Time to switch back to English Only (in pronunciation teaching)?

Clker.com

There is one counter-argument to use of L1 in the L2 classroom that you don't hear that often today: that L2 pronunciation may be compromised in the process. When I was trained 4 decades ago, that was a given. It may be time for a slight "switch" in perspective.

Goldrick, Runnqvist and Costa (2014), summarized by Psychological Sciences.org, conducted an interesting study where they had bilingual subjects switching back and forth between English and Spanish (their dominant language) nouns. Spanish consistently influenced their pronunciation of English consonants but English did not affect Spanish consonants. Spanish influence was not readily apparent when English terms were articulated consecutively.

The point of the study is that the additional processing load, itself, of switching--not just the differences in articulation of the L1 and L2 consonants--was contributing to the emergence of the more salient Spanish influence.

In an EFL class, where more of the speaking is in the L1 the "switching-processing" effect may be quite "pronounced." Even in an ESL class, where students, themselves, may be using the L1 privately, outside of the flow of the class, the effect on L2 pronunciation could, likewise, be significant. In the structuralist-audio-lingual period, exclusion of L1 in teaching was, indeed, a given.

Now if all the switching effect does is allow in a bit more "accent," then that may not be all that problematic, but that is not what the study seems to be implying: switching causes a generalized processing overload that probably affects much more than just pronunciation. It may be time we reexamine that effect, at least in terms of pronunciation teaching in integrated classroom instruction. The study deserves replication/extension to current methodology--and a closer look at L1 and L2 switching in your class as well?




Full citation:
Goldrick, M., Runnqvist, E., & Costa, A. (2014). Language Switching Makes Pronunciation Less Nativelike. Psychological Science, 25 (4), 1031-1036. DOI: 10.1177/095679761352001

Haptic pronunciation teaching presentations at TESOL 2014 in Portland!

There were at least a dozen explicitly "haptic" pronunciation teaching proposals that were submitted for the convention that I am aware of. (See earlier blogpost on that.) There are also always a number of other "near-haptic" presentations that focus on kinaesthetic techniques and those that involve touch+movement-based procedures indirectly. I'll report on those later, once the program is published. This year, four being done by myself and "haptician" colleagues were accepted:

Workshop: Essentials of haptic (kinesthetic+tactile)-integrated pronunciation instruction

    Kielstra, Baker, Burri, Rauser, Teaman and Acton

Practice-oriented session: Speak fast; speak easy: The Fight Club technique 

   Burns, Serena and Kielstra

Research-oriented session: Exploring research supporting haptic (movement + touch) pronunciation teaching

   Rauser, Acton and Burri

Workshop: Teaching basic English intonation by non-native English speaking teachers

   Lam, Zeng, Hong, Takatsu and Donkor

If you know of any others, please let us know!

See you there!

Pronunciation feedback: the quicker, the better?

Clip art: Clker

The research on corrective feedback in language learning is extensive. The conclusions are a mixed bag, at best. I do not recall seeing a study that measured the effect of anticipated feedback, whether immediate or postponed in the literature. I had missed this 2010 study by Kettle and Haubi of the University of Alberta (summarized by Science Daily) where they looked at the impact on test scores when subjects thought that they'd be given immediate, rather than delayed feedback. Those in the first group estimated their performance to be somewhat lower but did better than the latter group, which tended to overestimate their final score.

Pronunciation feedback in general tends to be more postponed, often in the form of notes to the student or critique of audio recordings. In class, real time responses to mispronunciations are less in fashion than during earlier periods when oral accuracy was strongly promoted and learners were often pressed to speak more in class and be immediately corrected than today. In survey after survey, learners desire more spontaneous correction and instructors appear less and less likely to comply.

Clip art: Clker

A solution to that, one that we (and many others) have developed in haptic-integrated work, is to use a set of gesture-based signals (perhaps including a vowel number) to alert the learner effectively to problematic pronunciation without requiring excessive public performance. That way the learner can immediately note the problem and either deal with it "internally" or go back and work on it later, perhaps talking with the instructor or another source privately, if necessary. Just the impact of that anticipatory attitude on motivation, according to the research, is worth the cost of tuition. Can hardly wait, eh?

