The Implications of Inter-language Analysis in the Development of Materials for Teaching Speaking (Matsda, LeedsMet Uni.2010)

The Implications of Inter-language Analysis in the Development of Materials for Teaching Speaking

BYAbdulmalik Y. Ofemile & Choonmi Kim

MA (TESOL& ICT) MA (TESOL)School of Education,

University Of Leeds, UK

Presented at the 8th Materials Development/MATSDA Postgraduate Research Conference 2010Building Bridges: Research, Materials,

Classroom Practice and Beyond

Saturday 15th May, 2010 09:30am – 16:30pmLeeds Metropolitan University

Leslie Silver International FacultyCaedmon Hall, Headingley Campus, Leeds

IntroductionThis paper is looking at a triangulation and application of three knowledge

areas in the process of materials development for teaching and learning speaking skills in a second language acquisition context.

The knowledge areas include, Inter Language Analysis (ILA), Speaking skills, and Language materials design. The concepts of Needs Analysis (NA) and content development will be subsumed under these broad areas as the implications of triangulation become manifest.

We will focus on our contexts, summary of our research work, brief discussion of basic concepts from literature, the implications for materials development and our concluding thoughts on the work done.

05/18/10 Abdulmalik Ofemile & Choonmi Kim 3

Our Contexts

Expanding Circle

Outer circle

Inner circle

UK, USACanada

India, NigeriaSingapore

South Korea, ChinaRussiaTheThree Circles(Kachru, 1985) Fig. 1

Adapted fromCrystal, (2010 :107)


Our contexts Outer Circle (Nigeria) English is the language of government,

politics, business, education, communication and national unity.

Nigerian varieties: Pidgin & Educated Nigerian English, Popular Nigerian English (Ofemile, 2010 citing Odumuh, 1987; Jowitt, 1991)

Failure in the secondary school certificate examination in English is rising.(Wedell, 2010 citing Bomgbose, 2001) The result for 2010 shows that less than 2% of candidates passed(Ofemile, 2010)

Expanding Circle (S. Korea)The 6th National curriculum (Mar.1995 to

Feb.2002) made English a compulsory subject for students from the third grade of primary school until graduating from high school (Kim, 2010)

English language is a requirement for admission into the best Universities and for getting the best jobs.

Learners do not get to use the language adequately outside the classroom.

$15.3 billion expended on private lessons in 2005 (Guardian Weekly cited in Wedell, 2010)

Vernacular style Careful style (more pidgin-like) Style 2 Style 3 Style 4 Style n (more TL/NL like)

Literature Review Inter-language

Unattended speech data

Attended speech data

Various elicitation tasks: elicited imitation,sentence-combining,etc

Grammatical intuition data

Inter Language continuum.(Tarone 1983:152) Fig.2


Literature Review.Selinker (1972 cited in Davies,1989) Inter

Language (Henceforth IL) is a learner’s language characterized by permeability, dynamism, and systematicity. Thus, IL is continually evolving with more input to the learner and revision by the learner (Lightbown &Spada, 2006)

IL describes the structured system constructed

by the learner at every stage of his

development. (Ellis, 1985)

'Sensitive Period Hypothesis'

Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is possible at any age but, it is impossible to achieve native-like competence. (Patwoski, 2006 citing Lennenberg, 1967) Thus, IL is a continuum that represents the learner's development. (Fig. 2) above.

As second language speaker sand teachers of English experience shows that Patwoski is right but, we must add that this however depends on several factors like context, the relationship between L1 and the target language, and the learners attitude and background.


Literature Review.

Needs Analysis Has been variously defined and described

(Munby, 1977; Richterich & Chancerel, 1977/1980; Widdowson, 1984; Hutchinson & Waters, 1987; Queeney, 1995; Jordan, 1997; Benech, 2001, Ofemile, 2009).

From the above we deduced that NA has the following properties.

• It is a learner-centered process

• It involves data collection and processing

• It provides information on the design, implementation and evaluation of learning experiences.

• The learning experiences meet the needs of the learners, Institutions, and Society.

Needs classified for ease of identification.

McDonough, (1984)Hutchinson and Waters, (1987); Mushare, (1992) and Benesch, (2001).

For our purpose,'Target needs (what a learner will do in order to learn). Learning needs (what the learner will do in a target situation) Hutchinson and Waters, (1987) will suffice because they help give focus to the paper.


