• No results found

Relevant Studies

In document Vol. 7, Issue 8 , August 2017 (Page 47-50)

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-

2 Relevant Studies

2.1 Speaking in a Foreign Language

A review of the literature on speaking shows two main approaches to defining this construct: 1- top- down approach 2- bottom-up approach. Elaborating on bottom-up position, Bygate(1987) asserts that the traditional approach to speaking defined speaking as the utterance of auditory signals to produce differential verbal reactions in the listener. Accordingly, it puts emphasis on motor perceptive skills. In the same veins, speaking was considered as putting together sounds systematically to yield meaningful utterances by drawing on principles specific to language. Audio-lingualism made extensive use of this approach. As for teaching speaking, the bottom-up approach insists on beginning with the smallest unit- sounds and going on with mastery of vocabulary and eventually discourse (Cornbleet& Carter, 2001). Actually this approach blinds its eyes on interaction and social life involved in speaking and sees speaking from psychomotor aspect. It wasn’t the only problem of this approach because no warranty did exist to assure users that they can use what they have learned in real situation. To address this shortcoming, Bygate (1998) supported using a definition of speaking in terms of the social and interaction skills used for engaging in communication. This approach to speaking is called top-down speaking.

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 7, Issue 8 , August 2017

Page 48

According to this approach, Eckard& Kearny (1981), Florez (1999) and Howarth (2001) characterized speaking as a mutual process in which ideas, information, and emotions are communicated. Based on this approach, as a result of cooperation between two or more speakers who share the time and physical context, the spoken texts are produced. The advocates of top-down approach assert that as an outcome learners should be encouraged to engage in spoken discourse instead of teaching them how to utter correct sentences.

2.2 Teaching Speaking

The golden key in teaching speaking skill “is the way teachers organize and respond to students’ work”(Harmer 1983, p.275). Gower, Philips & Walters (2005) and Baker &Westrup (2003) divide speaking activities into:

Guided activities gives students more freedom to speak even though the set of linguistic resources is still led by the teacher or the materials. Students may need for example to adapt a ready-made dialogue to their own situation or needs. Controlled and guided activities are prescribed to practice particular language items.

Free communication activities practice fluency skills giving the students complete freedom to use language structures and manage communication themselves (Gower, Philips & Walters, 2005 and Baker &Westrup, 2003).

Acting out written dialogues in front of the class or in pairs is a quite common controlled activity. Students are usually given some time to prepare themselves or rehearse before they perform the dialogue. Dialogues can be of great value to beginner level students as “they provide them with ready-made meaningful exchanges that can perform fluently making them more confident about communicating in English” (Ur 1991, p.125).

Information gap games where students usually have “to work in pairs and exchange information to solve a puzzle, give directions, find similarities and differences in pictures, put things in order etc” (Harmer, 1983, p.349)

Surveys where students have to fill in a questionnaire or survey going around the class and asking each other questions on a topic (Nation & Newton, 2009 and Thornbury, 2005).

Simulations normally require students to get into a situation or a problem and react as they must do in real life discussing suggestions and solutions (Gower, Philips & Walters, 2005).

Role plays students have to take on roles of different personalities and act out a conversation in various set contexts (McDonough & Shaw, 2003 and Gower, Philips & Walters, 2005).

Discussions that are the most common activities in the classroom are also really important for improving language fluency.

2.3 Task-Based Teaching

Having reviewed a number of works on task, Skehan (1998), summarizes five key characteristics of a task:

 Meaning is primary

 Learners are not given other people’s meaning to regurgitate.

 There is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities.

 Task completion has some priority.

 The assessment of the task is in terms of outcome.

Some of the researchers such as Nunan (2004) have criticized these definitions. Reviewing these characteristics and definition of task, Nunan (2004) criticizes them for not taking account of grammar in their task. His definition refers to extend the usage of grammar knowledge to express meaning, and in which the intention is to convey meaning rather than to manipulate the form.

2.4 Task Types

The survey of the research literature on tasks reveals types of tasks, variously labeled. According to Brown et al (1984) Task types can be defined as the type of activities that differ from each other in cases of degree of cognitive complexity; i.e., the cognitive demands they place on learners or the degree of

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 7, Issue 8 , August 2017

Page 49

cognitive familiarity and the need for deeper cognitive processing. Tasks can be labeled according to the kind of activity they require of the learner, for example, role-play tasks and decision-making tasks, or according to the language skill they focus on, for example, listening tasks or writing tasks. Ellis (2004) examines four approaches to classifying tasks:

1- Pedagogic 2- Rhetorical 3-Cognitive

4- Psycholinguistic.

An example of a pedagogic classification of tasks is to be found in Gardener and Miller (1996). This offers a number of recipes for tasks directed at learner training, the traditional four language skills(reading, writing, listening, speaking), two areas of linguistics knowledge(vocabulary and grammar), and paralinguistic.