The "Mudder" of all pronunciation programs

Image: Toughmudder.com

Have been trying to figure out what pronunciation systems or books are the big sellers for some time now. As you can imagine, those #s are not easy to get at. The plan is to evaluate some of the top programs for embodiment or "physical presence." Have done some preliminary analysis on a few of the student books from the big publishers which I will use as blog fodder later. ("Blog fodder" . . . nice term there, too.) The idea is to develop a more elaborated framework for applying principles of haptic anchoring to commercially available speaking, listening and pronunciation books. Will begin reporting on that project in a couple of weeks.

The basic EHIEP system provides the orientation to the sound system necessary and a set of techniques to use in working with it, but the point is that those "tools" are then ready to be applied to texts and vocabulary in content-based instruction--where the real pronunciation change actually "happens." With such integrated pronunciation instruction now the "flavor of the month," perhaps the day of the free-standing "Mudder of all pronunciation programs," with its wonderfully clear-cut "follow the yellow brick road" syllabus is over.

In part as a consequence, pronunciation methodology has become progressively more complex, nuanced and messier as the theoretical and pedagogical waters have muddied. Particularly for the less experienced instructor, doing pronunciation can appear to be nothing short of a very "tough mudder" at best. But it need not be. 

Scattergunning: A-systematic pronunciation instruction

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Nice set of slides from Derwing's plenary: What should L2 learners be able to expect from their language classrooms? A research perspective. from Pronunciation Symposium at the recent ACTA conference. The current case from a research perspective for what should be the focus of pronunciation-related instruction is (as usual) well articulated. The last two slides are worth the tour through the other 62: Moving from ~ Moving to. One in particular: (Move to) "Focus mainly on problems likely to interfere with communication--as opposed to "Scattergun pedagogy, giving everything equal importance." Interesting. The idea that limited, highly selective attention to problematic targets of intelligibility is the optimal approach in integrated pronunciation instruction needs to be (re)examined carefully. One of the "casualties" of current thinking on achieving greater intelligibility for learners is disregard for the systematic nature of speech production. For example, just because final devoicing of word endings seems to be the presenting problem does not mean that rhythm, stress and intonation can be neglected--in part because re-integration of change seems to depend critically on prosodic involvement. Likewise, orienting learners briefly to "problems that they don't have" may have any number of tangible benefits, from general awareness of the sound system and "healthy" vocal production to affirmations of "Hey, I can do that!" A little integrated pronunciation "scattergunning" may not be a bad thing after all . . .  Much more on this topic later!

Short-term and long-term pronunciation change

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

How often do you have learners who can do the "right," temporarily improved pronunciation of 'th', for example, but can't do it next day? According to a 2011 study by Schweighofer and colleagues at the University of Southern California, to the extent that the change was motor-based, that may make sense, depending on what else was being focused on during the classroom session and how things were sequenced during the lesson. Ironically, woking on a sound in several "passes," rather than just bearing down on practice the sound in isolation may be a much more effective approach. ". . . if your brain can rely on your short-term motor memory to handle memorizing a single motor task, then it will do so, failing to engage your long-term memory in the process. If you deny your brain that option by continually switching from learning one task to the other, your long-term memory will kick in instead. It will take longer to learn both, but you won't forget them later." That is an intriguing comment. It suggests something about the roll of repetition, integration and attention management--particularly in haptic-integrated work, which relies heavily on awareness of movement and somatic resonance in the upper body. Here's the question: When you decide to work on the articulation and integration of a consonant, let's say, 'th,' in what order do you first lead them through the various parameters of articulation of that sound: (a) lip configuration (b) tongue movement and positioning, (c) jaw movement/teeth opening, (d) aspiration, (e) voicing, (f) resonance and, of course (g) timing? Then, in what phonological and usage contexts do you next situate the "corrected" segmental for anchoring and practice? That is the essence of clinical pronunciation: management of real-time engagement and interaction. Take your local speech pathologist and aerobics instructor out for lunch. 

