Challenges in Tertiary Language Learning
Veronica Smith (Klagenfurt ,
Austria
Abstract (English)
Knowledge of foreign languages has decisively improved student and
professional mobility within the EU. Thanks to the research in the field of
foreign and second language acquisition, our knowledge regarding adult language
learning has increased considerably in the last few years. In spite of this,
university curricula show that the teaching of foreign languages is still based
on traditional methods, which tend to separate the four skills of reading,
writing, listening and speaking. These methods are not suitable for advanced
learners (B2 – C2 of the CEFR), since they do not take into account the complex
structures of linguistic interaction. In this contribution, an alternative
concept of language acquisition is presented –Scenario-based Language
Learning – that enables advanced students to master complex
cognitive tasks within a global linguistic approach.
Key
words: Foreign and second language
acquisition, adult language learning, language teaching, Scenario-based
Language Learning
Abstract
(Deutsch)
Fremdsprachenkenntnisse
sind ein wesentlicher Faktor, der die Mobilität in Studium und Berufsleben im
EU-Raum erleichtert. Durch die Fremdsprachenerwerbsforschung ist unser Wissen
über Lernprozesse und Sprachverarbeitung bei Erwachsenen in den letzten Jahren
stark gestiegen. Dennoch werden an vielen Hochschulen, wenn man die
Veranstaltungstitel zum Anhaltspunkt nimmt, eher traditionelle
Unterrichtsmethoden, die auf den vier Fertigkeiten basieren, bevorzugt. Diese
Methoden sind nicht dazu geeignet, bei fortgeschrittenen Lernenden (B2 – C2 des
GER) dem komplexen Gefüge von sprachlichen Interaktionen Rechnung zu tragen. In
diesem Beitrag wird ein alternatives Sprachlernkonzept - Scenario-based Language Learning - vorgestellt, das es
fortgeschrittenen Studierenden ermöglicht, kognitiv-komplexe Aufgaben
ganzheitlich sprachlich zu bewältigen.
Stichwörter: Fremdsprachenerwerb, Erwachsenenunterricht,
Fremdsprachenvermittlung, alternatives Sprachlernkonzept
1 Introduction
Foreign and second language learning have changed substantially in
recent decades. Language learning has become more democratic in that access to
learning other languages is far more widespread than it was a generation ago.
We know much more about the cognitive processes involved, about learner
differences, about the importance of emotional factors, including motivation.
Most of us have experienced at first hand a range of different teaching methods
and approaches intended to improve learning, some of which worked, others which
failed miserably. So the question remains: as language professionals, could we
be doing better?
In this paper, I intend to survey some recent developments in Second
Language Teaching and Learning and pose the question to what extent tertiary
language learning is changing to take account of new insights or whether
tertiary language learning is a special case with its own parameters and should
be approached with an eclectic mix of innovation and tradition. This survey
will be subjective rather than comprehensive, and will focus on language
learning in a foreign language environment rather than a second language context,
in particular, on teaching English in
German-speaking countries.
My claim is that tertiary language learning is a largely neglected
field. I realise that this is quite a bold claim to make in a book on language
teaching and learning. However, I detect a
paradox: a great deal of research is being conducted into what makes adults
successful learners but nevertheless, language teaching in university language
departments, if the course titles available on institutional websites are
anything to go by, does not appear to be changing much, if at all.
2 Current Practice in Tertiary Language
Learning
I base my claim on an admittedly unsystematic survey of tertiary level
language teaching in English departments in German-speaking universities drawn
from AREAS (The Annual Report on English and American Studies). My survey shows
that language instruction is a part of all Bachelor and some Masters programmes
in English or American Studies. There is usually a basic or general
introductory language course and the subsequent classes are divided up along
fairly traditional lines such as Grammar, Oral Practice, Essay
Writing, Creative Writing, Discussing Current Events or Sport
or something in English-speaking countries and Translation, occasionally
with a distinction between ‘Introductory’ and ‘Advanced’. Now I realise that
course titles never tell the whole story, but it appears that students spend
week after week doing more or less the same activities in class during the
course of a semester; in other words, more of the same, which may not be
particularly motivating, may not address their particular needs and may not
enable them to function well in the real world where linguistic demands are not
so easily compartmentalised. A further random survey of English for Specific
Purposes at German Universities of Applied Sciences yields a similar
picture: (Fachsprache) English 1 or 2, where the focus appears to
be on terminology or classes on intercultural communication, concentrating on
learning about cultural differences through the medium of English – studying
the What rather than the How.