Literature Review. Speaking skill in context

Speaking overlaps with many areas of language. It can be seen as an aspect of production or from the social aspects ie attitudes towards productive skills. (Hughes, 2002)

our understanding of Hughes goes thus:

As an aspect of production, spoken discourse is context dependent, usually unplanned, transient, uses oral/aural media and is dynamic.

From the social aspect, spoken discourse is perceived as an inter- personal locus of change, that is informal, rhetorical, stigmatized and a primary form of language.

We believe that these are the qualities and functions of spoken discourse. Just as in writing, learners learn to speak and speak to learn and we believe that there is a parallel here with 'competence and performance'.

The first refers to skill acquisition while the second refers to the ability to use the skill in the 'target situation'. A combination of the two provide what Harmer, (2007) calls 'rehearsal opportunities' to use the language for a purpose and as a skill.


Literature Review. Materials Design

It is a process that begins with identification of competences or needs assessment, then determining goals and objectives, conceptualizing content, and finally, selecting and developing materials and activities.(Graves, 1996)

This view sees material development as an integral part of course development.

Tomlinson(2005)citing Jolly and Bolitho (1998:97-8) presents a framework that focuses on procedures for developing materials thus:

Identification of need for materials

Exploration of need

Contextual realization of materials

Pedagogical realization of materials

Production of materials

Student use of materials

Evaluation of materials against agreed objectives


Literature Review.

We find this framework most useful because it is systematic, coherent purposeful and flexible. This review has given a mulch-dimensional insights to this paper.

We will now go further to give a comparative analysis of our researches in IL.


Research Analysis

The Learners' Background Korean(Lee) an Engineer and a

Nigerian (Nkiru) a teacher. We are using Pseudonyms

Lee speaks Korean and English. He learned English in Korea and Canada, rarely uses English at work but his composition skills are good.

Nkiru speaks Igbo,a smattering of Yoruba, pidgin English, Popular Nigerian English, and Standard British English. She is a post-graduate student in the UK.

The Research Tasks

The subjects were expected to:

Talk about themselves

Narrate or re-tell a story

Relate an experience that is of significance to them.


Research Analysis Aims Ascertain their linguistic

competences in the use of English language in interaction.

Ascertain their Listening and speaking skills.

Identify areas of deficiencies

Data CollectionWe used unstructured

interviews recorded using Skype over three interview sessions.


Research Analysis (Research Methodology)

Data Analysis Recorded interviews

were converted into transcripts using voice walker.

We analyzed data obtained using Canale's (1983) framework of communicative competence.

Results were classified under:

Phonology

Grammar

Vocabulary

pragmatics


Findings Phonology Nkiru's pronunciation was

good with an intermediate level of fluency.

However, she commits local errors attributable to transfers from L1 e.g. Omission of sounds like /t/ in 'least'.

Lee also has good pronunciation but, he displays a mixed grill of abilities.

In one instance, he correctly articulates and distinguishes between the sounds /r/ and /l/ in words like 'generally'. However, when these sounds occur in individual words, he switches them as in 'actualy' articulated as /ri:/. Other sounds include /v/ as /b/ and /z/ as /dz/. These sounds do not exist in Korean.


Findings GrammarNkiru's mastery of sentence formation is

very good. She was able to place morphemes in their proper positions to make sentences.

Lee on the other hand, displayed a good level of competence in the use of present tense but, his use of past tense and articles (a, the) were inaccurate while copula and regular 'be' forms were ommited. Examples include 'Ah, he style very strong'; 'I think he increase economy better now'

VocabularyNkiru code mixes registers (e.g. 'eba'

'fufu') with English language. She uses interjections and discourse particles like 'aho' (what do I care or how do I know) from Nigerian languages in her expressions. Her choice of words are varied and her repertoire of words very high.

Lee shows a limited choice of words which maybe an indication of the level of his development in the language.


Findings PragmaticsNkiru displayed an appreciable level of

proficiency in pragmatic skills. She was able to employ formulaic expressions without depending on them, interpret requests, recognize and respond to conversation starters,employ co-constructions to complete clauses as well as use a mixture and shift in tense 'complicating action'.(Ofemile, 2009, 2010)

Lee used and relied on formulaic expressions like 'I studied...' but, his discourse skills are good which can be attributed to a positive transfer from Korean.

