Theory and Practice in Government Language Teaching - Literature review Example

Note: Please just send a message if you need to change anything. Thanks! Teaching and Research Critical Review Jackson & Kaplan’s “Lessons learned from fifty years of theory and practice in government language teaching” Lesson 1: Summary In Lesson 1, reports that mature adult can learn foreign language better and they can do well in that language through intensive language study. Their justification is that aside from long experience, skilled adults learn better and faster than children do. Moreover, although aging often result to memory decline and most adults retain their accents, mature students often achieved the level of proficiency required to get things done. This is because in terms of practical application, development of native-like pronunciation is not necessarily a measure of success. In general, Lesson 1 support the idea that more mature diplomats should be trained in FSI and given language proficiency level just enough to perform their assigned tasks abroad. Discussion Jackson & Kaplan’s assertion of foreign language learning seems to support the notion that experience and age is an advantage. However, although this contention is in part true, maturity is not always a measure of proficiency. Countering this assertion are the results of studies in naturalistic settings suggesting that age of initial exposure is an important factor in achieving language proficiency. According to , younger children have more chances to become near native speakers because they can acquire other languages more easily. In fact, learning foreign language after puberty is more difficult and native-like competence is almost impossible. This is because adults and children used different learning mechanisms. For instance, most adults rely on general learning abilities (explicit and declarative knowledge) while children use domain-specific procedures (implicit). This difference in learning mechanisms suggest that mature adult language learners often have the advantage in the beginning but from Jackson & Kaplan’s view, they are fast and better learner throughout the course which is not quite accurate. However, Jackson & Kaplan probably recognised that most adults rely on explicit and declarative knowledge thus precisely noted their inability or limitations in accents and native-like pronunciation. Study of language learners shows that adults are initially fast learners as they employ explicit learning mechanism but less effective in the long run . Children using implicit learning mechanism on the other hand are initially slower but more efficient in the end . These suggest that Jackson & Kaplan’s assertion that adults learn faster is correct but not necessarily better. This is because adults possess vast knowledge of life and greater reasoning ability that allows them to outperform children in receiving formal instruction . However, in terms of ultimate attainment, children do better than adults in picking up English pronunciation and grammar . In the study conducted in the United States for instance, age was found as the most important factor in predicting immigrants’ proficiency in English with or without accent while early language learners have better grammatical judgement compared to adults who are often erratic and inconsistent . Evidently, Jackson & Kaplan’s assertion depends on individual interpretation of the term “language proficiency” which in the report is merely considered “as a tool to get things done” thus native-like accent and competence are not necessary. From this perspective, this particular lesson is only legitimate in practical application but irrational in terms of ultimate language acquisition. Application It is somewhat difficult as a learner to accept the idea that competence and correct pronunciation are not necessarily a measure of success in language acquisition. This is in view of the fact that most language courses measured success against “target competence” and “perfect mastery” of the language . This idea leads me to oppose Jackson & Kaplan’s Lesson 1. However, I am supportive of the pragmatic approach of Jackson & Kaplan in language proficiency particularly in improving diplomat’s language training and performance abroad for as long as it is applied to that area alone. Jackson and Kaplan’s Lesson 1 should be selective in specifying who are actually proficient by common definition and those complying with their own “practical” notion of proficiency that is compatible to the needs of FSI. As oppose to Lesson 1, it is somewhat evident that use of appropriate grammar structures, rules, and vocabulary is important for not only understanding teacher’s messages but also being understood in English. Moreover, proficiency in a particular language help learners participate in meaningful discourse and complete the task using language skills. Considering Jackson & Kaplan’s assertion therefore will make student language proficiency limited to practical application resulting to narrow understanding and confusion. For instance, if the idea of language proficiency in Lesson 1 will be strictly pursued then most graduates that will be assigned in different U.S. embassies, consulates, and other posts around the world are likely to encounter some problems in establishing meaningful and beneficial relationship with the locals. This is because their use of local language is limited to the common requirements of their work and therefore ineffective outside U.S. overseas facilities. Response overall Lesson 1 of Jackson & Kaplan’s report is only useful in practical terms as their interpretation of language proficiency is narrowed down to mere tool for completing tasks rather than mastery of the language. Lesson 2: Summary In lesson 2, Jackson & Kaplan reports that individuals have varying language-learning aptitude thus their success levels in language acquisition diverged. The reason provided is that some people, regardless of effort, learn better than others do. Another is the theoretical assumption that aptitude plays an important role in the learning process that they also claim can be learned and developed. These in particular are skills and awareness activating such ability and the experience, motivation, self-discipline, and level of concentration demonstrated by a certain learner. Discussion The above assertion regarding the effects of aptitude in language learning is legitimate and may be supported in full. Aptitude by definition implies individual differences in learning and natural ability to acquire knowledge which in this case is acquiring language skills at a fast and convenient rate. However, aptitude should not be confused with IQ and other special skills because it is independent of motivation, personality