TBLT and Less Commonly Taught Languages Curriculum Development
Facing challenges in FL programs:
 phonological development
 automatic oral production of non salient forms
John MacDermott
Director, Instructional Technology
Junko Takada
SLA Lexicology Specialist
Project Research Assistant
Albert Matthews
Senior Support Specialist for
Instructional Technology
Edward Dixon
Coordinator for Technology in
Foreign Languages
University of Pennsylvania, US
**********************************************
Development of Curriculum Incorporating
Web Based Oral Tasks
**********************************************
Sponsored by:
The Ivy League Language Learning & Teaching Consortium
Junko Hondo
University of Pennsylvania, US / Lancaster University, UK
hondoj@sas.upenn.edu
International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching
September, 2005 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
1
Challenges in Less Commonly Taught Languages Classroom
Promote oral production using
 Limited exposure to the target
language outside of the classroom non salient forms outside of the
presents difficulties classroom → CALL?
Task-based Syllabus per se:
i) “its representation of
communicative competence
as the undertaking and
Empirical studies: Positive
 phonological development
achievement of a range of
Phonological adjustment is said to outcomes of CMC tasks (Kern,
tasks;
be difficult after the
1995, Kitabe, 2000,
ii) its direct reliance on the
critical/sensitive period
Salaberry,2000 among others)
contributions of learners in
terms of the mobilisation of
 automatic oral production of non Creation of web based oral /
the prior communicative
salient forms
written tasks incorporated within
competence which learners
Non salient linguistic features for the existing curriculum
L2 learners are reported to be
bring to any task;
difficult to learn and are prone to
iii) its emphasis upon the
fossilize universally
learning process as
* Task-based approach to
appropriate content during
syllabus (Breen,1987, Skehan,
Attempt at a solution? →
language learning”
1996, White, 1988)
(White 1988:102)
2
Task Type and Effects: Theoretical Perspectives
Open (indeterminate)
Closed (discrete)
Facilitates comprehension, more negotiation of
meaning, more learner speech (interlanguage)
modification
One way
information flow
Two way
information flow
One way
information flow
Two way
information flow
Fluency Enhancement
Accuracy and
Complexity
Enhancement
Fluency Enhancement
Accuracy and
Complexity
Enhancement
Structure
Based
Structure
Based
Structure
Based
Structure
Based
Non
Structure
based
Non
Structure
based
Non
Structure
Based
Facilitates
Accuracy under
Facilitates
Accuracy under
Facilitates
Accuracy under
Facilitates
Accuracy under
Unpressured
Conditions
Unpressured
Conditions
Unpressured
Conditions
Unpressured
Conditions
Non
Structure
based
3
Tasks: 4 themes
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
Phonological development and self evaluation skills
Transformation of the nature of the feedback: implicitness → explicitness
Revealing the effect of synchronous and asynchronous communication
Tracking the cognitive registration of form: strong feasibility of longitudinal study
Self evaluation
Tasks
Focused Form
Interaction
Feedback
Synchronous vs
Asynchronous
Tracking Attentional
shift
Telephone Message
Oral Diary
Spot the difference
Story construction
Jigsaw
Discussion
Chat
Story construction
Jigsaw
Spot the difference
Story construction
Jigsaw








Supra-segmental
Double vowel
Flap “R”
Word final “N”
Tense aspect
-

Honorific
terminologies
Adjective
transformation
NNS – NNS
NS - NNS


Locative
terminologies
Particles
Tense aspect
NNS - NNS

Adjective
transformation
Locative
terminologies
NNS – NNS
4
NS - NNS
Sample Self Evaluation






“sing-song”-like
dropped “N” sound
flat intonations (NS evaluation is reverse)
choppy between words (NS evaluation is reverse)
O after N was difficult (glottal – high back)
alternated sounds: Ka → Ga
(Pe → Be, Za → Jya were unmentioned)
9
8
7
6
5
Week 15
Week 28
4
3
2
Decrease in number of mistakes from NS
evaluations over 13 weeks (Chart)



