Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom - University of Pittsurgh.pdf
《Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom - University of Pittsurgh.pdf》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom - University of Pittsurgh.pdf(36页珍藏版)》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、Language LearningISSN 0023-8333 Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom: An Experimental Study of Fluency Development and Proceduralization Nel de Jong Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Charles A. Perfetti University of Pittsburgh The present study investigates the role of speech repetition in oral fl uenc
2、y development. Twenty-four students enrolled in English-as-a-second-language classes performed three training sessions in which they recorded three speeches, of 4, 3, and 2 min, respectively. Some students spoke about the same topic three times, whereas others spoke about three different topics. It
3、was found that fl uency improved for both groups during training but was maintained on posttests only by the students who repeated their speeches. These studentshadusedmorewordsrepeatedlyacrossspeeches,mostofwhichwerenotspecif- ically related to the topic. It is argued that proceduralization of ling
4、uistic knowledge represented a change in underlying cognitive mechanisms, resulting in improvements in observable fl uency. Keywords classroom research; English as a second language; fl uency training; oral fl uency; proceduralization; second language; task repetition; vocabulary The ultimate goal o
5、f many second-language (L2) learners is to be fl uent in the target languagethat is, to be able to express their thoughts easily, with more The data of the pretests and posttests were presented at the AAAL conference in Costa Mesa, CA, on April 24,2007. Theauthors would like to thank Colleen Davy, J
6、essica Hogan,RhondaMcClain, and Laura Halderman for their contributions to transcription, coding, and analysis of the data from the training sessions. Thanks to Laura Halderman, Mary Lou Vercellotti, and Scott Walters for their feedback to drafts of this article. Funding for this research was provid
7、ed by the National Science Foundation, grant No. SBE-0354420 to the Pittsburgh Science of Learning Center (PSLC; http:/www.learnlab.org). Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Nel de Jong, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands. Intern
8、et: cam.de.jonglet.vu.nl Language Learning 61:2, June 2011, pp. 533568533 C?2011 Language Learning Research Club, University of Michigan DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00620.x de Jong and PerfettiFluency Training attention to meaning than form, in any given situation. Communication should eventually
9、be smooth, with some processes of production relatively fast and automatic. Although there is not a single agreed-upon defi nition in the litera- ture, fl uency is often understood to refer to the fl ow and smoothness of delivery (Chambers, 1997; Koponen Freed,Segalowitz, Segalowitz Towell, 2002; To
10、well, Hawkin, Mehnert, 1998; Yuan Bygate Lynch resultsmay have been different ifdifferent measures had been used. Finally, no benefi cial effect was found on a repeated task that had a different topic. Immediate repetition, on the other hand, was shown by Lynch and Maclean (2000, 2001) to improve ac
11、curacy in terms of phonology, vocabulary, semantic precision, and syntax. In addition, there was some evidence for gains in fl uency. Despite the research on fl uency in task-based learning, few studies have investigated how instructional techniques affect the mechanisms underlying the longer term d
12、evelopment of fl uency. A notable exception is the study by Snellings, Van Gelderen, and De Glopper (2002). They showed that classroom instruction can increase lexical retrieval speeda process of language produc- tion that supports fl uencyeven with only 10 encounters over a period of 4 weeks. A fol
13、low-up study provided evidence for transfer to a narrative writing task, in that more of the trained words were used (Snellings, Van Gelderen, Maurice,1983;Nation,1989;Wood,2001). Although this technique has been used in classrooms for several decades, few 535Language Learning 61:2, June 2011, pp. 5
14、33568 de Jong and PerfettiFluency Training studies have empirically investigated its effects so far. In this task, students speak about a given topic for 4 min and then retell it twice, as close to verbatim as possible, in 3 and 2 min, respectively. The 4/3/2 involves task time pressure and repetiti
15、on, but in contrast to the studies by Bygate and others discussed ear- lier, the speeches are repeated immediately. In that way, the speakers have the additionalbenefi tofhavingusedcertainvocabularyandgrammaticalconstruc- tions, which can facilitate retrieval through lexical and syntactic priming (e
16、.g., Bock Branigan, Pickering, McDonough Pickering Youjin Anderson et al., 2004; Anderson Squire, 1987, 1992) and has been applied to L2 acquisition (e.g., De Jong, 2005; DeKeyser, 1997; Ferman, Olshtain, Schechtman, Hilton, 2008; Towell, 2002; Towell et al., 1996; Ullman, 2001a, 2001b, 2004). It ha
17、s been argued that, in fl uent L1 and L2 speakers, procedural knowledge is mostly involved in the encoding stages of language production (e.g., phrase and clause structure building) and in articulation, whereas declarative knowledge is asso- ciated with retrieval of lexical items and their syntactic
18、 information as well as conceptualizing and monitoring (Kormos, 2006; Levelt, 1989, 1999; Towell et al., 1996). Less advanced L2 learners may still rely on declarative knowledge, which they need to proceduralize. The description of the process of proceduralization is found in the ACT-R model (Anders
19、on after creating work + ed, worked is encoded as a chunk). Procedural knowledge consists of production rules, which correspond to steps of cognition and have the basic form of “goal condition + chunk re- trieval = goal transformation.” For instance, if the goal is to add 3 and 4, the chunk“3+4=7”ca
20、nberetrieved,andthenthegoalcanbechangedtothenext goal (e.g., the next step in a multicolumn addition). In ACT-R, each produc- tion rule is triggered by a goal and retrieves one or, at most, a few declarative chunks. Production rules are the units of skill acquisition and each has its own learning cu
21、rve. Declarative chunks and production rules are competing with otherchunksorrules,andthestrongestoneistriggered.Strengthisdetermined, among other things, by amount and recency of use. Anderson et al. (2004) argued that the change in retrieval speed of declara- tive chunks follows a power law, with
22、initial practice leading to large gains and 537Language Learning 61:2, June 2011, pp. 533568 de Jong and PerfettiFluency Training later practice leading to gains that gradually diminish. Eventually, performance moves toward an asymptote. Proceduralization involves the creation of produc- tion rules
23、and combining smaller production rules into larger ones. These new production rules subsequently need to gain strength so as to be able to compete with other, previously existing, production rules. Strength can be gained by repeated practice. Inthecontextoflanguage,wecouldsaythattheretrievalspeedofw
24、ordsand phrases increases with repeated practice, with large initial gains that gradually diminish to smaller gains. The creation and strengthening of new chunks can lead to the emergence of formulaic sequences. Language use can also lead to the construction of new production rules and the collapsin
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom University of Pittsurgh
链接地址:https://www.31doc.com/p-5116657.html