Stop using excessive repetition in pronunciation teaching! (Especially if your student almost gets it right the first time!)

 "Words, words, words." (Hamlet)

There is probably no topic more controversial in pronunciation teaching than the role of repetition in learning and change. Key in "repetition in pronunciation teaching" into Google and you get about 1,000,000 hits. Educated opinion ranges from "use only sparingly and strategically, if at all" to highly sophisticated routines with multiple repetitions.

Applicability of repetition of language forms varies greatly, in differing forms and with learner populations. The operating principle may, in fact, be--to paraphrase an old pop song--neither "too much repetition-- or not quite enough."

The former injunction, to use repetition sparingly in at least some contexts, is seemingly supported by a 2014 study by Reagh and Yassa of the University of California-Irvine (summarized by Science Daily) in which repeated viewing of pictures seemed to " . . . increase factual recall but actually hindered subjects' ability to reject similar "imposter" pictures. This suggests that the details of those memories may have been shaken loose by repetition." Their model, Competitive Trace Theory, also is said to postulate that " . . . details of a memory become more subjective the more they're recalled and can compete with bits of other similar memories."

Now granted, that study focused only on repeated viewing of pictures, rather than oral (or haptic) repetition. What that does at least in part explain, however, is why repetition may not only be ineffective at times but possibly counterproductive, downgrading even further the memory of the target sound, word or phrase. In cases where there is a competing or "dangerously similar" L1 or L2 sound, word or phrase in the neighbourhood, either phonologically or semantically, the effect may be significant.

Recall that Asher's 1970's pre-Total Physical Response research was, in part, based on the concept that the fewer the number of repetitions when a word is learned for the first time, the better the chances of it being remembered.)

There are any number of approaches to effective repetition in pronunciation teaching, depending on what is being learned and when. If just articulation of a specific sound is the purpose, multiple, rapid repetition may be in order. If, on the other hand, the pronunciation of new or "repaired" vocabulary is the goal, then the effect alluded to by Reagh and Yassa may be in operation: the "uniqueness" of the target being hammered off or dulled.

In EHIEP work we generally try to limit the number of repetitions of words or short phrases to 3x, and even then requiring as much intense "full body" engagement as possible, accompanied by haptic anchoring--movement and touch on a stressed syllable.

Coming soon!
AHEPS v3.0 Bee & Butterfly
(Artist: Anna Shaw)

Repetition, like all aspects of instructional design must be intentional, meaningful and developmentally appropriate. Working 1x1, as in tutoring, that is more manageable. At the class level or during independent study, however, it is another question entirely.

Just ask Zig Zigler: “Repetition is the mother of learning, the father of action, which makes it the architect of accomplishment.” 

Haptic Integration of AWL Vocabulary Instruction

Credit for image:
 Thehungergames.wikia.com

Amanda Baker, Mike Burri and myself are proposing a chapter for a proposed book on integrating pronunciation into other skill areas. (No guarantee it'll be accepted, of course, but here is a draft of that proposal): 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Academic Word List (AWL), a compilation of 570 word families, has generated much interest, discussion and research in the past decade, and is now widely used, particularly in English for academic purposes (EAP) contexts (Coxhead 2000, 2011). Current theory on optimal acquisition of vocabulary suggests that it is best learned in context, using a more task-based approach (Nunan, 2004.)

However, recent research reveals an interesting twist. File and Adams’ work (2010), for example, demonstrated that isolated (not contextualized) vocabulary instruction may lead to a higher rate of retention than some forms of integrated instruction. Such research partially vindicates more traditional, paradigmatic practice that incorporates such practices as the use of word lists, attention to derivational and affixational morphology, along with basic etymology and word-family-association.

That research serves as point of departure for this proposed chapter. A classroom-tested, haptic (movement + touch) pedagogical overlay and extension of that study is proposed (Acton, Baker, Burri & Teaman, in press.) A key assumption of the chapter is that a word may be “processed” more experientially (haptically), in such a way as to better anchor (committing to memory) its meaning, pronunciation, structural and "familial" properties. That may or may not include a relevant -usage sentence or phrase, associated with a high value conversational or EAP context.