2.5 Task Complexity

In considering factors that make a task complex, Roger Gilabert Guerrero (2004, p. 173) says “the amount of pre-task planning time, the degree of prior knowledge, or the degree of displaced and past time reference” are influential. About planning time in the above mentioned source, the relationship between complex task and planning time has been proved by Skehan and Foster (1996, 1997 as cited in Gilabert 2004) that there is a mutual relationship between complex task and planning time because by taking to account enough time in performing a demanding task, its content will be chosen among complex lexical items and better to say more accurate form and reciprocally it adds to task complexity.

About time referencing he also asserts that there are two kinds of here and now and there and then tasks that naturally the degree of complexity in the latter case is higher because shift from tenses is required and this displacement is equal to task complexity. This part of task complexity is discussable from another point of view and that is recourse directing dimension of the task that is about shifting from here and now and there and then tasks. It says that if learners don’t have prior knowledge and planning (resource dispering) the task will change to complex task for the learners.

Some scholars (Robimson, 2000) believes that learners can benefit from increased complexity because of input richness .According to him: “increasingly complex tasks may prompt learners to look for more and more help in the input, attending to facilitative forms made salient by teacher intervention”(p. 304). Little research has verified the mentioned prediction. Revez and Han (2006) investigated the relationship between recasts and task complexity. This study examined the effect of task type's changes and familiarity on the efficacy of recasts. To this end, all learners in experimental groups received recasts. Finally the participants showed greater use of recasts when performing less complex tasks.

2.10 Experienced and Novice Teachers

Obviously, teachers who are experienced are different from fresh teachers many way (Berliner, 1987). One of the fields accounting for cognition is Cognitive psychology which presents one perspective on how experienced differ from novice teachers. From the view point of a Cognitive psychologist, people are seen as members of a community who have networks of related ideas or concepts called schemata. In the view of Colton and Sparks-Langer (1993) experienced and novice teachers are different in terms of their schemata. Experienced teachers have acquired knowledge on the basis of their experiences organized in intricate and interconnected schemata. In contrast, novice teachers, due to their limited experience, have limited schemata.

Next pole of experienced teachers are novices who are always stressful and worry about doing everything in detail. They count on preplanned programs and materials and in case of lacking the knowledge, they are extremely afraid and find themselves completely disarmament.

2.11 Previous Studies

Allen (1998) studied three groups of teachers with respect to the thoroughness and accuracy of recalling events in the classrooms. Student teachers, novices to averagely experienced teachers, and experienced

Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods ISSN: 2251-6204

Vol. 7, Issue 8 , August 2017

Page 50

teachers were 3 distinct groups that participated in this study. How the teachers could recall events were compared to the content of an audiotape which had already been recorded.

The student teachers and inexperienced teachers' ability to recall were limited and recalls were inaccurate. Teachers who had taught for 6 or more years displayed accurate recall (Allen, 1998). Those teachers who had the least experience concentrated on their own behaviors. In contrast, the experienced teachers put emphasis on their own behaviors as well as learners’ behaviors. The inexperienced teachers remembered neutral events while more experienced teachers remembered neutral, negative and positive events. Allen proposed that experienced teachers could remember more accurately because of their accumulated experience. This experience offered them increased cognition and more sophisticated schemata.

Hunsaker and Johnston (1992) carried out a longitudinal study of changes introduced by a teacher in teaching reading and writing. This research which lasted 4 years concluded that change is a long-term process; thus, most of the teachers who have more experience enjoy time to concentrate or reflect on theory or issues and readjust their convictions, hypothesis, or practices. Thus, experienced teachers are equipped with more extensive knowledge base obtained through experience to use as a basis for reflection and change. As Hunsaker and Johnston also found out, change will be accompanied by a joyous effect.

It could follow from the remarks given by Hunsaker and Johnston (1992) that change is associated to the extent of time devoted to teaching. According to these researchers, change is a time-consuming asset because teachers need to change or alter their convictions, beliefs or teaching practices.

A study conducted by Carter et al. (1988) made a comparison between novice teachers and experienced teachers. They also concluded that experience was significant for teachers to gain the ability to describe instruction and management observed through slides from other classrooms. This research showed that their schemata were underdeveloped. Borko and Livingston (1989) argued that these underdeveloped schemata contributed to the weaker pedagogical reasoning skills of inexperienced teachers.

Borko and Livingston (1989) came to conclusion that under developed schemata was the main reason behind several patterns observed in inexperienced teachers. Borko and Livingston asserted that inexperienced teachers have underdeveloped pedagogical reasoning skills. That's why their planning takes more time compared to experts. Moreover, the well-developed schemata is also the reason that Borkoand Livingston attribute to experts’ ability to predict where students will face difficulties in a course.

3 Methodology

In document Vol. 7, Issue 8 , August 2017 (Page 47-50)