Double vowel has been manifested for all subjects:
no mistakes found 13 weeks later
There was no improvement in pronouncing Japanese
flap “R” regardless of L1 of the subjects
Improvement was evident for both word final “N”
and supra segmentation
1
0
SS
SS:
D. V:
F.N:
Flap R:
D.V
F.N
Flap R
Supra Segmental
Omission of second vowel in
double vowel
Omission of word final “N”
5
Japanese Flap “R”
2. Feedback:
• Recast: Implicit in nature
Modified feedback with
partial reformulation
provided immediately
following an erroneous
utterance, with no adjustment
in meaning
• High uptake from recast
(Often in the classroom,
recasts are overlooked by
learners. The student
reformations, or uptake, is
sometimes reported as low as
18% (Lyster and Ranta, 1997)
• With the constraint of
perceptual modality, does it
become “Explicit”?
Eg: Subject’s L1: English Length of Japanese study: Nine months at this stage
Focused form – Particles wa, ga, ni
English translation:
Japanese Transcription:
T: How many pencils are there on
top of the table?
Table no ue ni, enpitsu ga nan bon
arimasuka?
S: Table is – 2 pencils (sic: counter
suffixes)
Table wa, enpitsu ni bon arimasu.
T: Yes, there are two pencils on top
of the table, aren’t there?
How many books are there on the
side of pencils?
Hai, table no ue ni, enpitsu ga
nihon arimasune.
Enpitsu no yoko ni, hon ga, nan
satsu arimasuka?
S: Pencil is, on the side, book is,
two are, exist.
Enpitsu wa, yoko ni, hon wa,
nisatsu ga arimasu.
T: There are two books on the side
of the pencil.
What are those items there next to
Ms. Masako.
Enpitsu no yoko ni, hon ga, nisatsu
arimasu.
Masako san no yoko ni, nani ga
imasuka?
S: There are two umbrellas (sic:
existence) behind of Ms. Masako.
Masako san no ushiro ni, kasa ga,
san bon imasu, arimasu.
6
3. Synchronous vs Asynchronous
Comprehension
25
Asynchronous:
Higher accuracy & Comprehension
* Proficiency dependent?
20
15
Synch
Asynch
10
5
0
Synchronous
A total of 251 productions of
the target features
Asynchronous
A total of 269 production of
the target features
Correct
Production
Comprehension
Pre&Post
Tests Delta
81%
11%
(63% - 74%)
6sec
93%
21%
(63% - 84%)
22sec
Pre-post Delta
Average
Pausing
Correct Production Rate
94
92
90
88
86
84
82
80
78
76
74
Synch
Asynch
7
C.P
4. Tracking the Cognitive Registration of Form
Depending on the developmental stage, the relationship between the written and oral production changes: eg
Oral production: Oba-a-san to oji-i-san wa, hidari ni arimasu. (Grandmother and grandfather are on the left.)
Written production: Oba-san to Oji-san wa hidari ni arimasu. (Aunt and uncle are on the left.)
Linguistic Item
Written Production
Oral Production
Developmental Stage
Oji-i-san
(Grandfather)
Oba-a-san
(Grandmother)
Oji-san: Inaccurate
(Uncle)
Oba-san: Inaccurate
(Aunt)
Oji-i-san: Accurate
(Grandfather)
Oba-a-san: Accurate
(Grandmother)
Fluctuating stage
Arimasu / Imasu
(Existence for nonanimated objects /
animated objects)
Arimasu used for people
Inaccurate
Arimasu used for
people
Inaccurate
Initial stage:
corresponding
mistakes
Subject’s L1: Korean Length of Japanese study: 3 months at this stage
8
Cognitive Processes and Pedagogical Implications
Initial Stage
Fluctuating Stage
Stabilized/
Fossilized Stage
Oral
Stable: Inaccurate or
Accurate
Fluctuate:
Inaccurate/Accurate
Stable: Accurate or
Inaccurate
Written
Stable: Inaccurate or
Accurate
Fluctuate:
Accurate/Inaccurate
Stable: Accurate or
Inaccurate
Cognitive Processes
Noticing:
(Attention vs. Noticing)
Registration and
Operation in Working
Memory
Registration and
Operation in Long Term
Memory
Pedagogical implication Strong feasibility in
Impact of form focused
TBLT/CALL with
intervention associated
multimodal emphasis and with “meaning”
constraints of perceptual
system?
Very little or no impact
by intervention
e.g.: Yu → Jyu (page 10)
9
Feasibility of Longitudinal Studies: Case of L1 German 10 months
Phonetic manifestation of the “Yu” replaced with “Jya”
L1 German: feature Ja sound is pronounced Ya
Periodic data correction
Linguistic
Item
Student production
Target language
Developmental
Stage
Yuu mei
(Famous)
Machi ni wa, ookikute, jyu mei na,
daigaku ga...
(In town, there is a large and famous
university ... )
Machi ni wa, ookikute, yuu mei na,
daigaku ga...
(In town, there is a large and famous
university ... )
Stabilized stage
(Stabilized for 8
weeks at this
stage)
Yuu mei
(Famous)
Demo, totemo jyu mei de wa arimasen.
Watashi no otoo san wa, cyotto jyu mei
desu.
(However, not too famous. My father
is a little famous.)
Watashi no okaa san wa, jyu mei dewa
arimasen.
(My mother is not famous.)
Demo, totemo yuu mei de wa
arimasen. Watashi no otoo san wa,
cyotto jyu mei desu.
(However, not too famous. My
father is a little famous.)
Watashi no okaa san wa, yuu mei
dewa arimasen.
(My mother is not famous.)
Stabilized stage
(Stabilized for 11
weeks at this
stage)
10
Thank you
hondoj@sas.upenn.edu
John MacDermott
Director, Instructional Technology
Junko Takada
SLA Lexicology Specialist
Project Research Assistant
Albert Matthews
Senior Support Specialist for
Instructional Technology
Edward Dixon
Coordinator for Technology in
Foreign Languages
Sponsored by:
Ivy League Language Learning & Teaching Consortium Grant
11