~

-,ffl Ii: !!f:! l \ 0,)"\.0- ~ j.__~ - 1~') C.(¾

/ ~
L 2 .; ,(\:: ~ -' l O INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARMl fi 3

CHAPTER THIRTEEN J,Tf~£·TQ'.~THI~((:;.,~~

Instructed Second
Language Learning
How did you learn your L2-in the classroom or naturalistically? What do
you th ink are the differences between the two learning situations? What are
the advantages and disadvantages of each?
@
.'.2
' 13.2 CLASSROOM LANGUAGE

t Spada and Llghtbown (2009) provide a review of classroom research, with a focus
on interaction. One of the main differentiating factors between classroom learning and
so-called naturalistic learning Is the language available from which learners can come
to understand the workings of the L2 and formulate hypotheses. In language
classrooms, the language addressed to learners may be somewhat modified, as we
saw in Chapter 12.
fY'.) ·~~11
· . Gales (1979) presented data from eight teacher trainees and their speech (a) to

11 '~ 13.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter is devoted to learning that takes place in a classroom context. It is not
a chapter intended to be a "how to" manual for teachers; rather, the focus is on learning
.rJ
IS~
;:~.
'-'.fi~
~- ·,.
..✓, -'t,:
each other and (b} to four groups of ESL students at four proficiency levels. Table
13.1 presents a porti91 1J i these data for each of these five groups. As can be seen,
in all cases there Is a progression from lesser to greater syntactic complexity as a
function of proficiency level. In fact, the proficiency level is a statistically significant

d\ i
that is specific to an instructed environment. In the other chapters in this book, we -'!",l;a2
:;t.·
.•

--;,
predictor of the syntactic complexity of these teachers' speech.
do not differentiate between in- and out-of-classroom contexts of learning. In other
,:¾, In foreign-language instruction, there are generally three sources of Input: (a)
words, even though some examples are taken from a classroom context and others
from outside the classroom, we do not focus on the contextual difference In the j} teacher, (b) materials, and (c) other learners, with the greatest amount of input coming
from the teacher. We saw earlier that teacher talk can be limited. It is clear that learner
f~
,.,.
~
.'!..
() conclusions we draw. This is mainly owing to an assumption that processes involved
talk to other learners is also limited and often filled with errors. To what extent these
in learning an L2 can be thought of as independent of the context in which the language
'1 i;_~
·;-:t errors are picked up or ignored in the classroom is unclear. Perhaps surprisingly, there

~
is being learned, although they may apply differentially by context. For example,
-~} is evidence that learners do not pick up errors from one another to any significant

~
whether or not some mechanism, such as UG, is responsible for the learning of cono
grammar is not to be thought of as dependent on the context of that learning. What-
ever psycholinguistic processing takes place in a naturalistic situation presumably takes
;,:-~:'.. : -:·,'. -~ ··' ~ ·_. ·..... .
. . ·; -,__ ·. .;,·-...
TAEJU: 1:1.1., qomplexity ofTeacher Speech Directed at Different Proficiency
-; -~-·.
·
. •.; -, , .,,..

"5 D
,.D place in a classroom situation as well. And whatever theoretical stance one assumes
for learning should not depend on where language learning takes place.
:-t ik;~:\./'. ' :L~ve\s (Source: Fr?lll "~inguistic input in first a~d second language . .
~?P,•y:\:'·./.1.E!~rn,~~tt:Pt~\ ~ates. _In F.,;Eckrnan and.A Hastings (Eds.),.Stud/eS;l!J.,
t,~r:-·J::·'; -·: flmf·<(n"(J:~,ec;onctJrtnguageacquisition (p. 190). 1979. Reprinted by ·
•c

.f;: -

This is not to say that differences do not exist, for clearly they do, the most obvious
·-~~ i~Z'?t~,z\/p~r".,'issiori:l_ ., . . ? ... , . • .
"?

being differences in the quantity and quality of input. For learners in a foreign-language ,i,.
setting-that is, those learning another language in their home environment-not only :, Level
,~!
Words per Ratio of clauses Words per
is there limited input, but a large part of the input comes from classmates whose • T-unit to T-units clause
f'
knowledge of the foreign language is restricted. lnteractional opportunities are also Beginner 4.30 1.02 4.20
often severely restricted in a foreign-language environment. In this chapter then, our Upper beginner 5.75 1.14 5.04
concern is with those opportunities for language learning that are specific to the
Intermediate 6.45 1.24 5.18
classroom context. Within this substantial area of SI.A, researchers have posed a range 1-.:'
Advanced 8.26 1.38 5.98
of questions related to classroom language/input, the type or types of Instruction that
are most effective (e.g., explicit vs. implicit), the duration and intensity of instructional Baseline 10.97 1.60 6,84
effects, and whether those effects might interact with, or be moderated by, other vari- Note: T-Unlts are defined as "one main clause plus any subordinate clause or nonclausal structure that is
ables, such_as learner proficiency or the types of L2 features being taught. attached to or embcddeo in ii" (Hunt, 1870, p. 4).