Before I proceed any further, I want to make it clear that I am
interested in the top of the range, those who in the Common European Framework
of Reference (CEFR) come into the B2 to C2 range. I realise that tertiary level
language teaching includes all levels of language learners, including absolute
beginners, but I want to consider the group of learners who, in the past, would
not necessarily have received any language instruction at all, with the
possible exception of practice in translation. They would have been largely
left to their own devices to polish their language skills as they thought best.
Two survey articles in the journal Language
Teaching reporting on PhD theses on language learning and teaching in England and Germany
What emerged from reading these two articles was that research into
language learning is alive and well but that the constraints of PhD research
lead to the design of relatively small-scale projects which can be accomplished
by an individual, even if that individual recruits other colleagues to assist
in data collection. So we either find studies which take place in laboratory
conditions where, for example, a linguistic item such as the use of modal verbs
is taught to an experimental group whose performance on various tests is
compared to the performance of a control group which did not receive the
special treatment; or we find a case study approach with a small group of
learners, which permits the study of more global learning factors such as
motivation, but is not generalizable to other learners or learning contexts.
Without wanting to criticise this kind of study, since such research renders
important insights into language learning processes, I would question its
ecological validity in terms of helping advanced learners to operate
effectively in another language. These studies offer too small a slice of
language use for learners in the upper bands of the CEFR to benefit from. And,
although individual students may benefit from the type of in-depth teaching
that these studies imply, others in the class may not need the selected item at
all but a different one and hence be unable to benefit from the specific
treatment. What is missing and needed by advanced learners is access to more
and better opportunities for language use so that they can ascertain where
their limitations lie. As Littlemore & Juchem-Grundmann (2010) recently
stated:
- Knowledge of language emerges from language use
- Language is a product of physical interaction with the world (Littlemore & Juchem-Grundmann 2010: 1)
Working with advanced tertiary level language learners is a special
challenge. Unlike working with beginners, it is never entirely clear what they
already know. They themselves do not readily admit the extent of their
knowledge, as they are often beset by doubts and fears of making a fool of
themselves. Unlike the case of working with beginners and using a course book,
instructors never have access to all of the input these learners have received,
nor is there way of discovering what language input they have received
informally. They all possess a stock of language which would be the envy of any
beginner, but they still tend to have some area or areas which need working on,
like pronunciation, fluency, vocabulary or grammar. This is where the problems
arise since, in order to help these students, it will be necessary to detect on
what occasions lapses in pronunciation occur, or fluency is impeded, or in
which contexts there are vocabulary gaps. For this reason, it is essential to
have access to extensive language production by these learners. They are not
easy to pigeon-hole and, to some extent, need individual study plans. They have
probably experienced a range of teaching methods during their school careers and
believe they know what works for them and what does not. They are also critical
learners in the sense that they seek a learning experience that engages them
cognitively and enhances their knowledge. As well as providing language input
and cognitive challenge, learning for them should be both rewarding and
enjoyable.
These learners’ experience of language learning in the past impinges on
their expectations of how further learning is to proceed. For the most part,
tertiary language learning is a matter of personal volition, with the possible
exception of students on LSP courses in non-philological majors. Students
usually choose to study another language. This means that a certain degree of
positive motivation can be assumed. Nevertheless, as studies have shown (e.g.
Dörnyei 2001), motivation is something that needs constant nurturing. Learning
styles and learning strategies also need to be taken into account. In one of
the PhD theses in the German survey reported on above, it was found that
learning style is not a fixed trait or even a relatively stable one, but varies
not only according to the task, teaching method, language focus and perceived
difficulty, but also according to the social network (Roche 2006). This is an
important finding as it indicates the potential for using peers as a reference
group and resource for learning.
