Abstract The present study attempts to propose a taxonomy for the discourse functions of importance markers in English academic lectures and examine their effects on ESL learners’ comprehension of important points in lectures. To this end, a corpus of 160 lecture transcripts from the BASE corpus was analyzed to identify and classify the main functions of words and expressions that mark importance in them. It was found that importance is indicated by the following lecture-specific devices and attributes: 1) student involvements, 2) topic announcers, 3) exam-related markers, 4) discourse clarifiers, 5) hedging markers, and 6) message promoters. A total of 62 Malaysian ESL students (38 females and 24 males) participated in this study and were divided into an experimental group and a control group, both of them of the same size. Through 12 forty-minute sessions of explicit instruction, the participants in the experimental group were instructed the discourse functions of importance markers in university lectures, whereas those in the control group did not receive such instruction. The result of the posttest of comprehension of important points indicated that familiarity with how importance is marked in lectures can boost ESL students’ understanding of main topics. The findings suggest that both novice lecturers and ESL/EFL students may profit from instruction as to how importance is indicated by native speaker lecturers through several lecture-specific discourse functions.
{"title":"“Bear in mind that”: Enhancing lecture comprehension through signaling importance markers","authors":"Hadi Kashiha","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2020-0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2020-0013","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present study attempts to propose a taxonomy for the discourse functions of importance markers in English academic lectures and examine their effects on ESL learners’ comprehension of important points in lectures. To this end, a corpus of 160 lecture transcripts from the BASE corpus was analyzed to identify and classify the main functions of words and expressions that mark importance in them. It was found that importance is indicated by the following lecture-specific devices and attributes: 1) student involvements, 2) topic announcers, 3) exam-related markers, 4) discourse clarifiers, 5) hedging markers, and 6) message promoters. A total of 62 Malaysian ESL students (38 females and 24 males) participated in this study and were divided into an experimental group and a control group, both of them of the same size. Through 12 forty-minute sessions of explicit instruction, the participants in the experimental group were instructed the discourse functions of importance markers in university lectures, whereas those in the control group did not receive such instruction. The result of the posttest of comprehension of important points indicated that familiarity with how importance is marked in lectures can boost ESL students’ understanding of main topics. The findings suggest that both novice lecturers and ESL/EFL students may profit from instruction as to how importance is indicated by native speaker lecturers through several lecture-specific discourse functions.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41640078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract While recent research on English language teaching (ELT) in Germany has called for a more comprehensive representation of the diversity of English worldwide, learners’ perceptions of Global Englishes are currently underresearched despite their importance for a successful implementation of this change in ELT. The present paper analyzes 166 German secondary school students’ perceptions of Global Englishes, underlying cultural associations, and stereotypes. To this end, a perceptual dialect identification task, keyword association, and direct open questions were combined in a folklinguistic study. The results show that the informants consider British and American English as general standards and primarily associate English-speaking countries with Inner Circle varieties: British, American, and Australian English. British English is regarded as the default school reference norm, while American English is associated with dynamism and casualness. Furthermore, the students identify Indian and African English(es) as important Global Englishes. Their perceptions of these varieties are, however, less positive and seem to be influenced by cultural stereotypes, which might prompt them to perceive these varieties as funny or unintelligent. We suggest that learners’ existing knowledge of Global Englishes and explicit metalinguistic discussions of variation can be used as starting points to counteract such stereotypes.