-·
398 399
INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
,
INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNi NG
~:,.
degree. For example, Gass and Varonis (1989) reported data from two NNSs of English \ ... the solution(s) to complex problems and tasks. It is defined as 'the process of making

'
/d'tferent language backgrounds). The learners were performing a classroom task in ,
which they had to go out onto the streets of Ann Arbor, Michigan, with a tape recorder ~.
,-3:
'
meaning and shaping knowledge and experience through language' • (Swain, 2006,
p, 89).
and ask people for directions to the train station. The tape recorder was left on during We present an example (13-2) of two classroom learners who are jointly writing
the entire time they were engaged in the task, including the time between stopping an essay. They are Grade 8 students who have been in a French immersion program
passersby for directions. They alternated stopping strangers to ask for directions.
since kindergarten. The vocabulary item reveil/e-matin-"alarm clock"-is in question.
Following is the exhaustive sequence of questions they asked:
On a pretest, Kim knew the word, whereas Rick did not. On a posttest, both students
..... knew the word. What we see in this episode is the use of conversation as a tool for
(13-1) NNSl : Can you tell me where is the tra in station?
-~ '
NNS2: Can you tell me where the train station is? '#.•·' learning. Rick wavers between alternatives for alarm clock and, through questioning

NNSl: Can you tell me where is the train station?

i~ ;, of Kim and responses from Kim, he comes to the correct French word reveil/e-matin .

NNS2 : Can you tell me where the train station is? ·.$
NNSl : Can you tell me where is the train station? ...,,., (13-2) Swain and Lapkin (1998, p. 329)

NNS2: Can you tell me where the train station is? Turn#
NNSl : Can you tell me where the train station is? -~
!~\-1
2 KIM : On peut pas determiner qu'est-ce que c'est.
NNS2: Can you tell me w here the train station is? "One can't figure out what it is."
3 RICK: Reveille-matin.
NNS1: Can you tell me wh~re the train station is?
·i ;..,• "Alarm clock."
To appreciate the significance of this example, it is important to note that nowhere _; 4 KIM: Eit ii
y a un reveille-matin rouge . .. sur une table brune, et le
in the conversation between requests for directions did the students discuss the reveille-matin dit six heures, et c'est tout.
discrepancy in their versions of indirect questions . Nevertheless. NNS1 made an "And there is a red alarm clock ... on the brown table, and
unprompted change in the form of her utterance, from the incorrect Can you tell me the alarm clock says six o'clock, and that's all."
where is the train station? to the correct Can you tell me where the train station is?, 9 RICK: Elle est en train de dormir apres que .• • la reve-matin est
whereas NNS2 made no change. Importantly, the change was in the direction of the encore sonne. Et le reve-matin dit six heures un.
TL and not from a correct form to an incorrect form. Hence, it was only input from " She is sleeping after the alarm clock rang again. And the
another NNS that prompted the change from incorrer,t to correct. Similarly, Bruton alarm clock says one minute after six o ' clock."
and Samuda (1980) listened to 10 hours of taped conversations and found only one 55 KIM: II y a un revei lle-matin.
example of a change from a correct for:11 to an incorrect one. It may be that learners "There is an alarm clock."
know when they are right and may also know when they are wrong, or at least have 56 RICK: Reveille-matin?
a sense that they are not sure. When learners internalize a new form, they may use " Alarm clock?"
the positive evidence they hear/read to strengthen that know ledge. That is, they may 57 KIM : Reveille-matin.
receive confirmatory evidence for their correct hypotheses. When a hypothesis is not " Alarm clock."
correct, there is no confirmatory evidence, and the knowledge is loosely structured, 66 RICK: Se reveille acause .. . du son . .•
resulting in uncertainty. " Wakes up because .. . of the sound ..."
This is supported by Brooks and Swain (2009), whose four participants were 100 67 KIM : Reveille-matin.
percent accurate on a posttest following a collaborative writing task; they w ere able "Alarm clock"
to resolve linguistic problems and were able to maintain correct forms on the posttest. 68 RICK: A cause du .. .
Language development, however, required not peer expertise, but NS expertise. · "Because of . .."
In Chapter 12, we looked at interactions in which negotiation about a form leads 69 KIM: Du revei lle-matin qui sonne? Does that sound OK?
to knowledge about the form. Swain (2006) uses the term Janguaging, which takes
place in collaborative dialogue. Such dialogue engages learners in both problem-solving
:fj "Of the alarm clock that rings? Does that sound OK?"

as well as' knowledge-building . In other words, they are solving linguistic problems
70 RICK: Or what about . . . Jacqueline se leve acause du . .. du
reveille- . .. yeah, qui sonne
and they are building their knowledge about language; that is, they are languaging.
As Swain et al. (2009) state: "L.anguaging is a form of verbalization used to mediate
~i. "Or what about . . . Jacqueline (the girl in their story] gets up
'ii
.,,·
flJ',.
because of the .. . of the alarm- . . . yeah, that rings."
~~·7.~t\ ~t.
400 :t<-t
~.~~t ;
401
INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

