Corrective feedback: learners' and teachers' perceptions; 4. A review of private speech and quantitative analysis; 5. Private speech: learners' and teachers' perceptions; 6. Review quote "Reiko Yoshida's book starts from the assumption that language learners are active participants in the language classroom and that all of their language use, including language used privately, is relevant to their language learning. Much of the language use analysed in this book would normally not be available for a language teacher because it is by definition private and would therefore often be overlooked as an important part of learning.
This book makes available what is often hidden and examines how such hidden language is not only relevant for but a constituent part of language learning. Yoshida's investigation of personal speech opens up second language acquisition research beyond a focus on the code to be learnt and places the learner on centre stage in language acquisition. Her study makes a valuable contribution to understanding language learning as a socioculturally constructed enterprise and reveals the importance of what students do with their whole language repertoire in the process of acquiring a new language.
Learn about new offers and get more deals by joining our newsletter. Sign up now. These strategies probably affected her noticing of incidental CF. In her interviews in Semester 2, Lily mentioned that she was not very confident and did not participate in the class actively in Semester 2 compared to Semester 1. One reason for her lack of confidence, she pointed out, was the difficulty of finding time to study Japanese at home due to the heavy workload of her major subject.
Her lack of time to review and prepare for the class may have affected the rate of her uptake and noticing in Semester 2. Wendy received only 6 CF moves in Semester 1. In Semester 2, she received 13 CF moves. According to the classroom observation notes regarding the frequency of her talk in the classroom and audio-recording of her speech, she was quiet compared to the other learner-participants in both the first and second semesters.
In the last interview of Semester 2, Wendy commented that she hesitated in speaking Japanese due to her lack of confidence in Semester 1, but that she became less hesitant in speaking Japanese in Semester 2 due to her increase in confidence. She mentioned that the private tutoring she had started taking in the middle of Semester 1 built her confidence, because she could ask questions to her Japanese tutor about the items that she did not understand in the class.
Her increase in confidence may have led to her receiving more CF in Semester 2; however, the quantitative data show that this did not contribute to higher rates of uptake and noticing. Corrective Feedback and Quantitative Analysis 49 2. In the teacher-fronted setting, the occurrence of the incidental CF was great 64 compared to the direct CF 24 in Semester 1, while the numbers of the direct CF 28 was slightly greater than those for the incidental CF 27 in Semester 2.
The learners worked face-to-face with other learners in pairs or groups of three or four learners in peer-learning settings. It is unsurprising that direct CF occurred more often than incidental CF in this situation in both the first and second semesters. The rates of uptake, noticing and no uptake after direct and incidental CF are shown in Table 2. Incidental CF, in my study, includes CF such as incidental metalinguistic feedback or incidental elicitation other than incidental recasts.
This broad definition of CF should have caused a higher uptake rate after incidental CF. The study found individual differences of uptake rates after direct and incidental CF. Catherine received direct CF 31 more often than incidental CF In other words, she often noticed the incidental contrasts between her erroneous utterances and the utterances of her teacher or classmates, or realized her errors by incidental prompts.
Erwin received the least direct CF 1 and incidental CF 6. Jessica received direct CF more often 31 than incidental CF Frequent occurrences of direct CF in pair work in Semester 2 20 may have contributed to the greater number of direct CF. Kiki received 32 direct CF moves and 19 incidental CF moves.
- Wildfire (Ralph Cotton Western Series).
- Money, Politics, and the Constitution: Beyond Citizens United.
- Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms : Reiko Yoshida : ;
- Book Summary / Abstract.
As mentioned in Section 3. This may have affected the rate of her uptake and noticing after incidental CF. Lily received incidental CF 26 more often than direct CF According to the classroom observation notes and audio-recordings of her speech, Lily was asked questions by McCartney less often compared to Catherine and Erwin who were in the same class for both semesters.
