Abstract
In ‘Language awareness and language learning’ (Svalberg, 2007) I concluded that the otherwise diverse and multidisciplinary field of language awareness (LA) is given coherence by its focus on engagement with language. I argued that LA is seen as active and not merely as a state of conscious awareness or sensitivity. This paper goes one step further by developing and testing the construct. It discusses what engagement with language might consist of and contrasts with and how it can be identified. Cognitive, social, and affective aspects of engagement, including notions such as attention, autonomy, and agency, are posited. Having arrived at first at a working definition and then an expanded and refined definition, the construct is applied to some classroom and student interview data. Some tentative conclusions about English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) students' engagement with language, what motivates, facilitates, and hinders it, are drawn. The main purpose of the paper is, however, to try and determine the usefulness or otherwise of the construct as such, how it relates to other constructs in the literature, and where it might be taken in future research.
Highlights
In a recent review paper of Language Awareness (LA) I stated that despite being a very ‘broad church’, LA is given coherence in both classroom practice and research by its focus on engagement with language:A shared concern, I would argue, of LA practitioners and researchers, is the notion of engagement with language
Having determined what Engagement means, and acknowledging that this is a work in progress, the purpose of the remainder of this paper is to try and determine how useful the construct might be to LA, and where it might be taken in future LA research
Because from just a couple of weeks ago we study a lot class this afternoon – it’s about Britain and the world
Summary
In a recent review paper of Language Awareness (LA) I stated that despite being a very ‘broad church’, LA is given coherence in both classroom practice and research by its focus on engagement with language:. A shared concern, I would argue, of LA practitioners and researchers, is the notion of engagement with language. The everyday contexts in which the term ‘engagement’ is used are suggestive: cogs engage, armies engage in battle, people get engaged (to be married) It seems to suggest physical or metaphorical close contact, and some force driving things forward or pushing in a direction. 99) and is linked to the quality of attention on which, as Storch (2008) points out, little research has been done It seems an intuitively apt term for what happens in LREs but is potentially a richer notion than this might imply. In order to facilitate a clearer understanding, and make it researchable and able to be evaluated as a construct, ‘engagement with language’ needs detailed interrogation.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