71 KIM: Or you can say, du reveille-matin, or du sonnement du Both march(.' I" Naik") and s'en al/er ("walk") exist in French, bL1t in this context marcher
reveille-matin. Is Incorrect. The pair opts for the incorrect form, probably because, as Swain and
"OK. Or you can say, of the alarm clock, or the ring of the Lapkin suggested, marcher more closely resembles English usage and it Is suggested
alarm clock." by Kim, the one who in general is seen as having greater expertise in French. Thus,
72 RICK: No, reveille-matin qui sonne. although the classroom is a place where conversational interaction can often provide
"No, alarm clock that rings." opportunities for learning, an important caveat is in order-teacher intervention is often
92 RICK: Sur la rev- .. . reve-matin. essential.
"On the alarm clock." -,~
Brooks and Swain (2009) show that other sorts of intervention are necessary. In
93 KIM: Sur le reveille-matin pour arreter le sonnement. :.:;~ their study, they considered different types of expertise. Four adult ESL learners
.J
"On the alarm clock to stop the ring." 'ti participated i,1 an initial collaborative writing (in pairs) of a story. The story was then
94 RICK: Reve-matin? \' compared with a reformulated version by an NS, and the learners were asked to
"Alarm clock?" discuss any differences they noticed between the two versions (this was video-taped).
95 KIM: Revei lie-matin The noticing task was immediately followed by a stimulated recall of the video, in which
"Alarm clock." [Stresses component meaning "wake".] the researcher stopped the tape to discuss differences or when the students wanted
to discuss changes made In the reformulated version. Rnally, one v1aek following these
What we see in the example above is an exchange that includes hypothesis activities, there was a posttest in which the participants were given a typed version
generation, hypothesis testing, and the extension of knowledge to new contexts. What of their original story and asked to make changes. The researchers found that the
is interesting is Rick's initial use of the correct word in Turn 3, followed in Turn 9 by relevant sources of expertise depended to some extent on language development. In
two uses of the incorrect reve-matin (once with the feminine article /a and once with ..' general, however, most of the Important input came from peers, which they
~
the masculine article le). Clearly, this suggests his uncertainty, which is further seen conceptualize as'the center of Input. The next layer of significant Input consisted of
In his pauses (Turns 9, 70, and 92) and in Turn 94, where he asks his partner If r{}ve- "l
.>
peers plus the reformulation, and the next was peers plus reformulation plus NS
matin is acceptable. So, we see Rick's change to the correct form. The change is not (teacher). As Brooks and Swain (p. 80) note,
a one-time affair, but shows a back-and-forth wavering between correct and incorrect
forms. Rick is seen to generate hypotheses {his questions), and Kim's responses are As a pedagogical model this places learners as the first source of expertise rather
either confirmatory or disconfirmatory. We note that Rick receives input and uses output than the teacher; when learners cannot create a ZPD through interacting with
as a means of learning the new word. In Turn 56, Rick's attempt to write the word each other or with other forms of mediati7n such as a reformulation, then the
focuses his attention on his own uncertainty, forcing him to make a choice between teacher can participate in the activity ne1ded to construct ZPD.
the alternative hypotheses he has entertained. It is through collaborative dialogues, as
evidenced here, that we recall the construct of Zone of Proximal Development
discussed in Chapter 11 . As noted in that chapter, potential development comes about 13.3 TEACHABILITY/LEARNABILITY
through problem-solving in collaboration with more capable peers.
However, as mentioned earlier, it is not always the case that learner forms can As early as the morpheme-order studies, there was an emphasis on acquisition orders;
serve as good input for other learners. In another excerpt (13-3) from these same two that is, the idea that acquisition takes place in some sort of natural order, regardless
learners (Swain & Lapkin, 1998, p. 333), it is clear that, without teacher intervention, of Input, instruction, or L1 background. In fact, Krashen stated this as part of the entire
these two participants will either walk away uncertain about the correct form or will Monitor Model (see Chapter 5) as the Natural Order Hypothesis, which claims that
learn something incorrect in French, that is, they ,will practice and automatize the IL, elements of language (or language rules) are acquired in a predictable order.
perhaps far from TL norms. · .. '· · ·· · · · · · The implication of acquisition order is that p~dagogical intervention cannot alter
{or can alter in only a trivial manner) natural acquisition orders {see Lightbown, 1983).
(13-3) KIM: [elle voit uni gars. The most explicit statement of this cornes f,om work originally involving German as
" [She sees a] guy." an L2. Recall from Ci1apters 1O and 12 the discussion of the acquisition of English
RICK: •. • gars, qui s'en va a l'ecole. questions. Findings based on the natural progression within a classroom context are
11
• • • guy who is going to school."
supported by a number of studies. Pienemann (1984, 1989) argued that stages in this
KIM: Qui marche vers I' ecole .. . marche. developmental sequence cannot be skipped, even as a result of instruction. He
"Who is walking towards school, walking." investigated German word-order development among 1O Italian children ranging in

402 403