| | | | | the most important thing in managing discourse with |
| In this paper I will discuss the main aspects of | | | | native speakers is to ensure that the topic of the |
| language development for L2 classrooms. My paper | | | | conversation is understood. Otherwise, the |
| will be divided into 5 sections; input, output, | | | | communication process will not be so helpful (for the |
| interaction, scaffolding and interlanguage. First, I will | | | | L2 students). Moreover, the native speaker should |
| talk about input and output and their importance in | | | | make sure that the conversation (or the talking) is |
| language development process, furthermore, which is | | | | done by both, native and non-native speakers in an |
| more important to the L2 students in their language | | | | equal amount. Richard-Amato gives an interesting |
| development process. Second, I will discuss the | | | | example from John-Steiner who mentioned that |
| interaction aspect relying mainly on Richard-Amato | | | | Finnish immigrant children entering Swedish schools |
| and Vygotskys' studies. Third, I am going to explain | | | | and experienced severe difficulties in their language |
| the scaffolding technique and how it benefits the L2 | | | | development process because "they were at first |
| learners in learning their second language. Finally, my | | | | placed in very structured classrooms where there |
| talk will cover the interlanguage aspect in the second | | | | was little chance for meaning interaction" (p. 90), |
| classroom. | | | | where the teacher did most the talking and the |
| | | | | children where only receiving input without any |
| First I would like to start my talk by discussing the | | | | interaction. However, Richard-Amato argues that |
| input and the output and their importance in language | | | | interaction is an important to the learner's language |
| development process. Behaviorists view input as an | | | | development process, because interaction increases |
| important factor in learning a second language, while | | | | the level of proficiency for learners in the target |
| others see it less important. Ellis (1994) argues that | | | | language. |
| input is indeterminate, which means the information | | | | Now I will move to the scaffolding technique in |
| that it supplies is, by itself "insufficient to enable | | | | language development. This technique has been |
| learners to arrive at the rules of the target language" | | | | widely used in ESL classes. Hammond and Gibbons |
| (p. 243). However, Swain (1995) argues that the | | | | (2005) mention that Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) |
| importance to learning of output could be that output | | | | were the first to introduce the term ‘scaffolding' |
| forces the learner to process language more deeply | | | | as a metaphor "to capture the nature of support and |
| "with more mental effort than does input" (p. 126), | | | | guidance in learning, where they used this term to |
| thus, with output the learner is in control. She also | | | | describe how parents teach their young children the |
| assumes that by focusing on output "we may be | | | | language. I have to mention here that Vygotsky did |
| focusing on ways in which learners can play more | | | | not use the term ‘scaffolding', but "its theoretical |
| active, responsible roles in their learning" (p.126). | | | | basis lies very much within a Vygotskian framework" |
| According to Swain (1995), output has to do with | | | | (p. 8). However, I think scaffolding is an important |
| accuracy more than fluency, although practice may | | | | technique for L2 learners because its ability to make |
| increase fluency but it does not necessarily improve | | | | the student know "not only what to think and do, |
| accuracy. However, Swain sees focusing on output is | | | | but how to think and do" (Hammond and Gibbons, |
| better than focusing on input, because output may | | | | 2005:p.5). Thus, Hammond and Gibbons (2005) |
| improve second language learner in much more ways | | | | described scaffolding as temporary help from a |
| than what input does. Thus, she argues that output | | | | professional (the teacher) until the learner reaches |
| has three functions which are: | | | | the required level of knowledge, because what the |
| | | | | teacher do is fostering the students to complete the |
| - 1. Noticing | | | | task, first, by giving help and support, then leave |
| In this function Swain discusses that output increases | | | | them to complete it without his or her intervention. |
| noticing for the second language learner. Because | | | | Furthermore, Mercer (1994) pointed out that when |
| when L2 learners speak, they notice their problems in | | | | the teacher for example, gives a question and |
| the language, therefore, they try to do something | | | | answer that question, then after that he or she gives |
| about them. Furthermore, when learners encounter | | | | a new question to the students to answer it by |
| problems or difficulties in producing the L2 language, | | | | themselves without help, the teacher here attempts |
| "they do engage in thought processes of a sort | | | | to bring the learners into a state of competence |
| which may play a role in second language learning" | | | | which enables them to accomplish the required task |
| (Swain, 1995: p. 130), therefore, noticing raises | | | | by their own, in order to "grasp a particular concept |
| learner's awareness of his or her gaps in the target | | | | or achieve a particular level of understanding" (p.97). |
| language, it plays "a consciousness-raising role" (p. | | | | No doubt that this technique is good and popular in |
| 130) and trigger cognitive processes that have drawn | | | | teaching second language, but it characterised by |
