How Much Foreign Language Is There in the Foreign Language Classroom?

Duff, Patricia A.; Polio, Charlene

doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1990.tb02561.x

Cited by 199 publications

(224 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

194

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, despite the ban on the use of the L1 in classroom contexts, it has been long acknowledged that the reality is that many highly skilled and effective language teachers (and their students) do in fact often use the L1 for varying and various reasons, even when discouraged to do so by educationalists, policy makers, and administrators (Baker 2011;Duff and Polio 1990;Lin and Li 2012). They do this often with feelings of guilt, unprofessionalism and subterfuge (Butzkamm 2003;Canagarajah 2011;Copland and Neokleous 2011).…”

Section: Re-thinking the Monolingual Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom

Gallagher

Colohan

2014

The Language Learning Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes a small in-class study which sought to explore the effectiveness (or not) of using the emerging bilingual skills of the students as a teaching and learning tool in a Geography through English CLIL classroom in Northern Italy. In particular, the study sought to examine whether and to what extent the use of codeswitching / translanguaging between the native language and the language of instruction during content-related tasks might prove a useful technique for highlighting particular grammatical points in the CLIL vehicular language. Findings support the view that there is a place for the focused, planned and targeted use of the L1 during meaning-focused lessons in the language immersion classroom and that bilingual instructional techniques, such as the 'twisted dictation' used in the study, can be an effective means of both drawing students' attention to particular linguistic forms and of developing an enriched bilingual vocabulary. The authors suggest that the use of the L1 as a language teaching and learning tool is not limited to the CLIL or immersion classroom, but could be adapted for use in other language learning contexts.

show abstract

Section: Re-thinking the Monolingual Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom

Gallagher

Colohan

2014

The Language Learning Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mackey and Gass (2011) distinguish between observational studies in which discourse-level events constitute the unit of analysis (interactionist studies) and those whose unit of analysis includes tasks and instructional practices (instructional segment studies). The interactionist studies have resulted in the creation of various observation schemes used to identify and characterize critical features in classroom discourse such as corrective feedback (e.g., Chaudron, 1977;Lyster & Ranta, 1997), form-focused pedagogical episodes (e.g., Ellis, Basturkmen, & Loewen, 2001;Loewen, 2003;Simard & Jean, 2011;Yuqin Zhao & Bitchener, 2007;Zyzik & Polio, 2008), question types (Long & Sato, 1983), turn allocation (Seliger, 1977), and L1 and L2 language use (Duff & Polio, 1990;Polio & Duff, 1994). The objective of the studies observing instructional segments, on the other hand, has been to elaborate observation instruments used to create a coherent and rational portrait of the complexities of the L2 classroom (e.g., Allen, Fröhlich, & Spada, 1984;Fanselow, 1977;Mitchell, Parkinson, & Johnstone, 1981;Ullman & Geva, 1984).…”

Section: Interaction-friendly Instructional Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Observing the interactive qualities of L2 instructional practices in ESL and FSL classrooms

Zuniga

Simard

2016

SSLLT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discourse features that promote the generation of interactionally modified input and output, such as negotiation for meaning, have been shown to significantly enhance second language acquisition. Research has also identified several characteristics of instructional practices that render them more or less propitious to the generation of these discourse features. While various classroom observation studies have successfully measured the communicative orientation of classroom environments, most of the indicators of interactivity analyzed in those studies were obtained through micro-level discourse analyses and not through macro-level analyses of task-related factors shown to directly influence the interactivity of instructional practices. Such a macro-level scale has potential practical implications for teachers and administrators seeking an efficient tool for assessing and improving the interactivity afforded by a given curriculum. The objective of the present study was therefore to develop macro-level scale to determine the extent to which teachers of French and English as a second language use interaction-friendly instructional practices. Using an observation scheme designed to code data on factors shown to influence interactivity, 63 hours of FSL and ESL classes from secondary schools in the Montreal area were observed and analyzed. Results indicate clear differences between the two groups. While both ESL and FSL classes were less teacher-centered than those observed in previous studies, they were still rated as not-very-interactive. Target language differences showed that the FSL Michael Zuniga, Daphnée Simard 136 classes were more teacher-centered and characterized by fewer interactionfriendly tasks and activities than the ESL classes. Task characteristics, reasons for ESL and FSL differences and recommendations for improvement are discussed.

show abstract

“…The study by Duff and Polio (1990) is one of the first endeavors to determine the functions of communicative strategies in language classrooms. Theyexhibited that there was anextensivevariation among teachers concerning thequantity of time they employed L1 fluctuating from 10 to 100 percent.…”

Section: Research On Code-switchingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study of Iranian EFL University Lecturers’ Practice of Code Switching in English as Foreign Language Instruction

Shabani

Jamnani²,

Heidar³

2016

JSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed at investigating where and the purposes for which code-switching is used by Iranian EFL lecturers in universities as foreign languageinstruction.The data of this study were gathered from two sources: six EFL university lecturers from three local universities where they taught English as EFL instruction.Theywere interviewed individually regarding the use of code-switching in their classrooms in order to reveal their purposes of using this strategy as well as their participants' understandings of code-switching as a language teaching strategy. The interviews took 30-40 minutes each. The interviews were finally transcribed and the main themes were coded to answer the research questions; the second group of participants was students as native speakers of Persian. Ninety undergraduates from the three universities were randomly chosen from among those students majoring in TEFL. They were majoring in the first grade of the academic program. To this end, an eleven-item questionnaire was given to them to elicit their responses for the contexts and the reasons for which code-switching was preferred.The data from interview with EFL lecturers as well ISSN 2162-6952 2016 www.macrothink.org/jse 96 those of the students' responses were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively using SPSS, respectively, to determine where and for what purposes codes-switching were applied or practiced in EFL classrooms. The findings of the study indicated that their code-switching habits were connected to what was being taught. Their code-switching had to do with efficiency in their teaching and how to make it easier for the students to understand what they were teaching. Journal of Studies in Education

show abstract

How Much Foreign Language Is There in the Foreign Language Classroom?

Cited by 199 publications

References 2 publications

T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom

T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom

Observing the interactive qualities of L2 instructional practices in ESL and FSL classrooms

A Study of Iranian EFL University Lecturers’ Practice of Code Switching in English as Foreign Language Instruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About