Toward SLA Theory Formation

In his similarly titled chapter, Brown discusses the process by which we must go about

formulating a theory for ourselves, which by no means is an easy process (2007, p. 285) (See the

conclusion at the end of the paper for how the process ultimately turned out at the end of my

MATL experience). The process of formulating my own theory is not that dissimilar to the way

many view the SLA process. That is, hypotheses are formed, tested, and a structure is modified

as a result. Of course, this is in some senses the very essence of the scientific method.

Much of my understanding of SLA began long before this course, and even my first

course in the MATL program. When my interested in teaching languages was stimulated, I

began searching out resources online. Some of the resources I discovered (Center for Academic

Research on Language Acquisition [CARLA], Foreign Language Teachers Guide to Active

Learning, and Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen, to name a few) led me to

begin making hypotheses about how SLA took place. However, most of my understanding and

self-made hypothesis was extremely binary (e.g., I must use this type of instruction since Blaz

said so and not that other kind) and continued to be. Although I was successful with many of

the methodologies I did incorporate into my teaching repertoire, much of my understanding

increased my ego and made me extremely defensive and incapable of learning or accepting other

methodologies as appropriate.

It was not until I sought out to find a more balanced and systemic program to increase my

skills as a practitioner, that I entered the MATL program and ultimately, this course. The course

work in the MATL program drove my understanding through many phases of questioning,

testing and retesting of my beliefs about SLA and its implications on my teaching methods. My

understanding is now much more balanced and comprehensive than it ever was in the past.

Additionally (and what is ultimately most important to my future success as a learner), I now

more willingly listen to others points of view about SLA and consider how valid claims could be

incorporated into my understanding. Although I know I will never possess a complete and

definitely not static understanding of SLA, I acknowledge that I now possess much more

understanding about how so many factors work together in SLA and how that should affect my

instruction.

The aforementioned list represents some of the theories that I have taken in and begun to

include in what I believe SLA is. As a consequence to this understanding, there are numerous

pedagogical implications. Some questions I must ask myself when planning lessons and

instruction are: how much and what type of input should I provide to my students?, when and to

what extent should I require output, especially for novice level learners?, how can I best lower

students affective filters?, what strategies can I use to maximize time in the TL, both for me and

the students?, and what will I accept as evidence as learning and what will I not?. The list could

go on and on, however I will not attempt to address all facets of SLA in a single assignment.

This accentuates the fact that SLA is indeed complex and is something that I could never (for

temporal and cognitive reasons) attempt to implement so many things in my own classroom. For

this very reason, my understanding has pushed me to seek out colleagues in other places as a

form of hypothesis testing and result sharing.

Seeing as research will continue and that we will continually learn more and more about

SLA, it is imperative that I continue learning and testing out new ideas. As I approach the end of

my coursework, I am already considering what I need to do to be able to have access to research

databases so that I may continue personal research interests outside of my graduate studies.

Additionally, the MATL program has provided me with invaluable professional resources such

as the FLTEACH listserv through which I have been exposed to #langchat on twitter once a

week, LangCamp on Google+ and numerous other websites and resources that continually help

me to enhance my abilities as a teacher. The result of knowing so much more about SLA

furthers its own cause.

Part B: Dispelling a Common Myth: Im Not a Language Person!

This is a phrase that I often hear repeated by students who are struggling with foreign

language classes or adults who had issues in their foreign language classes in high school or

college. For some time I concurred with individuals who said this, but in recent years I have

come to a different conclusion. Prior to covering academic research that I believe stands in

contrast to this, I would like to take a moment to address the how this statement and others like it

are extremely limiting of oneself. I am first very saddened when I hear individuals use this as it

sounds as if they feel they are innately incapable of learning another language. This is an

attitude I wish to help my students overcome in whatever endeavors they have. I know that in

my life, having the feeling that I can truly do whatever I want, so long as I am willing and ready

to work hard, has helped me tremendously. Statements such as this one immediately shut down

that possibility. I will later relate my feelings toward this with academic research regarding it.

Research Review

To begin, I would like to question whether individuals who are saying the statement Im

not a language person are making the statement based out of belief in their inabilities or in their

difficulty to learn the language at the time they were in a class. The former, language aptitude, is

an elusive concept. In many cases, it is has been something difficult for scientists to measure

and more current research is leading toward a general learner aptitude that is not specific to

languages (Brown, p. 105-107). Contrastingly, another way of looking at language learning is by

a means of learning styles, a willingness-to-communicate, and other individual factors. That is

that language aptitude, if there is such a thing, would be a combination of many factors.

However, as we have seen with the intricacies of SLA, one cannot simply state that one factor

can completely explain the process of SLA. If language aptitude is a factor in SLA, then it

cannot be a single explanation for not acquiring a language.

Another point to be made is about UG and its implications with SLA. If we indeed all

possess a language acquisition device, then any aptitude for learning a language may be present,

but everyone has it by nature of the device. Since we all have acquired a language, it seems that

our LAD is working fine. Of course, according to Gass (2013, Aptitude, para.2) there is not

much research relating to language aptitude and L1, unless it is related to cognitive deficits. This

might require further investigation. However, difficulty in SLA may be a result of other factors

(an affective filter, general intelligence, current L1 ability, etc.) as opposed to a single language

aptitude.

It would seem then that my first comments about a students difficulty with learning a

language hold more to the mentioned factors as opposed to an inability to acquire a second

language. Furthermore, could it be that making statements like Im not a language person

indeed demonstrate the notion of affective factors on learning? If I believe I cannot learn a

language, I may not succeed at it for that very reason.

Concluding Remarks

I enrolled in this course in my next to last semester of the MATL program and it is the

last of the foreign language pedagogy courses that I must take to graduate. Interestingly though,

it has no prerequisites. Throughout this course I have seen theory after theory that has been

introduced in other courses crop up. Having already been partly exposed to these ideas has

facilitated the synthesis of all of the information presented throughout this course. Not to say that

it would be beneficial prior to taking other courses, of course. It has, for me, punctuated the end

of these courses for me in a way that I feel I have truly have begun to grasp the concept of SLA.

This final assignment serves as an integral part in demonstrating my understanding of how the

pieces of the SLA puzzle fit together, not only demonstrating what I have learned in this course,

but in all of the foreign language pedagogy course I have taken in the program. While the

assignment was meant for this purpose, its importance to my knowledge base cannot be

understated.

References

Blaz, D. (1999). Foreign language teachers guide to active learning. New York, NY: Eye on Education.

Brown, H.D.(2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New York, NY:

Pearson Education.

Gass, S.M., Behney, J., & Plonsky, L. (2013). Second language acquisition: An introductory

course (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge

Goo, J., & Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition. 35, 127-165.

doi:10.1017/S0272263112000708

Lee, J., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language teaching happen (2nd

ed.).

New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Russell, V. (2014). A closer look at the output hypothesis: The effect of pushed output on

noticing and inductive learning of the Spanish future tense. Foreign Language Annals,

47(1), 25-47.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/flan.12077