Showing posts with label recasts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label recasts. Show all posts

Sunday, April 25, 2021

Content-based Phonetics and Pronunciation Teaching: The KINETIK Method™

"KINɛTIK" . . . Full body engagement in pronunciation and phonetics--in content instruction

Next month, on May 25th we are rolling out the new KINɛTIK Method: Content-based Phonetics and Pronunciation Teaching. (That is also, incidentally, my birthday and our celebration of beginning my 50th year in the field!) 

Basically, the idea is that teachers must still be taught how to teach pronunciation and phonetics but students really don't need much formal attention to either, just enough to introduce (their bodies to) key concepts to help them learn everything else! Let me explain. 

For a decade or more at the high the Communicative Language Teaching era, pronunciation teaching was discarded or even condemned, for a number of reasons, but most importantly the learning of the sound system and instruction in it were seen as almost entirely "physical," that is behaviorial and noncognitive, learned best by exposure or  . . . drill. In addition, attention to errors, error correction and accent reduction were understood as almost anathema to communicative and fluency development, and even worse, likely to undermine self-confidence and identity. 

(Note: From here on the term "pronunciation" will be taken to entail some limited, although essential training in English phonetics as well.) 

The current revival of interest in pronunciation began probably twenty years ago, when it became painfully evident that appropriate, systematic attention to form and accuracy were essential. What has emerged, however, is perhaps, in its own way, potentially just as counterproductive as "mindless" early behavioral and structural methods in regard to pronunciation: DISembodied instruction, where only learner's minds and mouths are engaged, and often not even all that much of the latter . . . where comprehension and intelligibility are foregrounded at the expense of fundamental accuracy developed through (full) body engagement. 

The last year of teaching and learning pronunciation on Zoom et al has made the disjunct even more "pronounced." In many, if not most programs, pronunciation has been either abandoned or at least radically deemphasized. Not being face-to-face in the classroom, not sensing even at an out-of-consciousness level that the students are engaged nonverbally or synced with you . . . gives one a more  accurate, realistic picture of what "disembodied" instruction is really like, when the body is not actively engaged, without sufficient physical, lived experience of verbalizing new and "corrected" sounds or words. 

Ironically, the early Communicative theorists, such as Krashen, actually had it right: Pronunciation or phonetics as a focus or class or "subject" taught in most programs should probably be eliminated. Both can create as much clutter and "pronunciosis" as good in many situations.  Instead, teachers should still be trained in working with pronunciation and phonetics, but within content . . . something like what we term  "haptic pronunciation and phonetics-enhanced content instruction." 

How does it work? Basically like this:
  • Students are gradually introduced to one of about 24 special haptic (movement plus touch) gestures either in short 3-5 minute videos or in class. (A quick bit of explanation and then three minutes of  doing the Movement, tone and touch technique, MTTP.) Those pretty much cover the basics of what students need to be able to do (and know) about pronunciation and basic phonetics of English. 
  • Later, in class, in the process of  working on any content, any accessible written text, instructor and students do what we call an "embodied oral reading," something analogous to the traditional "Lectio Divina" method, where they work with the MTTP in that class content to promote
    • Attention
    • Memory/recall
    • Expressiveness
    • Emphasis
    • Clarity (pronunciation of "old"!) 
  • Content and "pronunciation and phonetics" are, in effect, learned together, although the MTTPs are introduced and ready to be used whenever necessary. 
  • The same basic process can often be carried out in more advanced levels using a "Spoken Embodied Oral Reframing" where something spoken becomes the focus of the MTTP. 
  • But the real pay off of MTTP work in content is how it enables learners to better integrate into their spontaneous use of the language that they are being exposed to in the classroom and beyond. 
Join us next month. Beginning on the 25th, I'll be doing about weekly live stream webinars called, Dr Bill's Weekly (haptic) technique. Full details will be provided here on the blog soon. 

Keep in touch!





Sunday, September 1, 2019

To gesture or not to gesture (to provide spontaneous correction in language teaching) Part 1

A new study by Nakatsukasa (2019) demonstrates that using simple gesture to correct grammar (use of the 'ed' past tense) may not work. Amen to that. Signalling with a deictic/metaphorical gesture as the instructor recasts (repeats) the piece of language correctly when there is a error--and not requiring any kind of response from the learner--and furthermore still expecting some kind of meaningful uptake or noticing is . . .well . . . silly, but good to see that proved conclusively.

From the study:

"When the participants did not use the past tense in the obligatory context in two tasks, the researcher consistently provided recasts with or without gestures (pointing back over shoulder with thumb) immediately following the participants’ utterances, depending on learners’ assigned conditions."

clker.com
Now that, in principle, sounds like a pretty good signalling technique, one which I have seen used "repeatedly" over the years by teachers (Hudson, 2011). But . . .

"For the VR condition (verbal recast w/o gesture), the researcher provided recast only verbally, putting her hands down next to the side of her body to avoid gesturing."

Now, does that (standing motionless w/hands at sides) sound like anything close to natural teacher behavior/gesture? Really? I have got to see a video of that!  In fact, I’d really have to see a video of everything that went on, to make sense of the study.

"In addition, the researcher tried not to stress any part of the recast in either condition to keep consistency."

Wow. How could you provide anything close to effective, meaningful feedback without stressing the part of the defective sentence or phrase that is being corrected?

"In all the instances, learners had the opportunity to modify their output; however, production of modified output was not enforced in the present study, to keep the flow of interaction and the saliency of feedback as equal as possible across conditions."

Not requiring at least some minimal "embodied" verbal response to such a gesture seems about as disembodying as you can get! Apparently, it was.

The research on the use of simple recasts, as Nakatsukasa points out, is pretty clear that they are, for the most part, not worth wasting your time on. So, "pointing out" a basically ineffectual recast with a disembodied gesture is supposed to make it more effective? It didn't. Surprise.

This is an important study, however, in that it represents quite accurately, I think, the way in which many researchers and practitioners view the place of gesture in language teaching, or even human communication for that matter: "add ons" that can be understood out of context and disembodied (not demanding a corresponding physical response in the body and mind of the other--the learner, as if gesture can be understood independent of the meaningful interaction in which it occurs.)

Something of a “How not to” guide of sorts.

What then is the "right" embodied and contextualized way to use gesture in teaching? Thought you were never going to ask! See Part 2, The right (haptic) way to use gesture in (at least) pronunciation teaching. Forthcoming, shortly!

Source:
Nakatsukasa, K. (2019). Gesture-enhanced recasts have limited effects: A case of the regular past tense, Language Teaching Research (11)1-29.