1) The document summarizes a colloquium on research with low-literate adolescent and adult second language learners. It discusses several presenters and their research, including on Somali immigrant youth, alphabetic literacy development, and teacher preparation.
2) For low-literate learners, current SLA theories may not apply since they are based on literate learners who can visualize and manipulate language forms. Research is needed on how non-literate adults process oral language and acquire an L2. Studies show illiterate adults do not segment speech into words.
3) One case study examines an adolescent learner's errors and suggests his ability to recall corrections may relate to his developing literacy level
1. COLLOQUIUM: RESEARCH WITH
LOW-LITERATE ADOLESCENT &
ADULT L2 LEARNERS
Andrea Decapua Elaine Tarone
College of New Rochelle University of Minnesota
2. Colloquium Participants
Elaine Tarone: SLA of low-literate L2 learners
Andrea Decapua: Cognition, learning and formal
education
Kendall King & Martha Bigelow: Symbolic power of print
literacy among Somali immigrant youth
Nicole Pettitt: A longitudinal study of a learner‟s
development of aphabetic literacy & L2
Ranya Khan: Comparative case-study of 2 classrooms
Patsy Vinogradov: Preparation of teachers of students
with limited formal schooling
3. SLA of adults & adolescents w low
alphabetic print literacy
Brief review of research on alphabetic print literacy &
oral language processing by adults & adolescents
Among monolinguals
Among second-language learners
We desperately need more research
Some research questions & hypotheses
(Tarone & Bigelow 2012)
4. What does it mean to know a language?
(What is an interlanguage rule system like?)
Must be consciously
assembled out of learned Grows unconsciously
rules guided by built-in syllabus
Explicit knowledge Implicit knowledge
5. Current Theories of SLA
Input and Interaction (Gass & Madden 1987; Gass &
Varonis 1994)
Sociocultural (Lantolf 2000)
Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt 1994, 2001)
Corrective feedback in SLA (Lyster & Mori 2006)
6. Current SLA theories state:
L2 learners must notice and focus on forms used
in communication to acquire those forms
But these theories are based on data from
alphabetically literate learners …
If you‟re not alphabetically literate, are you
missing a cognitive tool you need to visualize
and mentally manipulate language forms that
have no meaning? To „notice the gap‟ between
your forms and others‟?
Do SLA theories only apply to the alphabetically
literate L2 learner?
7. Studies of language processing by
non-literate monolingual adults
These studies show there‟s an interaction between
degree of alphabetic print literacy and awareness of
linguistic units in oral input
Scholes (1998) preliterate adults don‟t segment speech
into „words‟
Many similar studies are summarized in Tarone, Hansen
& Bigelow (2013)
9. Selected Findings:
Kurvers, Hout & Vallen (2006, 2007): alphabetic
literacy --> awareness of the word and the phoneme as
units
Non alphabetically literate adults learning L2 viewed
language as means of communication, but not a string of
linguistic units
Onderlinden et al. (2009): degree of alphabetic literacy
correlates with degree of ability to identify word
boundaries in L2 learners
Young-Scholten & Strom (2006): L2 learners‟ phonemic
awareness only after learning to read; notions of syllable,
onset, rhyme developed independently. Knowing names of
letters is NOT related to phonemic awareness or decoding
ability.
10. How do adults without phonemic
awareness process oral L2 input?
Bigelow, et al (2006) replicated a standard SLA oral
recast study with 8 low literate Somali adolescent
multilingual learners
Errors with word order or do support in questions
(don‟t change meaning; totally form based)
There was a significant positive relationship
between alphabetic print literacy level and the
ability to recall oral recasts of these errors
Consistent with notion that alphabetic print
literacy level affects phonemic awareness in
processing oral L2
11. “Abukar” (Tarone & Bigelow, 2007)
15 years old, in 9th grade
Began formal schooling in US 4.5 years earlier
(after 4 yrs in refugee camp)
Scores show relatively low literacy level but
developing oral proficiency:
English literacy: 6 out of 9 possible
Somali literacy: 4 out of 9
SPEAK: 50 out of 60 possible
Question stage: 5 out of 6 possible
12. Abukar‟s errors
Abukar: … what, what he is looking?
Abukar: Why he is mad?
Abukar: … why he come this room?
13. Example 1 (1 on 1, not classroom)
1 Abukar: What he sit on, what he SIT on, or whatever?
2 MB: What is he sitting on?
3 Abukar: Mhm.
4 MB: What is he sitting on? Again. Repeat.
5 Abukar: What he sitting on?
6 MB: What IS he sitting on?
7 Abukar: Oh. What he sitting on?
8 MB: What IS he sitting on?
9 Abukar: What IS he sitting on?
(from Tarone & Bigelow 2007)
14. Example 2
01 Abukar: Why he is mad? Why [he], he is mad?
02 MB: [yeah]
03 MB: Why IS he mad?
04 Abukar: Why HE is mad? Why
05 MB: Why IS he mad?
06 Abukar: Why IS he mad? Why is, [is he]…
15. Example 3
01 Abukar: OK (pause) what is barrel, what is, what is
the thing in it?
02 What is there? Is it, is there pennies in it?
03 MB: Yeah. Um, again. Are pennies in the jar?
04 Abukar: Is, are the penny in the jar?
05 MB: Yes. And, um,
06 Abukar: (whispers) jar
(30+ turns later) Abukar: Oh. Oh. Is this jar have, this
jar, is this jar full of money?
16. We wonder…
Do all L2 forms have to be explicitly noticed to be
acquired?
Can low literate adult L2 learners acquire some L2 forms
implicitly, without explicit analysis? OR,
Do these learners structure their explicit working
memory for language in some way that researchers don‟t
see?
Can we capitalize on what preliterate learners do notice
in oral input to improve their acquisition of L2 grammar?
9:08 From many years working with language teachers at CARLA we’ve learned that teachers have two different theories about what it means to learn a language, and based on that, what it means to teach a language. Those theories come down to the two images on your screen. STOP. Each of these two approaches has a DIFFERENT GOAL. One is to have students who have explicit knowledge to pass form-focused tests. The other is to foster development of implicit knowledge students can USE to communicate and AS A THINKING TOOL
[let audience read] How much can illiterate and low literate learners focus on oral L2 forms particularly when those forms do not carry meaning? Many L2 forms of English are semantically redundant and do not affect the meaning at all: word order in questions, presence or absence of do-support, bound morphemes indicating tense or subject-verb agreement – such forms require phonological processing, since they do not alter meaning. So if L2 learners lack cognitive tools that improve phonological processing of such forms in oral language, will they: notice corrective feedback on those forms? Be able to retain those words in STM? Acquire those forms?
Since we published our study in 2006, a group of researchers in Europe and N America have carried out several studies with low literate adult L2 learners. Next conference: LESLLA 2012 Symposium Jysvaskyla Finland Aug 30 to Sept 1, 2012
Here are some sample studies and findings. Note especially the third: