The Effect of Different Task Types on Learning Prepositions in Form–Focused and Meaning–Focused Interaction Enhancement-Based Classes
محورهای موضوعی : language teaching
سعیده آهنگری
1
(
Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch,
Tabriz, Iran
)
بیوک بهنام
2
(
Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch,
Tabriz, Iran
)
هانیه دواتگری اصل
3
(
Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Ahar Branch,
Ahar, Iran
)
کلید واژه: Form- Focused Interaction Enhancement, Meaning- Focused Interaction Enhancement. Oral Picture Description Task, Written Picture Description Task,
چکیده مقاله :
The current study examines the impact of different task types on learning prepositions in form and meaning- focused interaction enhancement- based classes. The participants were 57 second Year University students enrolled in three intact lab classes at Tabriz Islamic Azad University. The first group was provided with form-focused interaction enhancement, the second with the meaning-focused interaction enhancement, and the third was the control group which received no interaction enhancement. During 12 sessions, the participants practiced using prepositions employing oral picture description and written picture description tasks. Having practiced using prepositions during the term using different tasks, the participants were presented with Oral Picture Description (OPD), and Written Picture Description (WPD) tasks in posttest. The results indicated that there are differences among the participants regarding their use of prepositions in performing oral picture description task in form and meaning–focused interaction enhancement- based classes. It also became clear that the group with meaning focused interaction enhancement outperformed the group with form- focused interactionenhancement and the control group. There were also differences among the participants of the three groups regarding their use of prepositions in WPD task in form and meaning -focused interaction enhancement- based classes.
تحقیق حاضر به بررسی تاثیر استفاده از فعالیت های مختلف در یادگیری حروف اضافه در کلاسهایی با محوریت تعامل افزایشی صورت محور و معنی محور می پردازد. شرکت کنندگان در این تحقیق 57 نفر از دانشجوبان ترم دوم دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تبریز می باشند که در کلاسهای گفت و شنود 3 ثبت نام نموده اند.در این تحقیق 2 گروه آزمایش و یک گروه کنترل وجود دارد. گروه آزمایش اول از تعامل افزایشی صورت محور و گروه آزمایش دوم از تعامل افزایشی معنی محور برخودار شدند و این در حالیست که در گروه کنترل از هیچ نوع تعامل افزایشی استفاده نگردیده است . در ابتدا به منظور تعیین همسطح بودن شرکت کنندگان این تحقیق ازآزمون PET استفاده شده است. در طول 12 جلسه شرکت کنندگان با استفاده از دو فعالیت توصیف کتبی و شفاهی داستان استفاده از حروف اضافه را تمرین کردند. نتایج تحقیق نشان داد که شرکت کنندگانی که از تعامل افزایشی معنی محور برخوردار بودند در توصیف شفاهی داستان و استفاده از حروف اضافه موفق تر از گروه آزمایش با تعامل افزایشی صورت محور و گروه کنترل بودند. این در حالیست که شرکت کنندگان در گروهی که از تعامل افزایشی صورت محور برخوردار بودند عملکردی بهتراز سایر گروهها در توصیف کتبی داستان و استفاده از حروف اضافه داشتند.
Aljaafreh and Lantolf (1994), Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. Modern Language Journal, 78, 465-483.
Dougthy, C., & Verela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, G. & Willliams, J. (1998) Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In Doughty,C. &Williams, J. (Eds.) Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Pp. 197-261. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harley, B. 1992. “Patterns of second language development in French immersion”. Journal of French Language Studies 2: 159-183.
Kowal and Swain (1994) Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students’ language awareness. Language awareness 3, 73-93.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1990). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Long, Michael and Robinson, Peter.( 1998). Theory, research and practice. In Doughty, Catherine and Williams, Jessica. (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M.H. (1981) Input, Interaction and Second Language Acquisition. In Winitz, S. (Ed.) Native Language and Foreign Language Acquisition. New York. New York Academy of Science.
Long, Michael. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K.de Bot, Ginsberg, R. and Kramsch, C. (eds.), Foreign Language Research in cross-cultural
Loschky, L. (1994). Comprehensible input and second language acquisition: What is the relationship. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 303-323.
Master (1995) Consciousness rising and Article Pedagogy. In D. Belcher and G. Brain (eds). Academic Writtind in second Langage (pp.183-204). Nerwood, N.J.: Albex
Muranoi, H. (2000). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning. 50(2), 617- 673.
Pica, T. (1987). Interlanguage adjustment as outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning, 38 (1), 45-73.
Spada, N. & Lightbown, Patsy. Form Focused Instruction: Isolated or Integrated? TESOL Quaterly. Vol. 42 (2). June 2008. Pp.181-207.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook and B.Seidhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125-144). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swain and Lapkin (1995), Problems in output and cognitive processes they generate: a step toward second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
