Skip to main content

Making the case for micro-skill teaching


One of the assumptions we make in our forthcoming book about teaching listening, is that it's possible to analyse all the sub-skills required to listen, then design teaching to enable students to improve their use of these skills to comprehend messages more effectively. Micro-skills include spotting the difference between phonemes such as the /i/ in ship and sheep, recognising how intonation patterns give clues to meaning, being able to segment the sound stream (spot gaps between words) and parse sentences (work out the grammatical structure). Put another way, it's about breaking down the skills involved in listening, then bulding them back up.

J. Wilson looks at this issue in detail in a Chapter called Listening Micro-Skills in the TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (2018). He notes that traditionally we have not shied away from analysing micro-skills of speaking, reading and writing, but that listening has been neglected - hence the occasionally used term 'Cinderella skill'.

He gives the example of a student who, when listening to a text, says they don't understand.The teacher replies "Which part don't you understand?" The student identifies a section, the teacher replays the audio and then asks further questions to find out what's causing the problem. The student says that one part just sounds like noise - a flow of sound which can't be broken down. The teacher replays it, then pronounces it slowly, breaking down the noise into clearer speech (without features such as elision or assimilation). The teacher clarifies where the word boundaries are and gradually the student is able to work out what's going on.

That description by Wilson sums up quite neatly what we mean in our book about "teaching listening", rather than just testing it with comprehension exercises. Is there evidence that this approach, if we extended leads to better outcomes and exam grades? Well, not exactly, since from out research no scholarly study has been done over a long term to demonstrate improved performance. However, there has been research in other associated areas, for example into the issue of listening and self-efficacy and anxiety (e.g. by Suzanne Graham at Reading University). Not surprisingly students tend to dislike listening, finding it hard and off-putting, notably since it's too hard and uncontrollable (you can't listen as many times as you'd like). With that in mind, it makes sense to scaffold the process of listening carefully, use accessible texts and do activities which break the process down - practise the micro-skills, if you will. If this means students build up confidence and mastery, they will fear listening less and be more motivated to work at it.

Wilson makes the point that these kinds of activities often focus on quite detailed areas of language and risk being dull, so he recommends, as do we, that they are best done in short bursts as part of your broader listening programme. If they can be made fun, that helps. Wilson sums things up nicely in this quotation:

"Without a focus on either listening strategies or micro-listening skills, listening is something of a zero sum game: either you get it, or you don't. When micro-skills come into play, teachers can probe the reasons for student difficulties and draw up detailed syllabi that focus on the specific challenges of listening in real time."

Reference: Listening Micro-Skills. Chapter from The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (2018).

Our book Breaking the Sound Barrier: Teaching Language Learners How to Listen is out in July on Amazon.






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,