{"title":"Folklinguistic perceptions of Global Englishes among German learners of English","authors":"Philipp Meer, Johanna Hartmann, Dominik Rumlich","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2020-0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2020-0014","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While recent research on English language teaching (ELT) in Germany has called for a more comprehensive representation of the diversity of English worldwide, learners’ perceptions of Global Englishes are currently underresearched despite their importance for a successful implementation of this change in ELT. The present paper analyzes 166 German secondary school students’ perceptions of Global Englishes, underlying cultural associations, and stereotypes. To this end, a perceptual dialect identification task, keyword association, and direct open questions were combined in a folklinguistic study. The results show that the informants consider British and American English as general standards and primarily associate English-speaking countries with Inner Circle varieties: British, American, and Australian English. British English is regarded as the default school reference norm, while American English is associated with dynamism and casualness. Furthermore, the students identify Indian and African English(es) as important Global Englishes. Their perceptions of these varieties are, however, less positive and seem to be influenced by cultural stereotypes, which might prompt them to perceive these varieties as funny or unintelligent. We suggest that learners’ existing knowledge of Global Englishes and explicit metalinguistic discussions of variation can be used as starting points to counteract such stereotypes.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2020-0014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47871527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This contribution aims at offering an overview of the main foreign language policies implemented in the Italian educational system in the last decades as well as of the role that research in Italian foreign language education has played. Main changes and innovations introduced through institutional – curriculum renewals, pre- and in-service education, European recommendations and implementation, language teacher education, university reforms – and through unofficial paths offered by publishers, professional associations, international exchange programs, will be explored and discussed. Some of the changes introduced at curriculum level (e. g. Content and Language integrated Learning (CLIL)) and in teacher education have added new perspectives in language teaching and are currently informing classroom practice in the Italian growingly multilingual scenarios. The impact of national and international research on foreign language teaching, carried out in the Italian language classrooms by scholars and, in some cases, by teachers themselves, will be described and illustrated through examples and language teachers’ contributions.
{"title":"More than meets the eye: research and practice in Italian foreign language policies and education","authors":"Lucilla Lopriore","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2020-0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2020-0025","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This contribution aims at offering an overview of the main foreign language policies implemented in the Italian educational system in the last decades as well as of the role that research in Italian foreign language education has played. Main changes and innovations introduced through institutional – curriculum renewals, pre- and in-service education, European recommendations and implementation, language teacher education, university reforms – and through unofficial paths offered by publishers, professional associations, international exchange programs, will be explored and discussed. Some of the changes introduced at curriculum level (e. g. Content and Language integrated Learning (CLIL)) and in teacher education have added new perspectives in language teaching and are currently informing classroom practice in the Italian growingly multilingual scenarios. The impact of national and international research on foreign language teaching, carried out in the Italian language classrooms by scholars and, in some cases, by teachers themselves, will be described and illustrated through examples and language teachers’ contributions.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2020-0025","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45773775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marije C Michel, Christine Vidon, R. Graaff, W. Lowie
Abstract The Netherlands have had a long tradition of modern foreign language (MFL) education: French, German and English have been standard subjects at secondary school since the 19th century. After the introduction of the Mammoetwet in 1968, several major educational reforms have shaped the current practice of Dutch MFL teaching. On the one hand, a greater diversity of languages is on offer in secondary schools (e. g., Arabic, Spanish), and following the implementation of the CEFR (Council of Europe 2001) MFL teaching has become more communicative. Additionally, more and more schools at all levels of education have adopted English as a medium of instruction. On the other hand, with the growing dominance of English in Dutch society, the time dedicated to languages other than English has declined substantially so that secondary school sections and university departments for other MFLs are closing down. In this article, we provide an overview of Dutch MFL teaching since 1945. We will sketch how the choices made by different parties involved, including learners and their parents, teachers, teacher educators, publishers and policy makers, have been shaping the teaching of MFLs at all levels of education with a special interest in MFL teacher education.