3 A Framework for Tertiary Language Learning
Since the membership of the group in any given classroom situation is
likely to be heterogeneous in terms of language gaps, learning styles and
interests, it is important to provide a learning space which allows the
learners to take the initiative for their learning, because they are the ones
who know best what they lack and need. Only by means of a learner-centred
approach can the learners’ cognitive sophistication be taken into account. The
framework to be presented later is based on a cognitive, interactive model of
language learning, and relies on a collaborative working mode which allows the
learners’ individual strengths to contribute to a successful outcome. This
means that not only language proficiency but also personal skills, individual
knowledge and experience are drawn on. If cooperation in the group is to work
satisfactorily, the learners must learn to rely on each other for knowledge,
feedback and support during the course of the interaction. Ultimately, as David
Block writes in The Social Turn in Second
Language Acquisition:
Learning is about more than the
acquisition of linguistic forms; it is about learners actively developing and
engaging in ways of mediating themselves and their relationships to others in
communities of practice (Block 2003: 109).
3.1
The Peer Group
Michael Long suggested as long ago as 1983 that linguistic and
conversational adjustments that occur in interactions might promote language
learning. Many learners, however, believe that speaking to native speakers is
the optimal way of gaining access to language input and hence reject teaching
formats where they are expected to interact with their fellow students. Many
even fear that their language proficiency will deteriorate if they interact
with learners who are less proficient than themselves. This is certainly a
problem as learners’ perceptions of the learning situation are an important
source of motivation. Nevertheless, there is an increasing body of studies
which shows the benefits of peer interaction. And, if one considers that most
people will use English as a lingua
franca with non-native speakers more often than with native speakers, peer
interaction makes a lot of sense.
Peer interaction appears to be qualitatively different from native
speaker / learner interaction inasmuch as the partners are more equal than in
learner and native speaker pairs. In a study by Sato and Lyster (2007), it was
found that the learners who were paired with a native speaker did more
listening than speaking, and did not modify their output as frequently as the
learners who were paired with peers: the interaction was one-sided. The peer
dyads, however, negotiated meaning more often and had to work harder to
complete the task than the learners paired with native speakers as the latter
were better able to guess what the learners they were paired with wanted to
say, thus reducing the effort required by the learners. But the benefits of
interaction are not limited to language learning: they are also to be found in
the educational value of learning how to collaborate, negotiate and produce a
joint outcome of the work accomplished.
Returning to my survey of English language classes in Germany and Austria
What now follows is a pedagogical framework setting out how language
can be contextualised and learning can proceed in a way which exploits the
level of proficiency which advanced learners have already achieved and
challenges them to stretch themselves even further. I start by explaining the
basic thinking behind this mode of teaching.
3.2
Enabling Skills
I want to propose the notion of enabling skills as the basis for
my concept of scenario-based language learning. The word skills
has a long history in language teaching – e.g. the four skills or
active and passive skills. But more recently, it has been used more
closely to its dictionary meaning of something you can do well because you have
learned and practised it (cf. Longman DCE 2003). In this particular case,
enabling
skills are those cognitive skills which are actively drawn on by learners to
learn a new language. They are developed and refined in the process of
interactive confrontation with a different linguistic system and furthered by
motivation to learn the language and use it for intercultural communication.
(Smith 2010: 45)
In language learning, like in other types of learning, there is a need
to draw on cognitive abilities such as the powers of analysis and synthesis,
the ability to deduce, infer, abstract, select and evaluate. These faculties,
along with individual learning awareness and individual learning strategies,
are what make up the cognitive component of my enabling skills model.
The second component, mega-skills for language learning, involves the
ability to deal with communicative input and respond appropriately. This
entails distilling and abstracting ideas from linguistic and non-verbal signs,
interpreting information from both channels to produce a pragmatically relevant
response in speech, writing or non-verbal communication. The appropriate
response will depend on the communicative situation, according to whether there
is no direct interlocutor, as in the case of presenting or editing text, or
whether communication is dialogical, as in a telephone call or correspondence,
or whether group interaction as in meetings or writing for a wider readership
is involved.
The final component of the model is the methodological realisation.
Since all interaction is intended to be meaningful, it is essential to create a
framework that will require genuine communication. This is the scenario.
But along with the scenario, which is learner-driven and largely independent of
instructor intervention, language-related activities devised by the instructors
in the light of on-going observations of the language being produced during the
scenario, particularly in lexico-semantics and discourse pragmatics, are
envisaged. These will be demonstrated later in conjunction with the scenario
outline.
4 Scenario-Based Language Learning
Scenario, like skills or communicative
competence, is a word used in a wide range of contexts with more or less
precision. My use of the word scenario draws on its use in the business
world. Scenarios were first developed by the energy company Shell in the
70s as “a method for summarizing alternative future trends” (Senge 1990: 179).
