Index
Overview
Papers
Program
Speakers
Registration
Overview
Rethinking Grammar Instruction: The Case for Processing Instruction
March 18, 2020 to March 19, 2020
Processing Instruction is a pedagogical intervention to grammar instruction facilitating the cognitive processes by which learners connect a form in the input to its meaning. The purpose of this symposium is threefold:
- To present and discuss the results of current experimental research into the effects of Processing Instruction using online instruments to measure correct language processing;
- To provide basic training on current research methods in second language research;
- To highlight the main implications of this research for language teachers and teaching.
Organizers: Alessandro Benati and Victor Parra Guinaldo, Department of English, American University of Sharjah, UAE
Day 1: March 18, 2020
Paper 1. What is Processing Instruction?
Alessandro Benati, (American University of Sharjah, UAE)
In this paper, the main characteristics of Processing Instruction will be presented. Processing Instruction consists of two basic components: (i) learners are informed about a particular processing strategy that may negatively affect their picking up of the form or structure during language processing; (ii) learners are pushed to process (not producing) the form or structure during Structured Input activities. Guidelines to develop effective Structured Input activities will be examined and a variety of sample material provided.
Paper 2. Efficiency Versus Depth of Processing: A Cross-Sectional SPR Analysis of Response Time, Accuracy and Retention in Guided Induction versus Processing Instruction
Paul A. Malovrh (University of South Carolina, USA)
In the present talk, I argue that PI affords the most efficient opportunity for FL learning currently available to pedagogues and students by providing a synthesis of recent empirical research examining PI from various perspectives. Specifically, I discuss PI in terms of online processing data elicited using eye-tracking and SPR designs; the differential effects of positive, negative or no feedback during instruction; and depth of processing during instructional practice. I assert that PI facilitates more efficient processors, and that efficiency of processing needs to be considered in the context of FL learning along with depth of processing. The present study extends previous research by examining the interaction between proficiency level and type of instruction. Results will be discussed in terms of the benefits of efficiency of processing as opposed to depth of processing.
Paper 3. Neurocognitive Evidence for Processing Instruction: The Acquisition of the Past Simple Marker for Regular Verbs in L2 English by School-Age Children
Tanja Angelovska and Dietmar Roehm (University of Salzburg, Austria)
This study tests the effects of Processing Instruction (PI) on the acquisition of English past simple -ed by (so far) 30 (ongoing recruitment) school-age (10- to 11-year-old) children who are beginner learners of English, recruited in Austrian primary schools. A pre/post-test procedure (including an additional second delayed post-test) was adopted in this study using EEG that provides a continuous measurement of the brain's electrical activity with a very high temporal resolution and traditional behavioral measures (accuracy data as well as reaction times data). During the computerized-PI treatment, participants received only automatic short feedback (correct/wrong) to each single stimulus, but no additional information was given about the target feature and no explicit information about the target feature was provided. In addition to the results gained through behavioral measures, the EEG measurements analysis provides relevant evidence for the effectiveness of PI. We derive direct implications for evidence-based teaching.
Paper 4. A Self-Paced Reading Study Comparing Structured Input and Textual Enhancement on the Acquisition of Italian Subjunctive of Doubt Forms
Gaia Chiuchiú (University of Portsmouth, UK) and Alessandro Benati (American University of Sharjah, UAE).
The present study is an investigation into relative effects of structured input (the core component of processing instruction) and textual enhancement on the acquisition of Italian subjunctive of doubt forms. A pre/post-test procedure was adopted in this study using self-paced reading to measure changes in processing behaviors. Participants were Chinese L1 enrolled in an Italian language training program in Italy. Self-paced reading tests consisted of 40 sentences and 30 comprehension questions. Instruction took place across two consecutive days. During the treatment period, participants didn’t receive any feedback on their performance and the target feature. No explicit information about the target feature was provided. The online measurements analysis provide important insights on the individual and instructional groups processing behaviors, and have direct implications for teachers and teaching.