The texture(s) of pronunciation (haptic-integrated) teaching

Clip art: Clker

Earlier posts have reported on recent research on the neurophysiology of touch, essentially showing that the brain responds to texture-based words and phrases, such as rough, smooth, hard, soft, slippery, sticky, prickly, slimey, etc., in very much in the same way as it does to actual, physical touch sensations. Combing that sense of texture with the way it is used in music, that is the sum of what is going on in a musical presentation at any moment in time, you have a very helpful framework for designing effective pronunciation teaching techniques and interventions. From the music perspective, among other things, a great deal is going on in haptic-integrated instruction:

• Sound is being generated by the vocal chords
• Resonance throughout the upper body is being "experienced" vividly
• The articulatory apparatus of the mouth and upper throat are engaged
• Hands and arms move across the visual field to a fixed point identified with a specific phonological target
• Hands touch on stressed or focused elements
• The orthographic representation is probably being visualized
• The meaning of the word or element is probably (ideally) being linked in memory
• The general context of usage for the word is (ideally) being consciously attended to

From the physical/metaphorical texture perspective, there are several different textures of touch that may be experienced when the hands touch either each other or some point on the upper body or torso. Among them:

• "Rough" on lax vowel-based pedagogical movement patterns (PMPs)
• "Smooth" on tense vowel-based PMPs
• "Prickly + gliding" on tense vowels w/off-glides or R+vowel combination-based PMPs
• "Soft and hard" tapping on unstressed and stressed vowel-based PMPs
• "Slippery" gliding or strong downward pressure on intonation contour-based PMPs
• "Smooth gliding" on fluency-based PMPs
• "Hard, rough squeeze" (on fuzzy tennis ball) during fast-speech PMPs

It's not hard to grasp at all . . .

Duelling (or dualist) pronunciation approaches and methods

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

In a 2012 study summarizing five research studies on the potential effect of mind-body dualism on health by Frostman, Burgmer and Mussweiler, summarized by Science Daily, it was "surmised" that " . . . people primed with dualist beliefs had more reckless attitudes toward health and exercise, and also preferred (and ate) a less healthy diet than those who were primed with physicalist beliefs." It went the other way as well, subjects who were less "physical" tended to hold dualist beliefs as well. From an HICP perspective, that translates to something like: Language instructors who have dualist beliefs tend to have more ambivalent and disembodied attitudes toward pronunciation, and are generally less effective than those with more physicalist beliefs. Now, granted, that is a bit of a stretch, but in my experience it is almost that predictive. It is not a matter of whether instructors are sufficiently "cognitive" in their approach or whether they, themselves, are sufficiently "physical." It is about learner "embodiment" as a central principle of method, where the question becomes moot, where mind and body function as one, at least when it comes to anchoring change. Of course, it helps if they are all  on the same page from the beginning . . . 

When to do pronunciation work and what to do before you do

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Stare at that pineapple for a minute or so before reading this post, please . . . From a curriculum perspective, pronunciation work can happen most anytime. It can, of course, be more or less integrated into actual classroom or one-on-one lessons depending on a "plethora" of factors. The EHIEP system, for example,  involves (a) decontextualized, out of class or in class introduction on video, (b) formal integration within lesson teaching objectives and content, (c) impromptu correction and anchoring in any lesson, and (c) focus on integration into spontaneous speech. (For a good, basic introduction to curricular integration for beginners, advanced and workplace programs, see Fraser's 2001 general introduction.) Where in time, however, in the course of a lesson or even a personal practice session at home is another question. In general, we begin with Lessac's "Train the body first!" dictum, which applies to the overall pronunciation program to some extent as well, meaning we try to do some kind of explicit body-engaged warm up as an integral part of speaking instruction in general. The importance of some kind of warm up that focuses mind and body has been empirically validated by any number of studies. Here is a striking example, a 2012 study comparing the effect of meditation type on creative thinking. "Open attention focus meditation," in effect clearing the mind and concentrating on nothing specific, enhanced creative, divergent thinking. "Focused attention," on the other hand, where for example one might concentrate on one object, like a pineapple on the table or a visualization of some kind, tended to improve creative, convergent thinking, the sort you might need in pulling together the pieces of a puzzle or problem. In most cases, effective anchoring of pronunciation requires the latter type of mind set. Meditate on that. 

