This post aims to give you a little background about the topic of second language learning aptitude, how to identify high aptitude language learners and what you might do with this information. It is based on a section of Memory: What Every Language Teacher Should Know (Smith and Conti, 2021).
Teachers sometimes hesitate before using the phrases high ability and low ability since they risk implying that a student's attainment is constrained by a pre-existing level of aptitude. However, few if any teachers would not recognise that some students just seem to be far quicker than others. There is, in fact, quite a long tradition of research into language learning aptitude.
There’s no doubt that aptitude for language learning exists and back in 1959 John Carroll and Stanley Sapon attempted to identify the factors which make up aptitude and predict a person’s ability to learn another language (Carroll and Sapon, 1959). Carroll is considered by many to be one of the premier psychologists in terms of contributions to educational linguistics. The audio and pen and paper tests they designed (called the MLAT – Modern Language Aptitude Test) are still used today, as well as later variations. Proficiency is, of course, also a product of acquired knowledge, not just aptitude. The aptitude test shows potential, not achievement. Even if a learner has lower aptitude, this does not imply some sort of cap on eventual achievement.
Below are the factors Carroll identified and which you can use to identify higher aptitude learners.
1. Phonetic coding ability - the ability to identify distinct sounds, to form associations between those sounds and symbols representing them, and to retain these associations.
2. Grammatical sensitivity — the ability to recognise the grammatical functions of words (or other linguistic entities) in sentence structures.
3. Rote learning ability for second language materials — the ability to learn associations between sounds and meanings rapidly and efficiently, and to retain these associations.
4. Inductive language learning ability — the ability to infer or induce the rules governing a set of language materials, given samples of language materials that permit such inferences.
Although working memory (short-term memory) was not particularly on the agenda in 1959, you can see how it is involved in all of the above factors. A few researchers, e.g. Wen (2016) even hypothesise that working memory is the key element of aptitude. Students have the above characteristics to varying degrees. You have encountered the good mimic who is not so good at grammar, and the accurate, grammatically aware writer who has more difficulty pronouncing accurately or speaking fluently.
Peter Skehan’s 2002
model of language aptitude and four stages in the acquisition process is
summarised in the table below (adapted from Ellis and Shintani, 2013). He
combines the notion of aptitude with cognitive processes involved in information processing models of learning (encoding, storing and retrieving via working memory and long-term memory).
|
Stage |
Processes involved |
Aptitude components |
|
Noticing |
The
student directs attention to a feature in the input |
Auditory
segmentation; attention management; working memory; phonemic coding |
|
Patterning |
The
student forms a hypothesis (explicitly or implicitly) about the feature, then
extends the range of the hypothesis before recognising its limitations,
restructuring it and integrating the new representation into the developing
language system |
Working
memory; grammatical sensitivity; inductive language learning ability;
restructuring capacity |
|
Controlling |
The
student can use the integrated feature with increasing ease and accuracy |
Automatisation;
proceduralisation; retrieval processes |
|
Lexicalising |
The
student can now produce the feature as a remembered whole rather than by
applying a rule |
Long-term
memory; chunking; retrieval processes |
On the whole, you'll recognise those high attainers in your classroom, although some are good at hiding their light under a bushel! They appear attentive, concentrate well, mimic accurately, pick up patterns and can hold longer sentences in mind, uttering them fluently. They find it easier to say longer words and can discriminate more easily between unfamiliar phonemes. In Skehan's terms, they notice, pattern, control and lexicalise more easily.
Once we know
something about aptitude, how can be use this
information be used to benefit the highest attainers – often the students who will go
to study languages to a more advanced level? Below are some factors to bear in
mind when curriculum planning.
· Classroom techniques designed to match questions to students (as opposed to random “cold-call” questioning). Are all teachers versed in skilled questioning technique?
· Opportunities for extra listening and reading input. Does the department have the necessary sources available?
· A consideration of class grouping by aptitude or prior achievement. If the school culture supports ability groups, what would be the best format and how would you assign teachers to each group for the benefit of all students?
· Differentiated tasks, for example, varying the length of oral presentations or the titles of written essays. How could this be incorporated while not sacrificing a “mastery for all” approach?
- Provision for high-aptitude linguists who may have conditions such as ADHD or dyslexia. Can you identify them (for example, the good mimic who may produce inaccurate written work)? Can you adjust teaching and resources to cater for their needs?
Comments
Post a Comment