SLA?

Report
Organization and implementation of FLT on
the basis of instructed SLA research and
L2 teaching methodology
Teresa Cadierno
Institute of Language and Communication
Second Language Research Center (SELC)
University of Southern Denmark
National konference om fremmedsprog på de videregående uddannelser
April 30th, 2012
Within language
Vertical and horizontal collaboration
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Tertiary
Tertiary
Tertiary
Within and across languages
Research-based foreign language teaching (FLT)
• Expertise in DK – institutions, research areas, language(s), learner types?
• Knowledge exchange / dissemination:
SLA Researchers
Current teachers
Primary
Secondary
Future teachers
Tertiary
UC
University
• SLA/FLT research prioritized
• Collaborative research between SLA reseachers and teaching practitioners
What do we need to make it work?
A common view of language?
A common view of (L2) language learning?
Willingness to accomodate what we know about (instructed) SLA
and newest trends within FLT in own teaching practices?
Views on language and language learning
and FLT
Structuralist view
of language
Behavioristic view
of language
learning
Functionalist view
of language
Interactionist view
of language
learning
”Traditional”teaching
methods: e.g.,
Audiolingual method
Communicative language
teaching
Can we accomodate what we know
about (instructed) SLA?
• Input-dependent, tied to meaning and interaction, usage-based
• Can happen explicitly (with awareness), implicitly (without awareness) and
incidentally (without intention, while doing something else)
• L2 development is not linear
• Transitional stages in the acquisition of grammatical structures
• Variable in its outcome  role of individual factors: age of acquisition,
personality, motivation, aptitude, learning strategies
• Constraints on the effects of (grammar) instruction on SLA:
•
•
Declarative vs. procedural knowledge  explicit knowledge about linguistic form ≠
appropriate use in context
Mediating factors: type of instruction, type of L2 feature and type of learner
Are we willing to incorporate principles
from newest trends in FLT?
• CLT ( action/task-based instruction, CLIL) --> Common principles:
•
Aim: develop learners’ communicative competence / intercultural skills
•
Exposure to authentic L2  use of L2 in class, use of technology (e.g.,
tandem-learning, tellecollaboration, Web 2.0 tools), partner schools …
•
Engage learners in activities with meaningful language use in various
domains  learning purpose (LSP)
•
Form and meaning are inseparable  “Focus on form” approach
Grammar teaching in the context of meaningful communication
Conclusions
•
Regarding organization and implementation:
•
•
•
SLA/FLT researchers: How best to accomodate what we know about
(instructed) SLA and newest trends in FLT to different L2 learner populations:
•
•
•
•
Create systematic structures for knowledge exchange and dissemination
Focus on research into SLA / FLT; collaboration between researchers and teaching
practitioners
Different languages
Different ages
Different educational profiles
L2 teaching practioners:
•
•
Open-minded to insights from research into (instructed) SLA?
Willing to change views on language, language acquisition and teaching practices?

similar documents