The key principle is that both contextualized and non-contextualized attention to AWL words can be equally effective. Research in several disciplines has shown that appropriate "haptic engagement" in instruction can serve to effectively link together disparate features from different learning modalities (e.g., Fremdenback, Boisferon & Gentz, 2009.) In this case, the structural, physical and systemic features of the word can be linked enabling better recall and retention.  

The chapter presents a vocabulary list consisting of academic, multi-syllable words featuring the 14 most frequent word stress patterns occurring in the AWL (cf., Murphy & Kandil, 2004), followed by a set of four haptic protocols specifically developed to assist second language learners in anchoring (committing to memory) and acquiring high-value academic lexical items more effectively.

The protocols involve gesture-based movements that are linked to the following: word stress differentiating between stressed and unstressed vowels; prominent syllables and syllable grouping; phrasal collocations; word-level intonation; stress shift anchoring, and word family/paradigm-review

To illustrate, a "syllable protocol" (Acton, 2013) addresses primary stress and unstressed/secondary stress or rhythmic beats, each linked to a syllable in a word. For the syllable with primary stress, the learners tap their right hand on their left shoulder firmly. For all other syllables, the left hand touches the right forearm near the right elbow, one tap for each unstressed syllable. For example, in visualization, there are three small taps near the elbow (vi-su-al-), followed by one strong shoulder tap (-i-) and then two additional elbow taps (-za-tion). All of the protocols involve similar, gesture + touch movements that help learners focus their attention on the targeted term and recall it better, later.

 References

Acton, W. (2013). AH-EPS B-FLY-Demo, https://vimeo.com/61190793, retrieved September 25, 

           2013.

Acton, W., Baker, A. A., Burri, M., & Teaman, B. (in press). Preliminaries to haptic-integrated pronunciation instruction. In J. M. Levis & K. LeVelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Aug. 2012. Vancouver, BC.

Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213-238.

Coxhead, A. (2011). The academic word list 10 years on: Research and teaching implications. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 355-362.File, K. A., & Adams, R. (2010). Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated? TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 222-249.

File, K., and Adams, R. (2010). Should vocabulary be isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly 44(2): 222-249.

Fredenbach, B., Boisferon, A. & Gentaz, E. (2009). Learning of arbitrary association between

visual and auditory novel stimuli in adults: The “Bond Effect” of haptic exploration. PLoS ONE, 2009; 4 (3): e4844 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0004844.

Murphy, J., and Kandil, M. (2004). Word-level stress patterns in the academic word list. System, 32, 61-74.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Teaman, B., & Acton, W. (2013). Haptic (movement and touch for better) pronunciation. In N. Sonda and A. Krause (Eds.), Proceedings of the JALT 2012 Conference. Tokyo: JALT.

Conferences at which the content has been presented:

Acton, W., & Burri, M., Rauser, K., & Teaman, B. (2013, March). Anchoring academic word list vocabulary: One touch at a time. Workshop presented at the 47^th Annual TESOL Convention, Dallas, TX.

Acton, W., Baker, A., Burri, M., Kielstra, N., Rauser, K., Teaman, B., & Van Dyke, A. (2013, March). Essentials of haptic (kinesthetic + tactile) - integrated pronunciation instruction. Pre-conference Institute presented at the 47^th Annual TESOL Convention, Dallas, TX.

Acton, W., Baker, A., Teaman, B., & Burri, M. (2012, August). Preliminaries to haptic-integrated pronunciation instruction. Paper presented at the 4^th Annual Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Vancouver, BC.

Acton, W., Burri, M., Teaman, B., Goertzen, M., & Brodie, A. (2012, March). Getting optimal pronunciation from learner English dictionaries and beyond. Workshop presented at the 46^th Annual TESOL Convention, Philadelphia, PA.

Acton, W., Burri, M., & Teaman, B. (2011, October). Moving pronunciation, meaning and usage from the dictionary! Workshop presented at the 2011 Tri-TESOL Conference , Des Moines, WA.