| in second language learning. | | | | how the teacher "is able to judge the need and |
| - 2. Hypothesis-testing function | | | | quality of assistance required by the learner" |
| In Hypothesis-testing function, Swain (1995) argues | | | | (Hammond and Gibbons, 2005:p. 5). |
| that some errors appear in L2 students' written and | | | | Finally, I will talk about interlanguage and error |
| spoken production of the target language "reveal | | | | correction aspect of language development. |
| hypotheses held by them about how the target | | | | Interlanguage refers to the separateness of a |
| language works" (p. 131). Thus, in order the learner | | | | second language learner's system, a system which is |
| test a hypothesis, he or she needs to do something; | | | | not the native language or the target language; but |
| otherwise, changes in the output would not be | | | | instead falls between the two. Thus, interlanguage is |
| expected following feedback. Swain suggests in this | | | | the type of language produced by L2 learners. In |
| function that second language learners may use their | | | | language learning, learner's errors are caused by |
| output to try out "new language forms and | | | | several different processes, according to Richards et |
| structures as they stretch their interlanguage to | | | | al (1992: p.186), which they are: |
| meet communicative needs; they may output just to | | | | - - Borrowing patterns from the target language. |
| see what works and what does not" (p. 132). | | | | - - Extending patterns form the target language. |
| - 3. Conscious reflection | | | | - - Expressing meanings using the words and |
| In this function, Swain illustrates that learners should | | | | grammar which already known. |
| communicate about language, in the circumstance of | | | | Furthermore, Brown (1994) in his paper about |
| producing something they want to say in the L2 | | | | interlanguage and error analysis mentioned some |
| language. Swain argues that learners negotiate | | | | theories regard error correction pattern, which I think |
| meaning, but the content of that negotiation is | | | | they are really helpful for ESL teacher in L2 learners |
| language form "and its relation to the meaning they | | | | teaching process. One of them, (which I found it as |
| are trying to express" (p. 133). As a result, learners | | | | the most important) is the Vigil and Oller's model |
| produce language and after that they reflect upon it, | | | | which depends on using green, red, and yellow lights |
| by using the language to "negotiate about form" | | | | as signals for the L2 learner (or the sender); where |
| (p.133). | | | | the green light allows the sender to "continue |
| Second, I would like to discuss the interaction in | | | | attempting to get a message across"(Brown, 1994:p. |
| language development which has a close relative to | | | | 119); a red light means that the sender most abort |
| target language input. Richard-Amato (1988) discusses | | | | such attempts; and yellow light means the learner |
| Piaget (1979) and Vygotskys' (1978) view regarding | | | | falls somewhere in between a complete green light |
| interaction in the target language. Richard-Amato | | | | and a red light. Thus, this theory concludes that |
| argues that Piaget's view on how the L2 learners | | | | "cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be |
| develop a language is that L2 learners must be | | | | affective" (Brown, 1994:p. 220). Moreover, Brown |
| exposed to input that adequate to their level of | | | | (1994) illustrated an article by Hendrickson (1980), |
| development. On the other hand, according to | | | | where the writer in his article advised teachers to try |
| Richard-Amato, Vygotsky has different point of | | | | to distinguish between global and local errors. The |
| view. Vygotsky believes that the L2 learner has two | | | | local errors do not need correction "since the |
| levels of development "which have interacted with | | | | message is clear and correction might interrupt the |
| learning since the time of birth" (p. 88). Furthermore, | | | | learner in the flow of productive communication" |
| Vygotsky illustrated that learning is a social process | | | | (Brown, 1994:p. 221). On the other hand, the global |
| rather than an individual one which occurs in the | | | | errors need to be corrected somehow because the |
| interaction between individuals. Thus, Vygotsky | | | | message might be corrupted, thus, the learner does |
| asserted society as the determiner in universal | | | | not produce a productive output. |
| stages of development. However, Vygotsky pointed | | | | In today's class, I have discussed the main 5 aspects |
| out that each person has different opportunities of | | | | in language development, input, output, interaction, |
| interaction. He explained that children always behave | | | | scaffolding, and interlanguage. It is sensible to point |
| beyond their age. Thus, they do not do anything | | | | out here that the teacher should first know his or |
| without having rules. This view leads him to create | | | | her students in order to be able to evaluate them |
| the Zone of Proximal Development theory, which I | | | | and give them the assessment that goes with their |
| am not going to talk about it today. Furthermore, the | | | | needs as L2 students, whether by a short quiz or by |
| L2 social interactions with speakers from the target | | | | doing a brief interview if the number of your class is |
| language will strength the L2 language for learners. | | | | not big. By doing so, you facilitate the teaching and |
| However, for the L2 learners according to Ellis (1994), | | | | learning process in your classroom. |