Abstract
We investigated the effectiveness of two different teaching methods based on two different theoretical views of how languages are learned in oral proficiency after three years of L2 French instruction. The first method is commonly used in the Netherlands and is in line with structure-based (SB) principles, viewing language as a set of grammar rules that need to be explained to achieve accuracy, usually in the L1. The second method aligns with dynamic-usage-based (DUB) principles in that language is viewed as a set of conventionalized routines that are learned through frequent exposure and the L2 is spoken exclusively in class. In a large study (Rousse-Malpat et al., 2019), the DUB method proved more effective, but the effects of method and L2 exposure could not be separated as the amount of L2 exposure is a crucial difference between the methods. However, one SB teacher spoke French almost exclusively, comparable to what happens in a DUB classroom. In this study, we compared this SB group with a DUB group matching in scholastic aptitude. The free oral L2 French production of 41 Dutch participants was measured in terms of holistic and analytical scores. The DUB method was more effective in terms of general proficiency, fluency, grammatical complexity, accuracy of the present tense, and overall L2 use. Our findings suggest that a teaching method in line with DUB principles is more beneficial in achieving overall oral proficiency and explicit grammar is not needed to achieve accuracy.
Highlights
If the past 50 years of research in L2 instruction has taught us anything, it is that the modern language classroom should be a place where learners are surrounded by meaningful L2 input and engage in motivating communicative activities in order to enhance their general proficiency level (Dörnyei, 2002; Krashen, 1981; Lantolf et al, 2015; Verspoor, 2017)
Because the method involves a great deal of L2 exposure and frequent repetition of meaningful utterances, the method is very much in line with dynamic-usage-based (DUB) principles (Verspoor, 2017), a combination of complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) and usagebased (UB) theories on language and language acquisition
The DUB group and the SB group could be compared with an independent t-test (α = .05)
Summary
If the past 50 years of research in L2 instruction has taught us anything, it is that the modern language classroom should be a place where learners are surrounded by meaningful L2 input and engage in motivating communicative activities in order to enhance their general proficiency level (Dörnyei, 2002; Krashen, 1981; Lantolf et al, 2015; Verspoor, 2017). In the Netherlands, as in Austria and France, most teachers still use methods that are based on structure-based (SB) views, where a focus on grammatical practice to achieve grammatical accuracy is viewed important (Graus & Coppen, 2018; Schurz & Coumel, 2020; West & Verspoor, 2016; see Lightbown & Spada, 2013) This is not so surprising as much L2 instructional research points to the effectiveness of some explicit focus on form (Goo et al, 2015; Norris & Ortega, 2000; Spada & Tomita, 2010). One small group of teachers, not satisfied with especially the oral proficiency outcomes, introduced the Accelerated Integrated Method (AIM) developed by Maxwell (2001) for teaching French to young children in Canada It is based on story scripts, in which the target language is spoken exclusively. Teaching methods in line with these principles do not see language as a set of rules but as conventionalized routines, where non-linear learning emerges from the dynamic interaction between input and output
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.
