Group Work and the Second Language Curriculum

Author(s):  
Marga Stander ◽  
Annemarie Le Roux

Abstract South African Sign Language (SASL) has become an increasingly popular language that hearing university students want to learn as a second language. This requires more qualified SASL instructors and new curricula at South African universities. This paper considers ways in which challenges associated with the teaching and learning of SASL can be overcome. Krashen’s Comprehension Input Hypothesis and Swain’s Output Hypothesis form the theoretical framework as reference to our own independent experience, praxis, and reflection. This study considered different teaching methods and pedagogies and found the post-method approach suggested by Kumaravadivelu (2003) a viable method for teaching SASL as a second language. This method aligns with the method we had independently identified as the most empowering for teachers to create their own strategies focused on their intuition, experiences and pedagogy. Therefore, we do not favour one specific method above another, but rather adopt an integrated approach. We make a few suggestions regarding sign language curriculum content and further research in sign language as an L2, which need urgent attention.


1985 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Pica ◽  
Catherine Doughty

The shift in language classroom organization from teacher-fronted to student group work has received a growing amount of theoretical and empirical support (cf. Long, 1983; Long, Adams, McLean, and Castanos, 1976; Taylor, 1982). However, this practice is becoming so popular that it is in danger of turning into yet another ESL bandwagon. The following study was conducted, therefore, to evaluate the role of group work in the classroom, specifically in regard to its possible effects on classroom second language acquisition. Comparisons were made of three ESL classrooms during group vs. teacher-fronted classroom interaction on decision-making tasks.Analysis focused on three broad categories: (1) grammaticality of input, (2) negotiation of input, and (3) individual input/production. Significant differences between the two participation patterns were indicated only in the increased amount of input and production for individual students during group interaction. Task, rather than participation pattern was shown to be a more important variable with regard to parameters (1) and (2). These results suggested that group work has a useful but somewhat restricted role in classroom second language acquisition.


1999 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Wang

Although considerable evidence indicates that age of onset for second language acquisition is related to second-language proficiency outcomes among adult learners Jew studies have actually looked at how adult learners of different ages experience and perceive second language acquisition. This study presents 30 women immigrant learners' accounts of their experiences and perceptions of learning English as a second language in the Canadian context. Findings from this study reveal the complexity of adult L2 acquisition, which involves factors pertaining not only to the learners themselves, but also to the social context in which the second language is learned. Implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the second language curriculum development and classroom practice.


Cancer ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 104 (S12) ◽  
pp. 2948-2951 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gloria D. Coronado ◽  
Vicky Taylor ◽  
Elizabeth Acorda ◽  
H. Hoai Do ◽  
Beti Thompson

1994 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 394
Author(s):  
Harriet Barnett ◽  
Sarah Hudelson

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-150
Author(s):  
Kira Gor

The current study pursues two goals. First, it establishes developmental trajectories in the acquisition of 10 morphosyntactic features of Russian by American learners, using a grammaticality judgment task (GJT), an offline test of morphosyntactic knowledge that allows for direct comparison of native and nonnative performance through a highly controlled set of materials. Second, it compares the performance of late second language learners and heritage speakers (early learners) of Russian matched in global proficiency as established by the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI), and ranging from Intermediate to Superior proficiency. The study demonstrates that heritage speakers outperform late second language learners on most, but not all the morphosyntactic features tested in the GJT. These findings shed new light on the development of nonnative grammatical knowledge in early and late learners of Russian, and will inform Russian language curriculum development.


2005 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. vii-xi
Author(s):  
Mary McGroarty

It is a sign of overweening ambition if not hubris to think that all of applied linguistics can fit between two covers. Dynamic even when the Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (ARAL) began publication in 1981, applied linguistics has continued to change, grow, and redefine its areas of coverage, even as many other journals have emerged in the intervening 25 years. Writing in the 20th anniversary issue of ARAL, my editorial predecessors, Robert Kaplan and William Grabe, provide the historical context for the establishment of ARAL and show how it came to fit into the context of applied linguistics as the field evolved from the mid-20th century to the beginning of the 21st. They summarize the key notions that characterize applied linguistics and remark that it “commonly includes a core set of issues and practices that are readily identified as work done by many applied linguists (language teaching, language teacher preparation, and language curriculum development)” along with “several further identifiable subfields of study: bilingual studies, corpus linguistics, forensic linguistics, language contact studies, language testing, language translation and interpretation, language use in professional contexts, lexicography and dictionary making, literacy, second language acquisition, and second language writing research” (Kaplan & Grabe, 2000, p. 5). The variety and diversity of these subfields defy attempts to gather them into a single volume (although some useful recent handbooks have done so; see, for example, Davies & Elder, 2004; Kaplan, 2002); furthermore, at present, topics in applied linguistics are commonly addressed through entire handbooks for particular subfields (Bhatia & Ritchie, 2004; Doughty & Long, 2003; Spolsky, 1999) or even in multivolume sets such as the Encyclopedia of Language and Education (Corson, 1997). Hence, this year's volume should perhaps be labeled a ‘selective’ survey, or even a sampling of the field, rather than an exhaustive inventory of all possible endeavors that warrant inclusion within applied linguistics. The present volume features research on some of the perennial concerns of applied linguistics, akin to Kaplan and Grabe's ‘core issues.’


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document