He is able to express his feelings about issues albeit in a confusing manner.

For example, he calls a 'puppy' 'baby dog'. This is a transfer from a Korean near equivalent expression 'kae saeki'. This is an attempt (Harmer,2007)that has pragmatic implications. The expression is considered a solecism in Korean culture and it is to an extent nonsensical in English.


ImplicationsWe believe that ILA has implications for

material development in the following areas:

• Needs analysis

• Types of materials ie classification

• Usability

• Contextual focus

Needs Analysis.ILA employs approaches that are

systematic and empirically established by a careful accumulation and analysis of data e.g. Canale's framework. These approaches are universally acceptable, they account for variations across IL sub-systems (phonology, grammar, vocabulary & pragmatics), and they are internally consistent, parsimonious and elegant, (Tarone, 1989).

NA tries to get information about the learners' perceptions of their needs and how others perceive them


Implications

Needs AnalysisIn view of the scientific and pragmatic nature of IL, we believe that it may be used to

strengthen the process of identification and elaboration of needs in materials development. Errors or language variations identified will now become the learners' needs. For example, our studies observed that the subjects need more pragmatic knowledge of English language to function and communicate effectively, thus, content design will include politeness, turn taking in conversation, or even elements of interaction in English language discourse.

Apart from that IL can be used as a lead on to other aspects of NA in materials development using the steps recommended below, (Fig 3).


IL strengthens data gathering processes in Needs Analysis

Set Speech Context

Set Interaction Objectives

Frame specific Questions

Administration (Interviews)

Analysis

Needs Identification & Evaluation

STEP 1.....

STEP 2.....

STEP 3.......STEP 4.......STEP 5......

STEP 6......

Fig 3


IL strengthens data gathering processes in Needs Analysis

Step 1: Determined by the communicative function of the language bearing in various contexts (Tarone, 1988)

Step 2:the purpose of the study should be set in a favourable linguistic environment.e.g. assessing the extent of linguistic competence in spoken English. (Ofemile, 2010, Kim 2010; Schumann, 1978b, Ellis, 1984a)

Step 3: Frame interview questions bearing in mind socio-situational factors like Tarone's (1988) social and pedagogical norms that may or may not conflict with the learner's background. (See Ellis, 1992 citing Lardiere, 2007)

Step 4: spontaneous recordings of speech by researcher, unstructured interviews, pre-planned sociolinguistic interactions to check 'observer paradox' (Labov, 1972 cited in Tarone, 1988; Ellis,2009)

Step 5:Focused analysis of transcribed spoken data using accepted theoretical standards e.g. Canale's four aspects of communicative competence.

Step 6: NA strategies are used in assessing linguistic competences or incompetence identified. Such strategies will include comparing the learner's linguistic performance with the accepted expected standard. A variance analysis will yield further the learner's needs at the evaluation stage.


ImplicationsTypes of materials

Input from ILA will help in raising teachers' and learners' awareness about ESL settings, methods and materials development. This will help in the inclusion of contextualized learning activities, strategies and exercises in classroom speaking materials and resources that can promote interaction in the target language. (Ofemile,2010; citing Jianda, 2008; Ellis, !987; Kim, 2010).

This implies that ILA input can aid the decision about the the type and function of speaking material to be developed e.g paper based or electronic; classwork, examination, or which specific learner need to meet.

Usability

We are of the opinion that ILA input can help in evaluating these materials in an empirical manner. This idea becomes relevant here since materials now include electronic resources like podcast, voice recorders, voice chats, video chats, CD/DVD, mp3, mp4 and other web based resources. ILA is used to identify learner needs and these materials and resources will be employed to give tasks that will remedy deficiencies.

Thus, materials will be assessed for 'learnability, Efficiency, Memorability, Errors and satisfaction' (Nielson,1993:26)


ImplicationsThis evaluation will simply ascertain

whether or not the speaking material is easy to learn, efficient to use, easy to remember, allows the learner to commit only a few errors, and is pleasant to use.(Nielson, 1993).

From experience, we find that these factors to a large extent determine the level of interaction that can be generated in the classroom. Thus, a positive result implies high interaction between the learner and the material and a negative indicates poor interaction with no learning taking place.

