Hi, Heather and Hannah!
Comprehension Questions
Comprehension Questions
1. What are four ways in output play a role in the process of second language learning of the output hypothesis?
2. What does acquisition without instruction or output occur? Please find example at least one in text.
3. What two forms do combination hypotheses involve?
Discussion Question
Stephen Krashen first examine direct confrontations, studies in which comprehension-based methods are compared with methods based on rivals hypotheses between “Experimental studies” and “Correlational studies.” Which one do you prefer and why?
1. First, it allows the development of automaticity in use. Second, it may force the learner to move from semantic processing to syntactic processing. Next, it might go through hypothesis testig. Last way is feedback, which can lead learners to modify or reprocess their output.
ReplyDelete2. Acquisition without instruction or output might cause serious problems, but not in all areas. When it comes to 'spelling' developmet, the difference between with instruction and without is minor. Those who had spelling instruction spelled better than uninstructed students in Grades 3-4, but the differences disappeared by Grade 4 and 5. Spelling aquisition with instruction only works when they start learning to spell.
3. First weak form is that comprehension is ecessary but not sufficient. Second is that acquisition is slow, and conscious learning or output can sppeed up the acquisition process.
DQ
Due to lack of understanding on Stephen Krashen's hypothesis, it's difficult for me to explain my preference. If I simply understand these two divided into 'in-school self-selected reading programmes' and 'extracurriculr readng', I would choose the second one. For both beginner and intermediate stages, the first way is effective, but for the above levels and those who move beyond their levels definitely need extracurricular reading. (Sorry, I'm not sure whether I catch the point or not.)
- Summary as a summarizer
ReplyDeleteThe first reading source is about 'Output hypothesis'. The main idea is that students seeks the output and take responsiblity for their learning. They wants to be pushed to do better, seeks feedback and reflects on future language use. Output might play a role in four ways; automaticity(fluency), reprocessing, testing and feedback. These can be accomplished both teacher-led and collaborative sessions.
The second reading source is about 'Comprehension hypothesis'. It shows lots of evidence and how they applies to each cases. Not only reviewing the hypothesis comparing to the chief rival 'output plus feedback' hypotheses, it draws direct instruction from each element of teaching method. It even provides a plausible explanation for non-human language acquisition such as Vervet monkey or birdsong examples.
1.
ReplyDelete- The first way in output is ‘learner’s development of automaticity in language use’. This is more focus on fluency rather than accuracy.
- It may force the learner to move from semantic processing to syntactic processing. Producing forces learners to recognize what they do not know or know partially.
- Producing language may serve the language learning process is through hypothesis testing.
- Output may be route to language learning. Feedback can lead learners to modify or ‘reprocess’ their output.
2.Acquisition without instruction/output causes serious problem for strong versions of skill-building and any output based hypothesis. Children learned to read on their own and very high levels of development of second language competence even for adults without formal instruction has been reported several times in the professional literature.
3.One of weak form is comprehension is necessary but not sufficient. Without formal teaching and comprehensible output, the acquirer will not reach the highest levels of competence. Another weak form is conscious learning and output can faster than acquisition process.
DQ.
I prefer experimental studies. Learning a language is not limited to writing issue. As a language development processing, ‘Total Physical Response’ is more likely the ideal way of learning. It is more effective than traditional intermediate instruction for literate.
As an Applier
As an applied in actual korean english classroom, teacher should plan the lesson considering student’s output. Teacher should withdraw proper output in the process of conscious/unconscious learning not by semantic, syntactic checking, but real feedback. Teacher should help learner’s reprocessing. And teacher lead to students to successful collaborative learning and encourage student to be more responsible for their own learning.