One of
the primary worries that language teachers voice with respect to using
technology to teach a second language (L2) has to do with speaking. How can the
use of the computer replace the face‐to‐face oral production that occurs in the
classroom, along with all of the live interactions with the instructor, who
represents the students’ best model for correct usage?2 In the context of a
fully virtual language course, this issue often becomes an impediment to having
the faculty grant online class credit. On the one hand, these doubts often
arise because of lack of knowledge about the many speaking options offered by
computer‐assisted language learning (CALL). On the other hand, many teachers
simply refuse to relinquish their traditional role as the sage on the stage in
favor of a more up‐to‐date function as the guide on the side. The
language teaching profession is resistant in recognizing that speaking practice
that does not directly involve the instructor is no less valuable to the
student´s long‐term L2 development. Clearly, the curricular activities for any
given language course will depend not only on the degree of agency that
teachers permit their students to exercise, but also on the instructor’s
appropriate choices of CALL activities that are performed outside of the
classroom.
Cognitive
perspectives on speaking proficiency: Accuracy, complexity, and fluency
A
cognitive perspective on speaking proficiency is useful for understanding the
intended outcomes of speaking pedagogy. Cognitivists see it as consisting of
three separate but interrelated constructs (Housen and Kuiken 2009):
1. Accuracy (i.e., the lack of phonological,lexical, or grammatical errors)
2. Complexity
(i.e., the number of words or clauses per T‐units or sentences; see Bardovi‐Harlig
2012)
3.
Fluency
For instance, the concept of L2 fluency depends on a
series of relative time measures such as the delivery speed and length of the
utterances, the number of pauses, repetitions, lexical lapses, or
discontinuities/ interruptions in spontaneous speech. Clearly, not all native
speakers would score well with respect to these factors, let alone L2 learners,
making these constructs difficult to pin down in absolute terms when assessing
L2 speaking proficiency.
Reference :
A Chapelle, Carol and Sauro, Shannon.
(2017). The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning: Technologies
for Teaching and Learning L2 Speaking. India: Willey backwell
Good 👍👍👍
ReplyDelete