TIme for pronunciation change

Clipart: Clker

Clipart: Clker

Following up on a few recent posts dealing with what goes on outside of class, today we'll look briefly at a set of principles of time management for clinical research professionals that provides a nice model for students. (If you, too, could use a little more productive time, this piece could be helpful as well.) In any teaching context the use of some kind of systematic pronunciation diary or log that includes a time management or practice scheduling function can be very effective. I have for decades used both: (a) Students plan their practice sessions that will take place before the next class--before they walk out the door (sometimes requiring my approval as well!), and (b) they also keep regular notes on how the practices went and related reflections on relevant "pronunciation events" (for them personally and their specific goals) that occur either in or out of class. Here is the recommended "clinical researcher's" framework, with my annotations:

• Use only one prioritized list — planner system, notebook, or calendar — for home as well as work. And make at least parts of that available for instructor review or consultation. 
• Update the list at the end of the day, rather than the morning . . . including reflections and "data."
• Consider the penalty, impact, and payoff of  . . .  a task. This can be a radical proposal for many learners, having to take full responsibility for the actions and time. 
• Review you goals and action plans each day prior to compiling your list . . . in the morning after coffee, breakfast and doing your basic pronunciation work. 
• Before you start a task that is not on your list, ask yourself, “Will what I am about to do move me closer to my objectives?” That, of course, assumes that the objectives are clearly articulated and achievable!
• Give yourself time to relax, meditate, or “goof-off.” (I, personally, also recommend regular aerobic exercise for my students as well.) Even if that only means sufficient sleep, research has validated repeatedly the place of critical "down time" for the brain in efficient learning. (In the EHIEP system, practice is scheduled on alternative days, not daily, although a morning warm up is highly recommended.) 

Got time to do some of that with your students? 

Fossilized pronunciation: recidivism unanchored

Clipart: Clker

Clipart: Clker

A grad student is doing a research paper looking at the conditions under which learners are able to anchor new pronunciation outside of the classroom, in conversation with those around them or strangers. (I may report on that later, too.) This has been a key theme of my work (especially pronunciation classes for nonnative business professionals) for decades. About the time I was publishing my first article on fossilized pronunciation, I became aware of the model for preparing prisoners for return to society developed by Prison Fellowship entitled, Innerchange Freedom Initiative. (That, in turn, was  based on a project created by the Catholic church in Brazil sometime earlier.) That approach to rehabilitation, which continues to have a very impressive record in avoiding recidivism (having to go back to prison after being released) was based on several principles:

• Participants are assigned a mentor who stays with them throughout and beyond the program. 
• It begins two years before release and continues for one year after.
• It is a holistic, involving, academic, vocational, spiritual, life skills, and substance abuse training. 
• In the post-prison phase, prisoners are assisted in finding employment and getting connected to a local church.

Now not to run too far with the analogy here of "fossilized" learners being "imprisoned" by their heavily accented pronunciation . . . There were two aspects of the IFI framework that caught my attention and became integral to the system I developed for dealing with fossilized pronunciation, other than the holistic, integrated whole person model: the importance of (a) the value of the learner's connection to the local community in ensuring that change lasted, and (b) maintaining a less formal "mentoring" or consulting relationships for at least a short period beyond the program. What I discovered early on was that (a) could often greatly enhance (b), pointing students to quality opportunities for practice and giving them advice on strategies and preparation--something more than "Now go practice your English with your friends or the tourists . . . " 

Overcoming pronunciation anxiety II--with (& in) class!