Wendy received direct CF 13 more often than incidental CF 6. Wendy used private speech least frequently, and this triggered less frequency of incidental CF that she received compared to the other learners. She may not have attended to incidental CF as she did to direct CF. CF does not occur frequently for those learners whose utterances include only a few errors, such as Erwin. Direct CF between a teacher and a learner in the teacher-fronted situation tends to occur to the learner who is often asked questions by the teacher, such as with Catherine. The occurrences of incidental CF in the teacher-fronted situation following peer work depends on how the learners participated in the tasks during the peer work.
The incidental CF is likely to occur to the learners who actively answered many questions in the peer work. Direct CF between learners in peer-learning situations also tended to occur for the learners who actively participated in the tasks. Corrective Feedback and Quantitative Analysis 53 2. Summary of the Chapter In this chapter, I indicated previous studies of CF and discussed the analysis of quantitative data of CF in this study.
Results of previous studies varied. Learners also perceived different types of CF, such as morphosyntactic, lexical or phonological feedback more correctly in different studies Mackey et al. This seemed to be related to the different degree of difficulty of the grammatical forms that were being practised in the classes and how the learners were relaxed and active in peer work. Most of the learners responded to more than half of the CF moves that they received. This shows the relationship between the frequency of particular types of CF and the situations in which they occur.
Therefore, qualitative analysis is necessary to investigate the perceptions of CF by the teachers and learners. This is introduced in Chapter 3. Ohta, personal communication, 3 January, Uptake constitutes the total number of uptake, and uptake and acknowledgement in each semester in Tables 2. Noticing consists of the total number of uptake, unsuccessful uptake, acknowledgement, uptake and acknowledgement in each semester in Tables 2. As stated in the first paragraph in Section 2.
In the first section, I indicate how direct and incidental CF occurrences are interrelated and how the learners benefit from the CF, or sometimes do not notice the CF in the classroom context. Thirdly, I indicate the explanations of the effectiveness of recasts, how the teachers choose CF types and what kinds of CF the learners prefer to be provided with by their teachers. Finally, I present the answers of the research questions.
Corrective Feedback in the Classroom Context The analysis of the data collected by both the classroom recordings and the SR interviews revealed results that are difficult to be discovered by focusing on only language used in classroom interactions. CF episodes are closely related to the classroom contexts in which they occurred. McCartney asked a task question to Catherine after pair work: Excerpt 1 1 C: Uhn kono keeki wa uhn nari nagara tsukutta n desu ga, a amari jyoozu ni dekimasen deshita.
Kono keeki wa? Catherine chose naku cry and made a sentence with an incorrect form of the verb in line 1. The teacher was not sure about what Catherine had said and asked for clarification in line 2, where Catherine gave him an English translation of her sentence and repeated nari nagara [sic] while crying in line 5. The teacher mentioned the necessity of a comma after kono keeki wa and showed the correct form naki nagara in line 8. Catherine repeated naki, the part where she made an error in the last line. According to Catherine, during pair work before this interaction, she considered that the polite form of naku should be narimasu and wrote the answer nari nagara in her notebook.
In her SR interview, I asked Catherine for the negative form of naku and she answered with the correct form nakanai. Corrective Feedback: Perceptions 57 Interestingly, this interaction between the teacher and Catherine functioned as an incidental CF move for Erwin. During pair work preceding Excerpt 1, Erwin made the following utterance: Excerpt 2 1 E: Nooto nooto o toru nagara jyugyoo o uketa. Kono keeki wa naku nagara. This cake TOP while crying error. I made this cake while crying error , but I could not make it very well. Aa, kono keeki wa umm. Oh, this cake TOP umm.
This led Erwin to self-correct the verb forms from naku nagara to naki nagara. In Excerpt 3, Erwin, who was an overhearer of the interaction between Catherine and the teacher, benefited from the interaction and noticed the correct form. As Ohta found in her study, a learner becomes an overhearer to an interaction of a neighbouring pair during pair work. She used the correct expression Doo ikimasu ka How can I go?
After a while, she used the more appropriate expression Doo yatte ikimasu ka in line Then she overheard that the teacher was suggesting the expression doo yatte iki masu ka to the group sitting next to her group, and she repeated it. The video recorded the teacher standing close to Kiki and talking to the next group for a while during the group work. This example shows that a learner can be active as an overhearer who uses any possible learning opportunity in the classroom context, as Ohta suggested.
