, perform
tasks, and solve problems." This approach aims
to fulfill the requirements for learning and
acquisition, and does a great job in doing it.
Its main weakness is that all classroom teaching
is to some degree limited in its ability to be
interesting and relevant to all students.
6. TOTAL PHYSICAL RESPONSE
Total Physical Response, or TPR, involves the
students listening and responding to commands
given by the teacher such as "sit down" and
"walk," with the complexity of the commands
growing over time as the class acquires more
language. Student speech is delayed, and once
students indicate a willingness to talk they
initially give commands to other students.
Theory predicts that TPR should result in
substantial language acquisition. Its content
may not be always interesting and relevant for
the students, but should produce better results
than the audio-lingual and grammar-translation
methods.
7. SUGGESTOPEDIA
Suggestopedia classes are small and
intensive, and focus on providing a very
low-stress, attractive environment (partly
involving active and passive "seances" complete
with music and meditation) in which acquisition
can occur. Some of the students' first language
is used at the beginning, but most in the target
language. The role of the teacher is very
important in creating the right atmosphere and
in acting out the dialogues that form the core
of the content. Suggestopedia seems to provide
close to optimal input while not giving too much
emphasis to grammar.
What does applied linguistics research have
to say about these methods? Applied research has
examined the older methods of
grammar-translation, audio-lingual, and
cognitive-code much more than it has looked at
the newer methods. There seems to be only small
differences in the results of the older methods.
While much research remains to be done, Total
Physical Response and the other newer approaches
"produce significantly better results than old
approaches."
So what is better, the classroom or the real
world? "Quite simply, the role of the second or
foreign language classroom is to bring a student
to a point where he can begin to use the outside
would for further second language
acquisition.... This means we have to provide
students with enough comprehensible input to
bring their second language competence to the
point where they can begin to understand
language heard 'on the outside'.... In other
words, all second language classes are
transitional."
In the real world, conversations with
sympathetic native speakers who are willing to
help the acquirer understand are very helpful.
These native speakers engage in what is called
"foreigner talk," not very different from the
way that a parent would talk to a child.
Voluntary pleasure reading is also beneficial
for second language acquisition, especially as
the reader is free to choose reading material
that is of interest and the proper level in
order to be understood.
Taking content classes in the language that
is being acquired can also be helpful to the
more advanced learner, especially when the class
is composed of students who are all acquiring
the second language.
How does all of the above affect our views on
achievement testing? As students will gear their
studying to the type of tests they expect to
take, the kinds of language tests that are given
is very important. "Achievement tests...should
meet this requirement: preparation for the test,
or studying for the test, should obviously
encourage the student to do things that will
provide more comprehensible input and the tools
to gain even more input when the class is over."
With this in mind, general reading comprehension
tests are helpful, as would be a test that would
encourage students to participate in
conversations and employ the tools of
communicative competence.
Assuming that the conclusions in this book
are correct, many new classroom language
materials need to be developed. These materials
should focus on providing much comprehensible
input to beginning and intermediate students and
should provide them with the means to gain even
more input outside the classroom. Such materials
should only focus on grammatical rules that are
easy to learn and apply. Readers should have
much more reading material in them and much
fewer exercises and should have enough content
that students can choose which topics to read
about.
A quote from the conclusion:
"Even if the theory presented here is totally
correct, and my suggestions for application are
in fact the appropriate ones, there are some
serious problems that need to be mentioned
before concluding. These have to do with the
acceptance, by teachers and students, of
language acquisition as primary, and
comprehensible input as the means of encouraging
language acquisition. These problems are caused
by the fact that acquisition differs from
learning in two major ways: acquisition is slow
and subtle, while learning is fast and, for some
people, obvious.... I think that I have
presented a conservative view of language
acquisition theory and its applications,
conservative in the sense that it attempts to be
consistent with all empirical data that are
known to me. It is consistent with the way
thousands of people have acquired second
languages throughout history, and in many cases
acquired them very well. They acquired second
languages while they were focused on something
else, while they were gaining interesting or
needed information, or interacting with people
they liked to be with." |