Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Core and Supplementary Activities in ELT
Transcript of Core and Supplementary Activities in ELT
Providing comprehensible input
By Enrique Liñan
MA Romance Linguistics
Core and Supplementary Activities in Language Teaching
messages that students understand
essential ingredient in SLA
stimulates the LAD
need to be comprehensible and motivating
similar to Natural Approach
Discussion of topics of interest
(ages, interests, and backgrounds)
Sheltered subject matter teaching
SL acquirers are grouped for subject matter instruction
Provide bridge/transition from general SL class to academic mainstream
Eliminates too-advanced speakers of the language
helps teachers adjust the input to the students' level
Out of class
place where students at any level of proficiency obtain aural comprehension input:
interactions with native speakers
1. Making input more comprehensible
2. Lowering the affective filter
3. Going outside the LAD
1. Untangling the composing process
2. Lowering the output filter
a. Simplification of language
b. Providing background information
more common vocabulary
shorter, less complex sentences
might not be encouraging
impair comprehension by removing crucial elements
pictures, additional verbal information, familiar topics
can be provided in L1
mental block that prevents input from reaching the LAD
use of music and relaxation exercises
held in ordinary rooms with comfortable chairs
students adopt new names - Ss get better acquainted
that lower the affective filter.
Only when the initial
presentation of aural input
or text is not understood.
a. Grammar instruction
b. Routines and patterns
Help students arrive at a conscious knowledge of language
"Learning" not "acquisition"
Focus on "learnable" rules (late-acquired rules)
Limited to prepared speech and writing (final stages)
Little benefits to learners who are not "Monitor users"
Short dialogues (social interaction+practical social problems)
Not true linguistic competence
Helping student show their competence
a. Experienced writers
b. Ineffective writers
means of intellectual growth and problem solving
first draft = contains all they want to say
subsequent drafts = neater versions of the first draft (mechanics, word choice)
new ideas and deeper understanding of topic from draft to draft
Revise based on reader response to meaning
Provide examples of good writing
Delay editing (final stage)
barrier that can prevent performers from showing their real competence
Especially active in pronunciation
Output Filter may be a cause of "fossilization"
the fact that most adult second language performers appear to stop short of the native speaker level performance
Activities that lower the Affective filter = Output Filter
Dealing with Output Filter
Constructing complex sentences ("releasing effect")
Stephen Krashen’s Theory of SLA
The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis:
According to Krashen there are two independent systems of second language performance: 'the acquired system' and 'the learned system'. The 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concentrated not in the form of their utterances, but in the communicative act.
The 'learned system' or 'learning' is the product of formal instruction and it comprises a conscious process which results in conscious knowledge 'about' the language, for example knowledge of grammar rules. According to Krashen 'learning' is less important than 'acquisition'.
The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and defines the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the utterance initiator, while the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The 'monitor' acts in a planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are met: the second language learner...
has sufficient time at his/her disposal,
focuses on form or thinks about correctness
knows the rule
Krashen also suggests that there is individual variation among language learners with regard to 'monitor' use. He distinguishes those learners that use the 'monitor' all the time (over-users); those learners who have not learned or who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge (under-users); and those learners that use the 'monitor' appropriately (optimal users).
The Natural Order
The Natural Order hypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay & Burt, 1974; Fathman, 1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the acquisition of grammatical structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable.
For a given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early while others late. This order seemed to be independent of the learners' age, L1 background, conditions of exposure, and although the agreement between individual acquirers was not always 100% in the studies, there were statistically significant similarities that reinforced the existence of a Natural Order of language acquisition.
Krashen however points out that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not that a language program syllabus should be based on the order found in the studies. In fact, he rejects grammatical sequencing when the goal is language acquisition.
The Input H.
The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second language. In other words, this hypothesis is Krashen's explanation of how second language acquisition takes place.
So, the Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not 'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along the 'natural order' when he/she receives second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of linguistic competence.
For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'.
Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at the same time, Krashen suggests that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus, ensuring in this way that each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current stage of linguistic competence.
The Affective Filter
The Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition.
These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety are better equipped for success in second language acquisition.
Low motivation, low self-esteem, and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is 'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.