عدد الرسائل : 133
مقر العمل : شفشاون
|موضوع: Audiolingualism (drilling as habit formation) and structuralism in language learning and teaching الجمعة يوليو 16, 2010 7:22 pm|| |
Audiolingualism (drilling as habit formation) and structuralism in language learning and teaching
Meaningless drills - the drawbacks
Choice (by the learner) of vocabulary is needed to permit individual control over the meaning of the information conveyed. When not permitted there's a danger that all that is being practised is pronunciation. Drills which lean heavily on automatic responses without reference to appropriate contexts may give rise to little or no naturalistic speech.
[ Question set by David Jones on RSA Course in Stockholm 1981 ]
1. The artificiality of the stimulus (in drills) may give rise to a kind of "structurespeech"; which is marked by lack of interaction in a real sense. No information is conveyed which is not already known.
2. The content presented by "meaningless drills" may teach learners that listening is a waste of time. Only hearing is required to complete meaningless drills. Language learning may be presented as a tedious process.
3. Behaviourists unapologetically set out to minimize the role of understanding in order to focus attention on structure. e.g. Don't worry about the meaning of these minimal pairs (watch wash; batch bash). I want you to get your tongue round the sounds.
4. When using "meaningless drills" e.g. minimal pairs for pronunciation, teachers should remember to convince learners of the importance of phonology, stress and intonation or any other features of language systems which might be isolated from meaning for the purpose of practice. Students should be given the rationale behind any attempt to focus atomistically on some feature of paragraph, sentence or word. e.g. Watching v Washing the TV. Awkward consonant clusters or diphthongs. Communication often fails at motor skill level (e.g. poor pronunciation of certain phonemes)
5. These drawbacks can be avoided by selecting a high proportion of "meaningful drills". Reject drills with anachronistic vocabulary items such as "ducks", "geese" & "sheep". These might have worked during the Agrarian revolution. Drills should contain a large proportion of vocabulary which meets learners' communicative needs. Good illustration (picture reference prompts) allows for application relationships. See the drills included in the "Streamline Departures Speechwork" series. For the most part, these have meaningful context. Implication relationships are well exploited: S: Joe Freezer is strong. R: but Tim Lyons is _____ . Substitution, Mutation and Transformation should not be discarded as a means of practising known lexis in different patterns. Streamline selects and presents the lexis carefully before practising the patterns.
Meaningful drills - the potential
Robert O' Neill is the author of some of the best language laboratory drills that have ever been constructed. The quality of these practice exercises depends on a clear understanding of the purposes which can be served by various types of drills and sensitivity to situational context and naturalistic conditions in their presentation. Moreover, learners using these "meaningful drills" are required to make choices i.e. to display conceptual awareness and a grasp of meaning by discriminating between different responses.
Robert O' Neill's success with the Kernel series [ see "Kernel Lessons Plus" Laboratory Drills/Tapescript Longman Group Ltd (c) Eurozentren 1974] stems from his interest is in both the generative function of language (TG Kernels) and the personal / creative use. The following steps are important in the provision of good meaningful driils:
1. Step 1 is contextualization - presenting a pattern in a context which suggests a basic use for that pattern.
2. Step 2 is to ensure through comprehension Qs on the short introductory texts that Ss actually understand the basic features of the context.
3. Step 3 Kernel Analysis K1 I object to something. K2 I share my room with the children. K3 I object to sharing my room with the children. The learner is fully prepared to manipulate the pattern as part of a drill.
4. Step 4 is to provide more K2s: i.e. the drill: You are an au-pair girl. You don't like your work. You have to clean the toilets… so you say: I object to cleaning the toilets. S You scrub the floors R… S You look after the baby. R… S You wash his nappies.
Far from being a collection of fragments with no reference to one another, Robert O Neill's prompts follow a series. The drill has something of the continuity of a real collection of utterances. It is centred both around a structural pattern & the function of complaining.
Tansfer: You are unhappy with your job. Tell your boss some of the things you object to doing. Learner supplies 50% of vocabulary through adding this phase.
Other landmark materials offering learners important opportunities to get their tongues round English syntax were provided by Shiona Harkness, John Eastwood, Duncan Shoebridge and L.G. Giggins. The virtue of Shoebridge & Giggins' book is that ONE COPY ONLY is required for the teacher. The learners actually speak. Far too much grammar is practised passively these days using materials which require no more than reading and writing + use of Answer Keys to check written exercise formats. The landmark drilling materials are:
Cue for a Drill by Shiona Harness and John Eastwood [0xford 1976]
Even if you only manage to get hold of a single copy of this book, suitable for practice at elementary to intermediate levels, it provides excellent examples of cues [pictures, menus, timetables - documents with an authentic feel to them although the authors have sensibly simplified them to make oral practice more accessible] which you could draw on the board for your learners to see. The cues are tied to areas of syntax and grammar such as verb tenses and adverb formation from adjectives. This book poses a fair challenge for learners and succeeds in its purpose i.e. practising grammar orally.
Tense Drills by Duncan Shoebridge and L.G. Giggins [Longman 1970]
This material demonstrates coalface experience of syntax, classroom dynamics [learner participation] and the related practice opportunities. You'll have everybody speaking to everybody else in every permutation and combination, providing you have enough participants to make up speakers A, B, C, D and E. It's a class resource as opposed to a One-to-One teaching material. It is intended for use at intermediate levels and draws upon practice of syntax to cover many useful lexical items e.g. What does a greengrocer do? A greengrocer sells fruit and vegetables. What does a pilot do? A pilot flies planes.
Although we are forced to be atomistic during some of the stages of our teaching, these stages need to be related to others where students attempt to arrive at the end-product. In this context drills can succeed. However, if drills become ends in themselves, students may never find out what it really is to communicate in another language. There are more examples of "meaningful drills" in Donn Byrne's "Teaching Oral English".
The theoretical background to pattern drill:
1. Behaviourist view: D. Starch 1915: "Apparently imitation and repetition of correct expression are far more efficacious in forming correct habits than grammatical knowledge." [ Some Experimental Data on the Value of Studying Foreign Languages ]
2. B.F. Skinner's "Verbal Behaviour" 1957: Skinner assumes that behaviour is the total of conditioned and associated responses. Learning depends on the frequency with which the responses are repeated, consistent reinforcement by suitably rewarding correct responses and on careful sequencing of Stimulus-Response bonds so as to minimize the chance of mistakes. Programming into easily assimilable and minimal steps allows control and conditioning of responses and building them into a behaviour pattern.
3. Associated with behaviourism and equally responsible for the kind of language syllabuses much in evidence in the 1960s is the theory of structural linguistics. Leonard Bloomfield in his book "Language" 1933 is preoccupied with form and not with meaning or function.
4. Behaviourism, Structuralism and reiteration of the fact that learners learn to speak L2 by speaking it have contributed in particular to the design of Audiolingual Courses.
5. The Audio-Lingual Method advocates "mimicry-memorization" in pattern drills in which the role of understanding is minimized as much as possible. The major emphasis is on the mechanical production of the utterance as a language form and in the development of automatic responses of the desired nature - i.e. good habits. Julian Dakin [in "The Language Laboratory and Language Learning" Longman 1973] coined the phrase "meaningless drills" to describe pattern practice of the kind inspired by the above ideas.
6. A History of ELT (second edition) - 1400 to the present, by A.P.R.Howatt with H.G.Widdowson (OUP)