Learners often provided help with each other when their classmates sitting close to them were called on by the teachers. Yama o:. While looking at the mountain, I drink wine, OK. S who was sitting next to her suggested Mi nagara While seeing in a soft voice in line 5 and Wendy repeated it with an acknowledgement in the following line.
According to Wendy, she was thinking about the answer, repeating yama mountain in line 2. She was a little bit surprised when McCartney suddenly pointed her out to answer the question. When her classmate mentioned Mi nagara, she realized that she had omitted na. Although she sounded mitara not migara in line 4, she was not aware when she was saying it. In which case, I will try. Kiki-san Number four, number four requires a little bit of imagination.
Kiki A. Umm go along? Tooru, yeah Go along, yeah I think you would say, did uh, if they listen to you, you might get run over by the car. Kuruma, kuruma ga, Kiki-san Cross, yeah. Although it was not clearly recorded on her tape, Kiki commented in her SR interview that her friend, M sitting next to her said michi when she said machi in line 4 and that this reminded her of the correct pronunciation of the word.
Thus, CF moves between the learners were embedded in CF moves between the teachers and the learners. This suggests the importance of SR interviews to obtain the information that was not audio-recorded. The teacher tried to elicit a more appropriate expression from Kiki in line 12 after making a funny comment about the expression tooru in line 9. The teacher confirmed the difference between tooru and wataru with Kiki in lines 18 and 20, and Kiki repeated wataru again.
He considered that Kiki understood the difference between the two verbs, because he explained it thoroughly with a funny comment and the example sentences. Kiki commented that she understood the difference between the two verbs after the teacher showed the verb wataru in line 16, and that she started talking with her friend, because she found the correct answer. To the same question at the beginning of her SR interview, she mentioned wataru immediately after saying kono michi o tooru, showing the development of distinguishing these two verbs in her language system.
CF moves between learners were also embedded in incidental CF episodes between the teachers and the learners. Catherine sat with her friend, A, in every recorded class. McCartney read a sentence from a letter in a task out of the workbook.
ÇOCUKLARIN İKİNCİ DİL KAZANİM SÜREÇLERİ: KAPSAMLI BİR LİTERATÜR TARAMASI
The teacher was talking to the class. The utterance of A sitting next to Catherine Ki ni shinai de in the next line functioned as a recast to Catherine and she repeated it. The teacher heard S and mentioned that the expression should be in the negative polite form in line This functioned as incidental metalinguistic feedback for Catherine and she said the affirmative polite ending after ki ni in the following line.
The teacher finally presented the correct sentence with a request form at the end in line 16 and this functioned as an incidental recast for Catherine who repeated the first part Ki ni shinai de again after it.
- Sonata in D minor, K. 295.
- Door County Outdoors: A Guide to the Best Hiking, Biking, Paddling, Beaches, and Natural Places?
- [PDF] Learners in Japanese language classrooms : overt and covert participation - Semantic Scholar.
Catherine responded to each utterance of the teacher, and she spoke softly in most of the utterances. Although she spoke up a few times, the teacher did not hear her. In some other parts of the task, they needed to use the forms te iku or te kuru to express change of an event or an action or express the direction of an action is going away or coming towards the speaker that they had learned in the class. Catherine commented in her interview that she tried to use the forms for all the questions, which is the reason for her erroneous utterance in line 6.
In line 2, she used the negative form of ki ni suru with an imperative, and then she manipulated ki ni suru by saying some different forms, including both affirmative and negative forms. When the teacher said ki ni shinai de kudasai, she understood that it was an appropriate ending from the content of the letter. Her manipulations of the forms show her use of the language as a cognitive tool through the mediation of the direct and Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms 64 incidental CF.
However, she presented the incorrect answer Ki ni shite kurenai at the beginning of the interview.
Learners In Japanese Language Classrooms Overt And Covert Participation 2009
As a few different kinds of grammatical forms were introduced in each week, Catherine seemed to be confused with the forms. Excerpts 5, 6 and 7 indicated that the learners benefited from CF from both their teacher and classmates who provided help to them or who were trying to work out the answers. The learners also benefited from CF episodes between their teacher and classmates who were called on, when they provided their help to the classmates.