Day 1: March 18, 2020
- 10:00–11:00 Registration
- 11:00–11:10 Opening of the Symposium
- 11:10–11:40 Paper 1: What is Processing Instruction? Alessandro Benati
- 11.50-12:40 Paper 2: Efficiency Versus Depth of Processing: A Cross-Sectional SPR Analysis of Response Time, Accuracy and Retention in Guided Induction versus Processing Instruction. Paul A. Malovrh
-
12:40–13:30 Lunch Break
- 12:40–13:30 Lunch Break
- 13:40–14:30 Paper 3: Neurocognitive Evidence for Processing Instruction: The Acquisition of the Past Simple Marker for Regular Verbs in L2 English by School-Age Children. Tanja Angelovska and Dietmar Roehm
- 14:40–15:30 Paper 4: A Self-Paced Reading Study Comparing Structured Input and Textual Enhancement on the Acquisition of Italian Subjunctive of Doubt Forms. Gaia Chiuchiú and Alessandro Benati
- 15:30 Closing
Day 2: March 19, 2020
Workshop 1. 11:00–12:00
Using the Experimental Method in Second Language Research
Alessandro Benati
American University of Sharjah, UAE
In this workshop, the basic structure and function of the experimental research framework will be introduced and explained. Key procedures to collect and analyze data within an experimental research framework will be presented. Advantages and disadvantages in using this framework will be explored. An exemplary study will be presented to show and to describe how an experimental study is conducted and how findings are presented.
Workshop 2. 12:00–13:00
Using Eye-Tracking in Second Language Acquisition Research
Dietmar Roehm and Tanja Angelovska
University of Salzburg, Austria
Recently the use of online measurements in the field of second language acquisition (SLA) has flourished. These techniques are contributing enormously to re-shaping existing SLA accounts as they offer moment-by-moment data. It is, thus, important to understand how they can contribute to our research questions. This workshop focuses on eye tracking, an experimental method that monitors and records the eye movements of individuals while performing complex visual cognitive processing tasks. We will tackle the following questions: what eye-tracking is, what is it used for in SLA and how eye movement data are used to make inferences about L2 processing and acquisition, what can eye-tracking measures tell us and what different eye trackers can and cannot do with some issues about the development and presentation of stimuli.
Workshop 3. 14:00–15:00
Using Self-Paced Reading/Listening in Second Language Acquisition Research
Paul A. Malovrh
University of South Carolina, USA
In this workshop, I will present the main conclusions of recent meta-analyses of SPR research in an SLA context and apply them to research conducted within the framework of PI. Emphasis will be given to the design of SPR studies, data collection and data analysis. I will then discuss the advantages and disadvantages of SPR research designs in PI contexts.
Workshop 4. 15.00-16.00
Classroom-based Research: Models and Tools
Hisham AlSaghbini
Cambridge Assessment
The main objective of this workshop is to look at the main models of teachers’ classroom‐based action research. It is wrongly assumed to fall into either positivist or interpretive paradigms (or perhaps a mixture of both) or to be critical. The workshop will then look into the importance of self‐reflexive, collaborative and political elements for effective outcomes. The workshop will look into the issues of generalizability and the argument that classroom research studies are not suitable for dissemination because they are not generalizable.
Book Launch. 16.00-17.00
Book Launch for Key Questions in Second Language Acquisition' from Cambridge University Press.
Tanja Angelovska (University of Salzburg, Austria)
Tanja Angelovska is Associate Professor of English Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition at the Department of English and American Studies at the University of Salzburg, Austria.
Alessandro Benati, (American University of Sharjah, UAE)
Alessandro Benati is Head of the Department of English and Professor of English and Applied Linguistics at American University of Sharjah, UAE.
Gaia Chiuchiú (University of Portsmouth, UK)
Gaia Chiuchiú is a PhD student at the University of Portsmouth, UK.
Dietmar Roehm (University of Salzburg, Austria)
Dietmar Roehm is Full Professor of Psycho-Neuro and Clinical Linguistics at the Department of Linguistics at the University of Salzburg, Austria.
Paul A. Malovrh (University of South Carolina, USA)
Paul Malovrh is Associate Professor of Second Language Acquisition at the Department of Languages, Literatures and Cultures at the University of South Carolina, USA.
Payment Error
Thank You for Registering
