Language Acquisition Lecture 2 PDF

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION LECTURE 2 Li et al. (2022). Part 2: Cognitive Differences  EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE APTITUDES Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT...

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION LECTURE 2 Li et al. (2022). Part 2: Cognitive Differences  EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE APTITUDES Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE APTITUDES - Increases until a certain age? (around 11) - Explicit instruction - What about implicit aptitude? - unconscious tallying and computation of linguistic tokens to extract linguistic regulari ties that govern the distribution and contingency between linguistic units (Li & DeKeyser, 2021) - Deductive vs. Inductive – Explicit vs. Implicit Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE APTITUDES - Convergent validity whether aptitude is correlated or behaves similarly with variables in the same paradigm. - Divergent validity whether it is uncorrelated with or dissociable from variables in other paradigms hypothesized to be different from the paradigm in question - Predictive validity whether it is correlated with learning behaviors, processes, or outcomes Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Convergent and Divergent Validity - Li (2016) → traditional aptitude is significantly correlated with, and yet dissociable from, intelligence and working memory - traditional aptitude is uncorrelated with motivation and negatively correlated with anxiety. - Implicit aptitude has been operationalized as sequence learning (Granena, 2013), which is measured by means of serial reaction time (SRT) tasks - it has been found to be uncorrelated with, or separate from, abilities for explicit learning - These findings suggest that SRT behaves differently from measures of variables in the explicit domain and therefore has divergent validity. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Predictive Validity - Correlational vs. experimental - Aptitude and L2 Attainment (e.g., implicit aptitude is predictive of L2 proficiency ) - Aptitude and Age (traditional/explicit aptitude → can predict only late second language learners? e.g., DeKeyser, 2000) - Aptitude and Treatment Effects (deductive vs. inductive instruction → high-aptitude learners benefited more from inductive instruction than deductive instruction, whereas the reverse was true for low-aptitude learners) ?? implicit aptitude may have a negative effect if learners engaged in conscious processing of a complex structure Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Other issues - a lack of research with learner groups such as children, middle school learners, and naturalistic learners → because? - Aptitude measures - Practical Applications → student selection, placement, diagnostic purposes ?? Exclusive use of either explicit or implicit instruction would result in a waste of learners’ cognitive resources in the other pool Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  WORKING MEMORY Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Working Memory - the cognitive capacity that allows us to make plans and keep goals in mind - Short-term? → an additional “working” (“processing” or “attention”) component - WM may play a larger role than long-term memory (LTM) in subserving human cognition and action (e.g., Baddeley et al., 1988) - “micro” models of WM Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Working Memory - the cognitive capacity that allows us to make plans and keep goals in mind - Short-term? → an additional “working” (“processing” or “attention”) component - WM may play a larger role than long-term memory (LTM) in subserving human cognition and action (e.g., Baddeley et al., 1988) - “micro” models of WM Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Working Memory - Overall effects (WM is a significant but weak predictor of L2 learning) - WM capacity increases throughout childhood and declines later in life - Phonological Working Memory (PWM) and Executive Working Memory (EWM) → diminishing effect as L2 prof. grows? - Interaction with Instruction Type (WM and language aptitude seemed to play a more important role in explicit rather than implicit treatments) - Collaboration with Psychology? - Practical applications → Low WM issues, WM training, task design Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  DECLARATIVE AND PROCEDURAL MEMORY AS PREDICTORS OF SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Declarative / Procedural Memory - DP model proposes that two evolutionarily ancient learning and memory systems (circuits) in the brain—declarative and procedural memory—have been co-opted, that is, hijacked, for language (as well as for other higher cognitive domains such as reading and math) - PM may subserve the learning of rule-governed (generalizable) grammatical knowledge that underlies real-time combination across language domains (e.g., in affixed forms such as “kick” + “-ed”). - Due to its flexible nature DM can memorize individual chunks (e.g., “kicked”), generalize analogically across such forms to new forms (e.g., “blicked”), and/or learn explicit rules. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Declarative / Procedural Memory - DP model proposes that two evolutionarily ancient learning and memory systems (circuits) in the brain—declarative and procedural memory—have been co-opted, that is, hijacked, for language (as well as for other higher cognitive domains such as reading and math) - PM may subserve the learning of rule-governed (generalizable) grammatical knowledge that underlies real-time combination across language domains (e.g., in affixed forms such as “kick” + “-ed”). - Due to its flexible nature DM can memorize individual chunks (e.g., “kicked”), generalize analogically across such forms to new forms (e.g., “blicked”), and/or learn explicit rules. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Declarative / Procedural Memory - the L2 lexicon was associated with DM tasks, while no clear association with PM tasks was evinced - Phonology → limited number of studies → potential design limitations - Morphophonology → DM can support both analogical and affixed forms, PM may only support the latter. - Morphosyntax → weak correlation between DM & L2 morphosyntax - DM playing a role at earlier stages of L2 learning and PM playing a role at later stages - Practical applications → design tasks to address DM and PM differences Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  LEARNING STYLES AND STRATEGIES Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - an individual’s natural, habitual and preferred way(s) of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills (Reid, 1995) - Thoughts and actions, consciously chosen and operationalized by language learners, to assist them [foreign language learners] in carrying out a multiplicity of tasks from the very onset of learning to the most advanced levels of target language performance (Cohen, 2011) Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - in more recent years, the concept has been criticized for failing to produce the hoped- for results in terms of student achievement (Pashler et al., 2009; Willingham, Hughes, & Dobolyi, 2015). ? identification of a learner’s style might become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Vasquez, 2009) ? styles “are not set in stone” → style stretching Rubin (1975) identified seven strategies characteristic of good language learners: guessing/inferring, com municating, managing inhibitions, attending to form, practicing, monitoring one’s own and the speech of others, and attending to meaning. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies Oxford (1990) → memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective, and social Dörnyei (2005) → the abandonment of the strategy concept in favor of self-regulation (e.g., Winne, 1995; Boekaerts et al., 2000; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011) → =?? in order to self-regulate, students need strategies, which brings the argument more-or-less full- circle Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - learning style was not a major factor in successful language learning in most cases - “significantly greater overall use of language learning strategies among more successful learners” → Oxford (1995) - Griffiths (2003) → higher-level students reported using more strategies more frequently than the lower-level students. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - Zhang and Xiao (2006) → the higher-level students reported significantly higher levels of agreement for a number of the strategy items in the survey. - Practical Application → “develop their individual learning styles” (Kinsella, 1995, p. 193) ?? - Mostly → mixed results - More reliable methods? E.g., eye-tracking Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  METACOGNITION Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - the learners’ heightened metacognitive knowledge and increased use of metacognitive strategies, fueled by metacognitive experiences in the classroom - Heightened and sophisticated metacognition relates to L2 motivation too, which is required for learners’ long-term efforts in pursuing L2 learning (Dörnyei, 2020) - “knowledge about knowledge”, “thoughts about thoughts”, or “reflections about actions” (Weinert, 1987, p. 8) - metacognition is a strong predictor of learning suc cesses (see Donker et al., 2014), even after factoring in other individual differences such as general intelligence (see Ohtani & Hisasaka, 2018) Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - Flavell (1971) conceptualized metacognition as having four components: metacog nitive knowledge, metacognitive experience, goals, and the activation of strategies. - learners → attain control of their thinking and learning, including planning, self- monitoring, and self-evaluation (Veenman et al., 2006). - Meta-cognitive experience → learners experience a variety of emotions and where their past and current experiences in learning shape their future experiences Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - Meta-cognition → problem solving and inquiry behavior - Adler et al. (2016) → the group that received collaborative training improved their content knowledge ?? most because the learners’ metacognition was interactively enhanced as they discussed and counter-argued different opinions Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies metacognitive knowledge/processing vs. L2 knowledge/processing Metacognitive knowledge → conscious → but it involves a meta-level and higher-order analysis of the person’s own L2 knowledge !! Different from knowing rules → “I still make mistakes of the simple past tense”. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies Metacognition involves the learner’s conscious awareness of their cognitive activities that they are attending to input, that their L2 knowledge retrieval is more accurate and faster, and that they know what to do to facilitate their learning in future tasks Self-monitoring in metacognition vs. monitoring in SLA 1. the learner’s awareness of their learning processes and products 2. processing of L2 information that can occur consciously or unconsciously (Kormos, 2000) Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies - if a learner’s metacognition is high and accurate, they are able to identify what needs to be done to improve their skills and content knowledge → more motivation? Self-efficacy? Feed-back seeking? - De Boer et al. (2018) confirmed that once students acquire metacognitive skills, “student performance is sustainably enhanced” (p. 111) → reading, writing, mathematics, and science - Content learning? !!! Learners may be providing feedback, but this behavior itself is based on lower-order cognitive Language processing; detecting an L2 error and providing interactional Acquisition Enis feedback Oğuz (Sato, 2017). Metacognitive knowledge involves awareness of the use of interaction strategies  Learning Styles & Strategies - SLA? → MI can impact the development of spe cific L2 domains, such as listening comprehension (Bozorgian & Alamdari, 2018; Goh, 2008; Tan et al., 2019; Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010), reading comprehension (Teng, 2020), writing skills (Negretti & McGrath, 2018; Teng & Zhang, 2019), and speaking performance (Sato, 2020; Sato & Dussuel Lam, 2021; Sato & Loewen, 2018). Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz  Learning Styles & Strategies Practical Applications → teachers should target different components of metacog nitive knowledge (person, task, and strategy) ?? MI should be delivered in a separate instructional unit from regular L2 lessons ?? Metacognition involves a higher-order thinking process (Roebers, 2017); L2 learners thinking about their learning processes and products differs from them thinking about L2 grammar or pronunciation. Language Acquisition Enis Oğuz End of Lec1