Ii desu ka? Were there many phone calls yesterday? Ee S-san, henji-wa? Well S, the answer is? After the teacher called on S who was sitting next to her, she helped him by telling her answers to him in lines 7, 9 and 11, and S repeated them. Catherine repeated Shika nakatta only in the last line, the alternative expressions that the teacher showed in the previous line. According to Catherine, she first tried to make a sentence with shika only in line 4; however, she could not complete the sentence. At the beginning of the interview, she answered the question with dake desu and immediately self-corrected it to deshita.
She may have been developing it for internalization. She paid Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms 66 attention to the incidental CF and used it as external assistance to develop her understanding of the appropriate forms. This is understandable, because Catherine was indirectly participating in the interaction between the teacher and her classmate who was called on, by providing her help to the classmate. In this situation, Catherine could benefit from the interaction as auditor and indirect participant in the interaction between S and the teacher.
S, please, over to you. Uh uh. Money, I found money. Kiki, 2 May Kiki chose one of the expressions and used it with nagara for S in line 2, and S said it to the teacher in line 3. Kiki apologized to S and asked M the reading of a kanji in the expression that she chose in line M read it as kuda again in line Kiki, who was trying to help S, repeated ku, the first part of the kanji reading that M said in line Although M was still expressing that he was not sure about the reading, S had to present the sentence in line Kiki repeated the correct reading shita down in line 29 and said the correct phrase shita o minagara while looking down to S who was told to correct his errors by the teacher.
Kiki, S and M were sitting in the back of the classroom, and Kiki and M spoke very softly in order to help S without being heard by the teacher. The teacher commented in the interview that he noticed how the students sitting around S were helping him, although he did not know what they were actually saying. According to the teacher, although learners learn from other learners as well as from the teacher, only repeating what other learners said does not lead them to learning.
The teacher considered that other learners, including more advanced learners in the class, also should have learned from this long interaction between the teacher and S, and that S understood his feedback. After this interaction, the teacher went to S and shook hands with him, appreciating his efforts to work out the answer. Therefore, his understanding of the feedback by the teacher and his classmates could be suspect.
Kiki, who was trying to help S, seemed to notice the correct forms. When the teacher mentioned the English translation of the phrase in line 8, she realized her misunderstanding. M, who provided the kanji reading kuda to Kiki and S, may have learned the correct reading of the kanji, as well, through the incidental CF, although he did not repeat the correct reading. Ohta explained that the learners who are not addressees of the CF by a teacher, but auditors or overhearers, may be more likely to notice CF, because they have more abundant resources in their working memory memory that is activated from long-term memory.
It may be easier for learners to process language forms when they have no pressure to think about correct answers and present them to the class, as Ohta pointed out. In the above example, Kiki, who was an auditor, could understand the incidental CF while under no pressure. Moreover, her intention to help her classmate may have promoted her involvement in the interaction between the teacher and the classmate, and this resulted in enhancing her understanding of the feedback. In my study, the CF between the learners that was embedded in the CF between the learners and the teachers promoted the learning of the learners who participated in the embedded CF episodes.
- Find a copy in the library!
- A Dolls House (Plays for Performance Series).
- Lesson Plans The Firm.
- Health Insurance Plans and Prices for Missouri Women (Missouri Health Care Book 1).
Incidental CF occurred frequently in the teacher-fronted setting, and the learners benefited from the incidental CF. The learners sometimes confirmed the correctness of the forms which they were not sure about during Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms 70 the previous peer work, by receiving incidental CF from their teachers during post-task activities.
This one, parking. Parking, to park ACC After the pair work, the teacher is doing the task with the class 5 T: Ichiban, S-san, what, what did you work it out Number one, S, what, what did you work it out? After the pair work, the Corrective Feedback: Perceptions 71 teacher asked the question to one of the students, S. Therefore, Kiki needed to change the particles from o to ni.