The scenarios were projections of how the business might look in a certain
number of years if the operating conditions were to change dramatically. The
problem with the early scenarios, according to Senge, was that the Shell
managers found them too contradictory and simply dismissed them. As a result,
the planning team started to create scenarios which would induce the managers
to question their models of reality. In the new scenarios, the planners made
the managers’ own thinking the starting point. Scenarios were developed to move
the thinking beyond the managers’ personal world views and open it up to other
interpretations of reality. So the scenarios work as a tool for revealing gaps
in knowledge or exposing entrenched thinking among the members of the group,
allowing them to question their beliefs and explore a situation
unconventionally without prejudices. The scenario depends not on a fixed plan
or order, but on the process of communication between the participants. As
such, the scenario culminates in a description of possible futures rather than
an action plan. It is a way of coming to terms with complexity by inviting
unorthodox thinking through communication and dialogue with others who hold
different world views. The emphasis is on unleashing participants’ creativity
through the process of communication.
Scenario-based language learning is conceived of as a framework to
enable small groups of language learners to engage in a similarly creative
process. The scenario takes a whole term, which gives the participants time to
develop their scenarios in greater depth and rework them both in terms of
conceptualisation and language. Time is an important factor in the
learning experience as it makes for continuity, allows the learners’ ideas to
evolve and permits opportunities to reflect on this evolution. Scenarios are
embedded in a real-world situation in the learners’ immediate environment and
reflect the space and time they currently inhabit. In my case, this is the
university, Klagenfurt or Carinthia .
The advantage of this restriction to the here and now is that the students’
starting point is their own world knowledge. It means that they work from a
baseline of common knowledge among the group participants[1]
and are not required to engage in some flights of fancy. The scenario provides
a framework for a series of inter-related activities which are contextualised
and, in a step-by-step process, build on what has gone before. This means that
the cognitive complexity of the task is reduced at the beginning and the
students’ final production reflects the sophistication of the developing
process.
A number of learning objectives underlie the scenario. The first is to
develop independent study skills, such as research and planning. Although these
skills may be presupposed in university students, they are actually tested and
refined in the group since the scenario outcome can only come about if each
member has contributed effectively: downloading a few pages from Wikipedia
with no thought about how the information is relevant to the scenario will soon
be exposed as useless. The second objective is to develop a holistic approach
to learning, exploring different sources of knowledge and finding ways to
integrate that knowledge. The third is to learn to analyse and structure a
complex problem so that resolution becomes possible. Fourthly, the students
should use the group for sharing ideas and reflecting on them. Finally, they
should develop an awareness of their personal language needs through the
interaction in the group so that they can seek appropriate help.
Scenarios are planned as work cycles in which the students work largely
autonomously. After deciding on the general theme for the term’s work, the
students, working in groups of about four, commence on a cycle of activities,
which is repeated as many times as necessary. The first stage consists of
brainstorming ideas and sharing knowledge. In the first round of the cycle, the
group members get to know each other’s interests and expertise and hence can
fine-tune the general theme to suit their particular group[2].
Each member of the group is allocated responsibility for a particular part of
the scenario. Fact-finding on an individual basis is the next stage. This is
followed by a group session where the material or information collected is
analysed and organised in preparation for a first draft report. The first draft
is only one of many, because the idea of the scenario is to refine the
conceptualisation and the language of the documentation as the term progresses.
The first draft, however, is the basis for the instructor’s feedback and
suggestions for the next repetition of the cycle.
At this stage, the focus of the
feedback is on the viability of the scenario and the clarity of the
presentation for outside readers. The instructor does not necessarily have to
bring in any particular expertise; ordinary common sense and knowledge of the
local constraints and opportunities are usually enough although qualified
feedback will obviously lead to greater sophistication as long as the students
are not intimidated by it. The first feedback need not involve criticism; it
can take the form of additional ideas for the group to take on or reject as the
members think appropriate. Language feedback should not be foregrounded at the
stage since there will be many more drafts in which the ideas will be expanded
and improved. Moreover, the students should learn to rely on their own resources
to proofread and improve the language of their texts.