Clipart: Clker

Clipart: Clker

The stress generated by pronunciation instruction, especially the "public" performance side of the process so necessary for integration of change, gets a bad rap. (Anxiety brought to class by the learner, as alluded to in the previous post, not withstanding.) A recent study, summarized in the Wall Street Journal, provides a little more neurophysiological evidence for that principle. What the researcher points out is that the stress should be immediate-task-based, not general fear of failure or longer term existential questions. The article concludes with the following: "We'll say to athletes, 'You're going to be anxious. Great. Channel it and use it," Dr. Josephson says. "Being willing to feel some anxiety and not running away from it is huge." Although I have not been able to find the research piece I discovered earlier on the "advantage" of some types of group therapy, I have for decades been operating on the principle that a balanced "diet" of both the private and public practice is essential for most efficient pronunciation change. (That is why tutoring in pronunciation for some may be relatively ineffectual--if the learner does not also have a meaningful place to practice, especially one where the "new" personna will be readily accepted or at least not noticed!) That, in part, explains why occasionally I encounter a student, especially from China, who has developed extraordinary pronunciation and fluency from having studied back home only in an "all English" college that was exceedingly serious about controlling learner practice 24-7. This is another important dimension of integrated pronunciation instruction not addressed in the pronunciation research literature. To quote the article once more: "You have to embrace the anxiety to overcome it."-- even if only with a quick, 3-second "Shhh!" (See previous post!) 

Fathering persistence in pronunciation instruction

Apropos for the day, a recent research study (summarized by ScienceDaily) by Padilla-Walker and Day of Brigham Young University on factors influencing persistence, examining the potential contribution of fathers to development of persistence in teenagers. The longitudinal study basically asked the question "Can your child stick with it?" and concluded the following about children who could:

• [They] felt warmth and love from their father.
• Accountability and the reasons behind rules were emphasized.
• [They] were granted an appropriate level of autonomy [italics, mine].
• [There were] above-average levels of authoritative parenting[italics, mine].
• [The fathers] engaged in high quality interactions, even if the quantity of those interactions might have been lower than is desirable.

Research on adult exercise persistence has demonstrated similar principles of persistence but generally only in regard to the aspects of the learner's personality or the overall environment provided, for example, by the health club. I have yet to find a systematic study of the relationship between the leadership style (e.g., parent vs facilitator) of the coach and trainee persistence. Note the two terms in italics in the list: autonomy and authority. One reason that many have serious aversions to pronunciation work is that it requires all five of the above--but especially the exercise of both authority and (Here it comes!) . . . power. It simply does not fit well with contemporary learner-centered, non-evaluative and (overtly) non-directive approaches that can generally be very effective in motivating learners to do high level, strategic thinking and reading, general acquisition of vocabulary and developing fluency. (It did resonate well, of course, with the structuralists' drill and practice ethos.) Getting students to consistently and persistently do their pronunciation homework-and providing them with effective and systematic practice at the same time--can be enormously challenging. Are you comfortable with being more of an authority figure in pronunciation work? Apparently, you need to be . . . 

IPA (Intra-personal physical alphabet) basics for pronunciation teaching

Had a fascinating discussion with an ESL teacher recently who maintained that knowing basic IPA for English (international phonetic alphabet) was irrelevant--for him! Asked how students are to get the pronunciation of a new word, his response was simply ("All they have to do is consult . . . ": online audio from a learner dictionary or DVD.  (For some student populations, we could probably find some common ground there!) In phonics teaching there are probably hundreds of "body alphabet" schemas and dances. (I kind of like this one!) Where he actually had it right, I think, was with use of IPA with learners--when it is not used systematically in integrated instruction. If learners cannot accurately relate the symbol to the sound, (if it is not anchored well, in EHIEP terms) it is worse than pointless--at least those sounds that are especially problematic for a learner. As noted in several earlier posts, effective use of the dictionary for anchoring pronunciation, meaning and usage is generally essential to efficient learning beyond basic functional (primarily oral) usage, which requires at least orientation to a limited set of dictionary phonetic symbols. EHIEP work begins with physically anchoring of the vowel system, first lax (what we refer to as "rough" vowels) and then tense+off glide and diphthongs (what we refer to as "dynamic" vowels), something of an "Intra-personal, physical phonetic alphabet!" The best analogy is sign language. Here is a brief Youtube clip of me doing a  the "dynamic" vowels. That is representative of the entire EHIEP system, in fact. Before long, as soon as we get the complete EHIEP haptic-videos all edited and publicly available, the training of students--and instructor--can be done in IPPPA, as well! Keep in touch. 