Learners In Japanese Language Classrooms Overt And Covert Participation
The teacher corrected tomaru, the intransitive verb that S used in line 8, to the transitive one tomeru. She realized that it was possible when the teacher mentioned the expression. In relation to the intransitive verb tomaru a car stops and the transitive verb tomeru someone stops a car , she correctly answered the difference, when I asked it in the interview.
She also remembered the expression chuusha suru for the same task question by myself at the beginning of the interview. This is an example where the learners confirmed the correctness of the grammatical forms that they were uncertain about during pair work, when the teachers checked their answers of the task questions with the class after the pair work.
As Ohta referred to the importance of this type of post-task activity, it provides the opportunities for learners to learn from incidental feedback as well as direct feedback. As shown in this section, incidental CF is interrelated with direct CF. Situations 1, 2 and 3 are teacher-fronted settings and Situation 4 is a peer-work setting. Figures 3. In the figures, T means a teacher and L1 and L2 mean learners.
In this case, L2 is a non-participatory audience member. The study found that incidental CF also occurred in some other situations, although overhearing the speech of other learners who were working in neighbouring groups in peer work, which was indicated in Ohta , was not found in the data of my study. The study suggests that the occurrences of CF in the classrooms are more complicated and dynamic than the findings in previous studies.
The following excerpt is an example of Wendy: Excerpt 11 The teacher points out Wendy to answer a task question 1 W: Mexico de wa jyuu daraa de kuruma o? Wendy repeated it with nodding in the last line. Wendy knew the meaning of the verb kariru, because the teacher mentioned the meaning before asking her the question. However, her error was not simply the pronunciation of the word because of her inability of making the correct plain form of the verb from the potential form karirareru can rent. Although the teacher considered that provision of the correct form was appropriate to lead Wendy to understand it, she needed further scaffolding with an explanation of the verb conjugation.
He could have checked whether Wendy could self-correct the verb form kareru [sic] before providing the correct form kariru in line 2. For another error made by Wendy, as doru was written in katakana in the textbook, she only needed to read it correctly. According to her, she was not careful and said it in English, because she was nervous when the teacher called on her. Uh this person umm looks sad error , um? Kanashii soo.. For those who went to the lecture this morning, A-sensei4 pointed out the important difference.
Make sure you know the difference. Ii desu ka, minasan, kanashi soo desu. For those who went to the lecture this morning, the teacher A pointed out the important difference. OK everybody? After the teacher showed the correct form of the adjective with soo look like twice in line 4 and 6, Jessica repeated it with the wrong form without dropping i of the adjective each time. After the teacher gave a precise explanation about kanashii soo I hear that someone is sad , the class repeated kanashi soo desu look like sad after the teacher and Jessica made the correct repetition with them.
According to McCartney, in the class, he considered that Jessica understood the difference between kanashi soo and kanashii soo; however, after listening to the recorded tape in the SR interview, he realized that Jessica only repeated what he said without understanding the difference. He actually believed that Jessica said kanashi soo not kanashii soo in lines 5 and 7 in the class and in his SR interview when he listened to the recorded tape. He mentioned that his explanation was not clear enough in spite of his long explanation, and that he should have written the sentences in English on the board or shown other examples.
He also commented that Asian students tend to pretend to understand to make their teachers happy, even when they do not understand. According to Jessica, she did not understand the semantic difference between kanashi soo and kanashii soo. However, she was satisfied because she found what the correct answer was. She did not ask the teacher a question, because she considered that she would probably find it when she reviews the forms before an examination.
In Excerpt 12, Jessica repeated the correct form in concert with the class without asking her teacher a question, although she did not understand the semantic difference between the form and her error. This behaviour led the teacher to misconstrue that they understood his CF in the classes. It is noteworthy to discuss the reasons why this occurs in the classroom context. Speakers construct not only their own identities, but also the social identities of other interlocutors by using a verbal act or stance Ochs, Shimazu applied these concepts to a teacher and JFL learners in a university setting.
JFL learners in my study seemed to be aware of their roles as learners in the classroom from their comments in their SR interviews that they preferred to show agreements with their teachers and not to disturb the flow of the teaching. Allwright claimed that language classroom interaction troubles are typically resolved with a minimum social strain; however, the pedagogical outcomes are often unsatisfactory.