The timing of the scenario is established by the instructor who
negotiates deadlines at regular intervals for handing in written drafts,
presentations and any other tasks for assessment. Scenarios can be organised as
regular weekly sessions, or with less frequent in-class meetings using a
learning platform like Moodle, or Facebook, to maintain communication. However,
the in-class meetings are important because they give the instructor a chance
to monitor progress in the groups[3],
offer praise or criticism and check whether there is a need for some explicit
help on some language problem which is shared by the group or the whole class.
This is where the language-related activities for the whole class in the areas
of lexico-semantics and discourse pragmatics come in, such as YouTube clips to
demonstrate real-life interaction.
The final outcome is a group report based on individual texts which the
group members have written during the term on the area that they have been
responsible for in the scenario.[4]
The final report should naturally be free of repetitions and inconsistencies
which have resulted from multiple authorship. Since the work leading up to this
written outcome will involve different activities such as individual research
as well as plenary sessions and group work, it is important that the learners
know exactly what will be expected of them for their final grade. It is also
important that the students document their meetings in the form of minutes so
that everyone knows what has gone on and can check on misunderstandings. These minutes can be a part of the assessment,
too.
5 Conclusion
The scenario concept means a break from conventional teaching practice
and may be more suited to subjects like languages for business or economics,
rather than technical subjects. It is also a challenge for instructors, who
have to relinquish a certain amount of control. However, by allowing students
to be largely responsible for creating their own learning framework instead of
merely consuming what the instructor has to offer, the learning experience is
enhanced and the learners gain a more realistic insight into their proficiency
in the foreign language.
In a study of non-native telephone communication, Alan Firth was able
to show that “interactants provide resources for each other, which may then be
utilised, adopted and adapted as the interactional exigencies dictate” (Firth
2009: 133). The important point here is that as in real life, the scenario creates
such interactional exigencies as the learners stretch themselves linguistically
to achieve the performance goals they have set themselves. And that is why
scenarios belong in a tertiary level learning environment.
References
Behrent, Sigrid / Doff, Sabine / Marx,
Nicole / Ziegler, Gudrun (2011). Review of doctoral research in second language acquisition
in Germany
Block, David (2003). The Social
Turn in Second Language Acquisition. Edinburgh :
Edinburgh University
Dörnyei, Zóltan (2001). Teaching
and Researching Motivation. Harlow :
Longman.
Firth, Alan (2009). Doing not
being a foreign language learner: English as a lingua franca in the workplace and some implications for SLA . IRAL, 47,
127-156.
Littlemore, Jeannette & Juchem-Grundmann, Constanze (2010).
Introduction to the Interplay between Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language
Learning and Teaching. AILA Review,
Vol. 23, 1-6.
Long, Michael (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to
non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 5, 2,
177-93. Longman Dictionary of
Contemporary English (2003). Harlow :
Pearson Educational.
Mackey, Alison (ed.) (2007). Conversational
Interaction in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford :
Oxford University
Marsden, Emma & Graham, Suzanne (2009). Review of Doctoral Research
in Second-Language Teaching and Learning in England
Martinez, Hélène (2008). Lernerautonomie und Sprachlernverständnis:
Eine qualitative Untersuchung bei zukünftigen Lehrerinnen und Lehrern
romanischer Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.
Roche, Thomas (2006). Investigating
Learning Style in Foreign Language Classrooms. Berlin
Sato, Masatoshi & Lyster, Roy
Senge, Peter M. (1990). The Fifth
Discipline. The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. New York
Smith, Veronica (2010). Tertiary Language Learning. Changing
Perspectives and Practical Responses. Tübingen: Narr.
[1] This does not mean that every participant shares
the same local knowledge at the beginning of the scenario, but that the local
environment becomes the common denominator as the scenario progresses.
[2] A general theme could be to find ways to attract tourists to the
city. Whether this is achieved by infrastructure measures or events is left
entirely to the group.
[3] Group work does not always run smoothly and so it is sometimes
necessary to defuse conflicts or at least channel them productively. The
language of conflict is rarely dealt with in the classroom and so it can enrich
the learning experience if dealt with appropriately.
[4] The individual texts can provide the basis for
individual assessment. The final grade need not consist exclusively of the
written group report. It can be made up of various items, including individual
texts, group texts, individual presentations, such as the ‘Elevator Pitch’ or
performance in group meetings, depending on institutional requirements. Further
information on assessment procedures can be found in Smith (2010).