Individual versus pair work in (haptic-integrated) pronunciation teaching

The advice out there on using pair and group work in pronunciation teaching is mixed. For focusing on the comprehensibility side, for example, Gilbert and others have developed a range of effective communicative pair instruction formats where articulation of the sound is essential to meaning. In general, the enthusiasm for group and pair work, although well documented in other areas of instruction, has not been validated, the subject of published research in pronunciation teaching. Neither has peer-based monitoring and correcting of oral production in class, especially at the segmental level, been systematically explored. The same applies for what goes on in individual practice or after class in the form of homework or ad hoc student-initiated practices. (There are a few examples, such as Stevick's classic, Success with foreign language learning . . .  available on Amazon.com for about $265 now!) That is all indicative of an overall "non-clinical" approach to instruction in the field today--the motivation for this blog!
     Most would agree that both group and individual work are advantageous in all contexts but often unrealistic in some settings as well. In EHIEP work, for effective results, both must be exploited continuously. The key--somewhat being enabled now by the development of cheap, accessible web-based technology--is the idea that  outside of class learners should be able to learn and practice key pronunciation features from mirroring video models (See previous post.) At the same time they should also be working on their own, personal word lists and mini-dialogues, embedding and embodying new and changed elements. Efficient integration of pronunciation instruction in class and subsequent integration by students of those targets into their spontaneous speech, requires both effective "inside out" personal work and "outside in" social practice. The next breakthrough in pronunciation teaching is "mirror-ly" a matter of time--and (haptic-integrated) technology--as individualized practice first more systematically complements and then ultimately replaces the classroom. Keep in touch. 

Experiential pronunciation learning: sing first, think later

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Here is a 30-minute video by Per Bristow which is worth watching. (You might have to sign up for his free newsletter to view it, unfortunately . . . ) It takes him about 25 minutes to get to unpacking his method but when he does, as you will see, it is worth the wait, very consonant with HICP thinking. His basic approach is to set up what he calls a mind set of the "rapid or creative learner," beginning with kinaesthetic awareness, which leads to self awareness and beyond--from an almost entirely experiential learning perspective. Nothing he advocates is inconsistent with that of Lessac, for example, although it would be almost worth buying his DVD and signing up for his program for one of my students, just to see if and how it works. Being a singer, myself, what he says makes real sense and is probably not all that difficult, in principle, to manage--with a little self discipline and desire. But his basic pitch, that of developing a good, healthy voice, is dead on and well presented. (Even his accent is interesting!) If you don't have one yet, you should get one. 

EHIEP Protocols: What are they and why "protocol" anyway?

Clip art: Clker

Got an email recently asking me that question. A good place to begin is the medical definition: protocol [pro´to-kol]

1. an explicit, detailed plan of an experiment. I love that one!

2. the original notes made on an autopsy, an experiment, or a case of disease. Sort of like this blog!

3. a detailed written set of instructions to guide the care of a patient or to assist the practitioner in the performance of a procedure.That is a great fit to an EHIEP protocol! 

Update: There are now currently 9 basic and 6 optional protocols in development, each providing one or more techniques for classroom instruction or independent study. Each of the main protocols involves a 30-minute haptic-video lesson (composed of 4 video clips) and 3, 15 minute haptic-video homework assignment videos:

• (Optional) EHIEP system introduction
• Warm Up Protocol (WUP)
• (Optional) Body Flex Protocol (BFP) 
• Matrix (visual field) Anchoring Protocol (MAP)
• (2 basic; 2 optional) Vowel and Word Stress Protocols (VWSP)
• (Optional) Vowel Resonance Protocol (VRP) 
• Rhythm Group Butterfly Protocol (RGBP)
• (2) Intonation Touch-i-nami Protocols (ITP)
• TaiChi Fluency Protocol (TFP)
• Rhythmic Feet Fight Club Protocol (RFFCP)
• (Optional) Baton Integration Protocol (BIP) 

There are also 8, 5-minute Consonant "Protocolettes" (th, r, l/n, f/v, w, y, s/z, sh/zh) haptic-videos.
Each complete protocol includes 7 short video clips: (a) Demonstration, (b) Training, (c) Rhythmic practice, (d) Classroom procedure, (e) Homework 1, (f) Homework 2, and (g) Home work 3.
Each protocol includes Instructor guidelines and Student workbook. The complete system will be available later this year. The videos will probably be downloadable from iTunes or a similar web source. The system is designed for the relatively untrained instructor, equipped with only video player appropriate for the class size of some kind. The demonstration clips and some of the consonant protocolettes will be available here (for free!) soon. Keep in touch. 