Learners tend to perceive that reminding a teacher of a failure to treat a question adequately is impolite, and embarrassing the teacher is even more embarrassment for the learner who does it Allwright, Karp and Yoels also stated that both teachers and learners avoid situations that might trigger social embarrassment for one another.
Boulima , p. McCartney was actually aware of this kind of learner behaviour. As found in his comment in his SR interview, he described this as a characteristic of Asian students. This supports Karp and Yoels findings. Showing acknowledgements and uptake without understanding the CF provided also occurred in CF episodes between learners in the peer-work setting.
Catherine received CF moves from her friend, A, during peer work. Is that number six? As the teacher is not very good error and the class is not interesting, either error , I intend to drop out of that course. Nai shi, nai shi Not, not Nai shi, oh nai shi, OK, sensei ga amari yokunai shi, jyugyoo ga omoshirokunai shi, sono koosu o otosu tsumori desu. Not, oh not, OK, as the teacher is not very good and the class is not interesting, I intend to drop out of that course. Catherine, 2 May The task required the learners to combine a few sentences into one by using the conjunction shi.
A provided a recast in line 2 and Catherine made a sentence with the correct form. Japanese has two different adjectives: na-adjective and i-adjective, and each adjective has affirmative and negative forms, as Table 3. The plain forms of adjectives or verbs are necessary before the grammatical form shi.
The plain forms of na-adjectives include da at the end such as kirei da pretty. However, the negative forms of the na-adjectives do not include da at the end, such as kirei jya nai not pretty. Moreover, both the affirmative and negative forms of i-adjectives do not include da at the end. Ii good and omoshiroi interesting are both i-adjectives. Catherine confused them with the affirmative forms of na-adjectives. In her SR interview, Catherine commented Table 3.
However, her understanding of the CF did not occur. Catherine commented in her interview that A had already read the whole textbook and knew all answers to the task questions. When the learners consider that their classmates are more advanced than themselves, they may sometimes accept the CF of the classmates without understanding the CF, as they did with their teachers. Jessica received some different CF about a Japanese counter system from Ito during peer work. She could not find the rule to make correct forms with a counter kai, which is used with numbers to indicate the frequency of actions.
Do I ask you this same question for this? Soo Yes Uhn is that ichikai? As she was not confident, she was actually asking the teacher a question. The teacher showed the correct pronunciation of the word in line Jessica repeated it and made the correct sentence Ikkai mo ikimasen deshita Did not go even once in line The teacher commented in her SR interview that this type of pronunciation error is difficult to be fi xed after only one or two corrections.
Before this interaction, Jessica manipulated the form once with a counter. Did not go for a walk even once error Jessica, 11 Oct. The frequency of actions basically is indicated by adding the counter kai after numbers.
However, when the numbers are one ichi , six roku , eight hachi and ten jyuu , it is necessary to contract the last morae of the numbers such as ikkai or jyukkai, as in Table 3. Jessica commented that she did not notice the similarity of the rules between the formations of jyukkai and ikkai.
Any question? Table 3. The teacher was trying to let the class complete the peer work in order to move on to the next part of the classroom schedule. Jessica and her partner were still answering the questions. Jessica commented in her SR interview that she did not remember the previous expressions jyukkai or ikkai here, and that she realized the correct form rokkai six times , but that she would have problems when using kai with the other numbers, because she did not find any particular rules to use the counter kai with numbers.
According to Jessica, it was not necessary to understand and memorize how to use counters with numbers, because she usually referred to the table of the counters in her textbook when she had to use them. The teacher mentioned the difficulty of correcting this type of error again in her interview and referred to the number of students who had pronunciation problems. Jessica repeatedly mentioned in her interviews that she very quickly forgets what she has practised in class. Her inability to find similar rules between the CF moves that she received may contribute to the difficulty with her memory organization and remembering appropriate items when she needs them.