Contextual focus

Finally, we believe that the role of ILA in the future development of English language as an international language will become more pronounced. This belief is based upon the striking similarities that occurred in the results of our independent researches of learners that represent the outer circle and expanding circle.

Secondly, Graddol's (2010) futuristic axioms about India, which we find in view of the results above to be increasingly relevant to our research contexts


ImplicationsThese are summarized thus;

• There is a major shift towards English

• There are three main drivers for English

• English has escaped from the library

• Sustained economic growth requires more English speakers

• National Improvement in English is too slow

• English is a casualty of wider problems in Indian(Nigerian, Korean) education

• There is a huge shortage of English teachers, and

8.Surveys of English proficiency levels are needed. (Graddol 2010,14-15).

Material developers will continually

have to bear in mind this ever widening contexts and ILA has the potential of presenting critical data for those designers who desire to promote mutually intelligible materials for teaching and learning speaking or oral communication in English language internationally.


Conclusion This paper has looked at the influence of ILA on materials development based on studies carried out in two contexts. We must quickly add that, we interviewed only one subject each and in three events and to these extents can the results be generalized. However, we think that more of these studies are needed in other contexts with other specifications to build a body of knowledge in preparation for a future which is very near.


References/Bibliography

BENESCH, S (2001) Critical English for Academic purposes: Theory, politics, and practice. Mawah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

CRYSTAL, D (2010). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of English Language. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press p 107.

ELLIS (1994) ‘Differences between L1 and L2 acquisition (based on Bley-Vroman 1988)’

ELLIS , R (1997) SLA Research and Language Teaching. London: Oxford University Press. Chps 5&6.

ELLIS , R (2009) The study of second language acquisition. Second Edition. London: Oxford University Press. Chps 5&6.

ELLIS, R (1987) ‘Contextual variability in Second Language Acquisition and the relevancy of language teaching’ In R, Ellis (Ed) Second Language Acquisition in context. London: Prentice Hall International. Pp 179-195.

GRADDOL, D (2010) English Next India: The future of English in India. India: British Council. Pp14-15

GRAVES, K (1996) ‘A framework of course development processes’ In K. Graves (Ed). Teachers as course Developers. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.

HARMER, J (2007) The Practice of English Language Teaching. Fourth Edition. London. Pearson Longman.

HUGHES, R (2002) Teaching and Researching Speaking. London: Longman. pp 5-25

HUTCHINSON, T & A.T. Waters (1987) English For Specific Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

JOWITT, D (1991) Nigerian English Usage. An Introduction. Ikeja: Longman (Nig) Limited. Part1

KIM, C (2010)' Second assignment: Investigating Language for EDUC 5902 Submitted to School of Education, University of Leeds. (Unpublished)

MCDONOUGH, J (1984) ESP in Perspective: A practical guide. London: Collins ELT

MUNBY, J (1976). Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

NIELSON, J (1993) Usability Engineering New York: Academic press. P26.

OFEMILE, A.C (2009) ‘First assignment: Investigating Language for EDUC 5902 Submitted to School of Education, University of Leeds. (Unpublished)

OFEMILE, A.C (2010)Second assignment: Investigating Language for EDUC 5902 Submitted to School of Education, University of Leeds. (Unpublished)

References/Bibliography

RICHTERICH, R & J-L Chancerel, (1980) Identifying the Needs of Adults Learning a Foreign Language. Council of Europe Modern Languages project. Oxford: Pergamon press

TARONE, E. (1983) ‘Variability in Interlanguage use: a study of style- shifting in morphology and syntax’ In Language Learning. 35/3. 373-404

TARONE, E. (1983). ‘On the variability of Interlanguage Systems’ In Applied Linguistics 4/2 pp143 – 163

TARONE, E. (2008). ‘A Sociolinguistic Perspective on Interaction in SLA1’ In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple Perspectives on Interaction. in SLA. Routledge Publishers.

TARONE, E.& Liu, G. (1995).Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory* In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in honour of H.G. Widdowson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 107-124.

TOMLINSON, B (2005) ‘Developing Principled frameworks for materials development’ In B,Tomlinson (Ed) Developing Materials For Language Teaching. London. Continuum. pp107-129

Voice Walker download from

http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/projects/transcription/tools.html

http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/projects/transcription/tools.html