Happy with your pronunciation teaching?

University of Missouri researcher, Sheldon, " . . . a nationally recognized scholar in the field of positive psychology," provides the following "tips" for being happy: "Change what you do, not what you have . . . .Pursue the right goals, for the right reasons . . . Your “social character” should match your “unguarded self. . . . The more evenly you distribute your activities and obligations the happier you’ll be . . . Do what you choose, do it well and connect with others." Let's translate that into guidelines for "happy-tic-integrated" pronunciation--or any pronunciation work:

Clip art: Clker

• Consistently and creatively work with targeted pronunciation features in all skill settings. (Of course, using the 8 EHIEP protocols for anchoring change and introduction of new sounds and vocabulary!)
• Have a limited set of targeted features with clearly "future" paced benchmarks,  "measurable" outcomes such that achievement can be "checked off." 
• Aim for staged, explicit integration into spontaneous speaking.
• Maintain a very tight task-based structure where pronunciation is involved.
• Once learners have been introduced to a protocol and it has been subsequently used by the instructor in class, they should be able to identify when and how to use them in their own, self-directed language study.
• And finally, the "evidence" should be evident, post hoc, to learners in everyday, conversational interaction, especially with friends. 

Clip art: Clker

I feel better already . . . 

Pronunciation rehabilitation

Had a great dinner last night with a friend who is a kinesthesiologist and was reminded once again of the close affinity between what we do and what he does. The word "rehabilitation" in the blogpost title should be understood in two senses: (a) HICP as an approach to assisting learners in "getting" pronunciation more efficiently and (b) an attempt to rehabilitate (and integrate) the way certain aspects of pronunciation teaching are done, specifically taking the focus of instruction and ensuring that optimal attention is paid to it and the new material is best integrated into spontaneous speech. In other words, the focus is as much on how pronunciation is taught as what phonological processes are chosen. A typical 6 hour "lesson" with the kinesthesiologist goes something like this: (a) 20-minute group walk around the park, (b) warm up, (c) specific exercises tailored to each individual's injury recovery, (d) assigned "education" modules such as  planning of exercise regimen, time management or diet, (e) specific work-context physical task simulations, and (f) closing "mindfulness" module focusing on relaxation, integration and attention management. Does that set of six functions look familiar? The balance between mind/body, cognitive/affective, conscious/unconscious, context-dependent/context-independent, and, of course, "hands on/hands off" is striking. And before any of that "course" begins, there is extensive consultation with a team of experts from four for five related disciplines to carefully plan the path of each individual's rehabilitation. What a great model! I am going to try something analogous this summer with a few "fossilized" guinea pigs. Any volunteers? 

Triggers that "figure" . . .

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

When you look at that picture to the left of the trigger (or Picasso) fish, what does it bring to mind? An aquarium that you like? A scuba diving trip to the Bahamas? A recent Disney movie? A paint-by-number project you did in elementary school? A favorite sushi? What memory (or appetite?) does it trigger? In a couple of earlier posts I reviewed research on the effect and mechanisms involved in triggering. This piece from Lifehacker.com does a nice job of informally characterizing triggers and prescribing what to do about them to manage those in your life and work more effectively. The previous blogpost on how anchors work, especially the role of visual (and auditory) triggers in haptic-integrated pronunciation work, was addressing much of the same idea. The Lifehacker review of a couple dozen techniques for dealing with them in just organizing the clutter around your laptop could easily be translated into a recipe for design and monitoring of optimal classroom milieu (cf.,"boutique" Suggestopedia method.) It takes a little semiotic extrapolation, of course, but once you get into that temporary "hyper-sensual" frame of reference--where virtually everything in the instructional environment can potentially affect everything--you are at least capable of making some new choices. And when you do, the impact on learner attention, and yours, will at least for a time work for you. Go figure . . . then "pull the trigger" (in either sense!)