type, opportunity to learn, and learning environment . In language learning, aptitude is divided into four major abilities. These include phonemic coding ability (ability to code foreign sounds so it can be remembered later), grammatical sensitivity (ability to recognise the grammatical functions of words in sentences), inductive language learning activity (ability to identify patterns of correspondence), and rote learning ability or the ability to form and remember associations between stimuli . These abilities suggest that aptitude is unique and in certain occasion exclusive to certain individual as not all people possess these abilities. For instance, not all individuals possess the ability to recognise grammatical functions particularly when an unfamiliar language is concern. Similarly, to form and remember associations between stimuli may be easy for some but it can be frustrating to others particularly when forming and remembering associations between multiple stimuli. In terms of learning and developing aptitude, the idea presented by Jackson & Kaplan is correct and may be supported because language-learning aptitude is not a gift or talent for learning languages but mere speed at which people can learn new languages. MLAT or Modern Language Aptitude Test is in fact created to measure the rate of learning rather than the level of personal talent . Aptitude is also not achievement or proficiency but results of a learning process as it can be hampered or discouraged by teaching methodologies and other learning contexts . Moreover, the concept of aptitude has been developed not to elevate a particular individual capacity but to explain differences in language learning. Therefore, aptitude is not about a person’s general ability to learn but specific to individual capacity to learn languages . In further support of Jackson & Kaplan’s Lesson 2, it is important to note that some individuals who started language learning late in life were able to attain native-like second language pronunciation. According to , this phenomenon suggest that some people have aptitude for pronouncing unfamiliar sounds and sound sequences. Longitudinal studies focusing on language learning and aptitude shows that good language learners are those who believe that they will learn and the language they are studying is worth learning. Studies conducted on language learning suggest that language learners often take conscious steps to enhance their learning while other research shows that learners, regardless of levels proficiency, use language-learning strategies. More importantly, successful language learners use multiple strategies and are highly motivated to succeed . Application In my experience as a learner, motivation is important in learning. In language learning, my assumption is that motivation can be developed through interaction with others with same interest and may be dramatically improved if such interaction occurs with native speakers of the target language. For instance, language learners who seldom encounter native speakers have least knowledge how a particular language is actually applied thus less enthusiastic in learning the language. In contrast, those who often interact and communicate with native speakers have more idea of that particular language use and therefore highly motivated in pursuing his or her language-learning course. Although mostly unaware, some people seems to employ sort of learning strategies to enhance their respective learning. For instance, some of my colleagues appear to be more effective learners and employ their learning styles in a more organised manner than others. Moreover, they are somewhat self-directed and improving their performance most of the time. On my own, I often apply my learning style and perceive the need to use multiple learning strategies in order to improve my performance. Based on my experience, language learning is not mere acquisition of knowledge because it seems equally important to know how the language can be applied. For instance, we often used our linguistic knowledge to read, speak, listen, write, and perform various communication tasks successfully. In essence, these activities represent appropriate use of language in a give context thus mere declarative knowledge of the target language is not enough. The point here is the fact that varying language –learning aptitude is a product of individual motivation to learn and ability to use learning strategies rather having a gift or talent. Note that Jackson & Kaplan’s Lesson 2 specifically mentioned the various triggering mechanisms of aptitude and these include not only skills but also awareness, experience, motivation, self-discipline, level of concentration by a willing learner. By analysis, the inclusion of this triggering mechanism is intentional and recognition of the fact that effective language-learning aptitude requires multiple skills and constructive behaviour. Response overall Jackson & Kaplan’s emphasis on the impact of various language-learning aptitudes in students’ success levels is useful and constructive. This is because there are indeed individual differences in learning and ability to acquire knowledge particularly in the speed that such knowledge is absorbed. Lesson 3: Summary In Lesson 3, Jackson & Kaplan reports that there are many ways to teach and learn languages thus there is no such things as “right syllabus”. The reasons provided to support this assumption is the fact that students in other language training programs regardless of teaching and learning method used and syllabi structure learn languages effectively. Another is the findings of the study conducted by Larsen-Freeman in 1991 suggesting that learner’ needs change eventually thus fixed curriculum and standard teaching method will not always work. Failure to provide learner requirements at the time they need it can result to frustration, loss of focus, and eventually ineffective language acquisition. Lastly, Jackson & Kaplan emphasises the importance of clarity in instructions and introducing language students to the rudiments of a subject (ex. grammar) early in the course. This awareness according to the report help learners learn efficiently and reduce probability of errors. Discussion In support of Lesson 3, correctly reported the needs of language students. According to for instance, students in foreign language classes often view grammar subject as a “hovering” and “threatening cloud below the classroom ceiling” simply because of associated boredom and lack of interest in grammar instructions. Analysis of language learning strategies suggests that most of them contain not only combinations of declarative and procedural knowledge but intentional behaviours and complex processes . This indicate that student