At the beginning of the interview, to the same question by myself, Jessica used the correct expression for jyukkai and ikkai, but used the incorrect word rokkatsu for rokkai. She could not explain why she said rokkatsu. Although she successfully contracted the sounds before the counter, she was not sure about the difference between these forms and the forms of the counter kai with the other numbers. Jessica could not develop the conceptual knowledge of the counter system that is crucial to internalize the grammatical form.
This may be related to her lack of strategies to find the similarity between particular grammatical forms. Stern stated that good language learners frequently use strategies of experimentation and planning in order to develop new language into an ordered system and of revising this system progressively. Reiss reported that good language learners constantly process new information. Lantolf 84 Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms and Frawley described this type of behaviour as object-regulatory.
Therefore, Jessica is object-regulated at the point where she could not connect the similar linguistic items with each other in the CF that she received. Moreover, her lack of motivation to analyse the language further may also have affected the use of appropriate learning strategies. Jessica decided not to take the subject of Japanese language the following year at the beginning of Semester 2, and commented that she would probably keep learning Japanese culture or economics, but not the language.
Her goal of learning the Japanese language was to pass the course and her objective of attending the classes was to find out the correct answers to the tasks in order to prepare for examinations. Therefore, she was not motivated to analyse the answers and compare them with her own answers for gaining further knowledge. On the other hand, her inability to find rules may have produced her reduced interest in the subject and kept her motive low.
In addition, her other-regulated attitude of always relying on the table in the textbook may be related to her low motive for learning the language. Han stated that individual attention is necessary for the facilitation of learning by receiving recasts. In the following example, Jessica did not notice the incidental CF by Ito and her classmate. Dare ka ni yatte moraoo, who can answer this question?
Nanji ni kenkyuu shitsu ni kuru n desu ka, sensei asking, and you will answer as. What time are you coming to the office? What time are you coming to my office? A teacher is asking and you will answer as. Jessica, 6 Sep. She added an unnecessary o for the polite expression before mairimasu in line 9, and changed mairi to mairu, the plain form of the verb.
Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms 86 Table 3. In her interview, she could not remember the humble form of the verb kuru come. However, Jessica commented that she did not notice anything when she heard this interaction in the class. As Jessica did not attend carefully to the utterances of her classmate and teacher, her noticing of the incidental CF did not occur. Although Kiki noticed and understood the incidental CF in Excerpt 9, she tended not to notice the incidental CF in the teacher-fronted setting. The following excerpt occurred immediately after Excerpt 6. You can take subway here.
Hai, chikatetsu ni noru koto ga dekimasu or chikatetsu no densha ni noru koto ga dekimasu. Yes, you can take subway or you can take subway train. To the same question by myself, she could use the expressions koko de and ni noru koto ga dekiru n desu yo, although she could not remember the word chikatetsu subway.
Shima explained that these strategies are used by the learners to make their learning environment more comfortable by not taking risks. It is almost impossible for learners to fully attend to a teacher and classmates at every moment of the class. However, this strategy affected her noticing of incidental CF. Kiki also tended to prepare her answers to the task questions while the teacher was asking the other task questions to the class or the other learners.
In the next excerpt, Kiki is working with M and the other classmate S. Ukeru: incomprehensible. STE 4 S: Uke? However, in her interview, Kiki commented that she was not listening to the teacher, because she was answering the other task questions in case the teacher would call on her to answer them. She provided an erroneous answer uke shi to my question in the interview.
From her comments in her interviews, Kiki was found to have a strong desire to be seen as a capable student by her teacher and classmates. She was often preparing answers with her friend or on her own while the teachers were asking her classmates other task questions in case her teachers asked her questions.
When the learners spontaneously participated in the CF episodes, despite the indirect participation, they tended to notice or understand the incidental CF. In Section 3. The learners frequently noticed or understood incidental CF in private-speech situations and in helping a classmate situations. However, as shown in Excepts 18, 19 and 20 in Section 3. Your email. Send Cancel. Check system status. Toggle navigation Menu. Name of resource. Problem URL. Describe the connection issue. SearchWorks Catalog Stanford Libraries. Second language acquisition processes in the classroom : learning Japanese.
Responsibility Amy Snyder Ohta. Imprint Mahwah, N.