motivation, aptitude, age, sex, prior education, cultural background, and learning style can significantly affect the effectiveness and outcome of language training . According to , motivated students or those more willing to learn often succeed while others particularly those that consider themselves as poor language learners and view certain aspects of training as worthless often fail. The assumption that there is no “one right way” to teach or learn languages is therefore rational as students have varying learning needs. A good example of the idea emphasised in Lesson 3 is the way language instructions and curriculum are regularly revised is some Western states. In the United States for instance, most foreign language instructions are derived from several factors such subject content, thematic context, appropriate language vocabulary, structures and functions, and correct technique and pacing . However, these language instructions are not intended for all types of students thus their content is continuously revised and carefully aligned to specific group of students. For instance, vocabulary and language structures are often revised to complement lesson content and students’ language level . In Australia, AMEP or the Australian Adult Immigrant Education Program was initially based on centralised curriculum where course materials are produced by a team of curriculum writers. However, due to the large influx of Southeast Asian refugees in the later 1970s and early 1980s, the Australian government realised that a single curriculum cannot cater to a large and diverse group of learners. Consequently, AMEP abandoned its centralised approached and embraced a need-based philosophy . Similarly, Denmark adopted a need-based approach in language learning thus every student is assessed to determine their learning needs and supported accordingly. For instance, Denmark developed an early language evaluation and support where bilingual children undergo early language screening and receive language stimulation whenever required. In terms of second language learning for adults, the Danish government integrate language and content learning vocational education in order for bilingual students to improve their Danish language proficiency . These examples suggest that centralised curriculum is no longer acceptable as the need of learners change rapidly. Similarly, language teaching and learning strategies should be flexible and based on needs rather predefined procedures. Application As a learner, I am aware of my learning needs and believed in Jackson & Kaplan’s assumption that there are many ways to teach and learn languages. My view of need-based approach is optimistic as based on own experience, centralised curriculum only benefits those with standard learning needs. For instance, there are times when learning is difficult because the learning materials provided is not suitable for my learning conditions and limitations. Some teachers are more like theorist than practical people who are ready to provide immediate learning support and supervision such as learning materials that matches my interest. According to , the failure of students to learn language instruction cannot be attributed to the absence of appropriate aptitude but deprivation of opportunities to learn the language, lack of learning environment that can accelerate their language learning, and prospect to learn the language in a normal steady pace. As opposed to need-based approaches, most centralised teaching strategy and curriculum often assume that all students are the same. For instance, since computers have been around for many years, some teachers assume that all students in their class are familiar with computer-based tutorials thus; the need to provide training on how to work in a computer environment is generally ignored. Similarly, students who obtained lower English proficiency scores and eventually taking a language class are assumed to be completely ignorant of the language and could correctly answer an English test. Consequently, language instructions and test instruments are considered suitable for the student and therefore effective regardless of the fact that some students are already knowledgeable and competent before the tutorial or test. Response overall Lesson 3 is undoubtedly realistic in the sense students have different learning needs. Need-based approach is therefore more preferable than centralised approach not only because of consistent changes in learner’s needs but from the fact that boredom and lack of interest often result to frustration, loss of focus, and ineffective learning. References Bohn, O. S. & Munro, M. J. (2007). Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In honor of James Emil Flege, John Benjamins Publishing Company Byram, M. & Hu, A. (2013). Routledge Enyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning, Taylor & Francis Coelho, E. (2012). Language and Learning in Multilingual Classrooms: A Practical Approach, Multilingual Matters Deinzer, E. (2009). Teaching Grammar: Approaches and Methods, GRIN Verlag Ellis, R. & Fotos, S. (1999). Learning a Second Language Through Interaction, J. Benjamins Gordon, T. (2007). Teaching Young Children a Second Language, Praeger Publishers Hansen, L. (2012). Second Language Acquisition Abroad: The LDS Missionary Experience, John Benjamins Publishing Company Jackson, F. & Kaplan, M. (2001). Lessons learned from fifty years of theory and practice in government language teaching, Georgetown University Press.Washington D.C. Koch, A. (2008). What are Language Learning Strategies and How Can They Contribute To a Better Learning?, GRIN Verlag Macaro, E. (2010). Continuum Companion to Second Language Acquisition, Bloomsbury Academic Muñoz, C. (2006). Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning, Multilingual Matters Naughton, B., Nusche, D. & Wurzburg, G. (2010). OECD Reviews of Migrant Education: Denmark 2010, OECD Publishing Nikolov, M. (2009). Early Learning of Modern Foreign Languages: Processes and Outcomes, Multilingual Matters Nunan, D. (2012). Learner-Centered English Language Education: The Selected Works of David Nunan, Taylor & Francis O'Malley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition, Cambridge University Press Oxford, R. L., Teaching, U. o. H. a. M. S. L. & Center, C. (1996). Language Learning Motivation: Pathways to the New Century, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawaiì at Mānoa Robinson, P. (2013). The Routledge Encyclopedia of Second Language Acquisition, Routledge Romo, C. V. (2012). Hypnagological method: accelerative language learning for adults, Editorial Club Universitario Semonsky, C. M. S. & Spielberger, M. A. (2004). Early Language Learning: A Model for Success, Information Age Pub.  Read More