{"title":"Language Learning beyond English in the Netherlands: A fragile future?","authors":"Marije C Michel, Christine Vidon, R. Graaff, W. Lowie","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2020-0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2020-0020","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Netherlands have had a long tradition of modern foreign language (MFL) education: French, German and English have been standard subjects at secondary school since the 19th century. After the introduction of the Mammoetwet in 1968, several major educational reforms have shaped the current practice of Dutch MFL teaching. On the one hand, a greater diversity of languages is on offer in secondary schools (e. g., Arabic, Spanish), and following the implementation of the CEFR (Council of Europe 2001) MFL teaching has become more communicative. Additionally, more and more schools at all levels of education have adopted English as a medium of instruction. On the other hand, with the growing dominance of English in Dutch society, the time dedicated to languages other than English has declined substantially so that secondary school sections and university departments for other MFLs are closing down. In this article, we provide an overview of Dutch MFL teaching since 1945. We will sketch how the choices made by different parties involved, including learners and their parents, teachers, teacher educators, publishers and policy makers, have been shaping the teaching of MFLs at all levels of education with a special interest in MFL teacher education.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2020-0020","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43106150","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The following article addresses epistemological and terminological issues regarding Didactique des langues [language didactics] in France, including teaching methods, curricular developments, and research priorities. Why do the French, among other Europeans, keep on labelling “didactique des langues” what is also known as Second Language Teaching and Learning (SLTL), even though the English translation, “language didactics”, is hardly found in anglophone scientific literature? As for the very word “didacticien.ne” [didactician], so often used in France, it seems inexistent in English, often translated as “teaching expert” or “educational specialist”. Still, to what extent do these signifiers convey the same signified? How did the research area develop in France? The purpose of this paper is to research and make more visible the historical and scientific foundations of “didactique des langues “ and more precisely of “didactique de l’anglais“ in the French context. First, our analysis will borrow from educational sciences and focus on the term “Didactics” as opposed to “pedagogy”, and explain the concept of “didactology” developed by Galisson (2002), Coste and Puren (1999). We will also elaborate on the specific meaning of “didactique des langues”, “didactique des langues-cultures” in connection with other European traditions and Anglo-American terminology. Then, we will adopt an epistemological stance and briefly outline the history of the concept of “didactique de l’anglais”, with an overview of language teaching in relation to founding theories. Finally, we will present the evolution of French contemporary research.
{"title":"Language didactics and language teaching since 1945 – the French way","authors":"Claire Tardieu","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2020-0024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2020-0024","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The following article addresses epistemological and terminological issues regarding Didactique des langues [language didactics] in France, including teaching methods, curricular developments, and research priorities. Why do the French, among other Europeans, keep on labelling “didactique des langues” what is also known as Second Language Teaching and Learning (SLTL), even though the English translation, “language didactics”, is hardly found in anglophone scientific literature? As for the very word “didacticien.ne” [didactician], so often used in France, it seems inexistent in English, often translated as “teaching expert” or “educational specialist”. Still, to what extent do these signifiers convey the same signified? How did the research area develop in France? The purpose of this paper is to research and make more visible the historical and scientific foundations of “didactique des langues “ and more precisely of “didactique de l’anglais“ in the French context. First, our analysis will borrow from educational sciences and focus on the term “Didactics” as opposed to “pedagogy”, and explain the concept of “didactology” developed by Galisson (2002), Coste and Puren (1999). We will also elaborate on the specific meaning of “didactique des langues”, “didactique des langues-cultures” in connection with other European traditions and Anglo-American terminology. Then, we will adopt an epistemological stance and briefly outline the history of the concept of “didactique de l’anglais”, with an overview of language teaching in relation to founding theories. Finally, we will present the evolution of French contemporary research.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2020-0024","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41296674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Integration courses in Germany started in 2005 as a consequence of the newly promulgated immigration law, the so-called Zuwanderungsgesetz, a set of laws that restructured the 2005 legislation on foreigners in the Federal Republic of Germany with the first version of the Residence Act and the Freedom of Movement Act. Since then, although these laws have experienced changes in structure and audience, what has not changed is the presence of multilingual competences in classrooms in German as the norm. The mere presence of multilingualism in the courses does not automatically equal multilingual pedagogy. In this article, we present a quantitative study participants concerning the attitudes towards multilingualism and multilingual pedagogy of teachers in courses of German as a Second Language. The results indicate that one third of the participants present a consistent and marked “monolingual habitus” (Gogolin 1994; 1997), possibly influencing how open they are to including multilingual practices in their teaching. The remaining two thirds indicate openness to a multilingual orientation, but still engage in predominantly monolingual teaching practices: a contradicting stance in need of further investigation.
{"title":"Ich kann keine andere Sprache verwenden : A survey of attitudes towards multilingualism in German integration courses for adult migrants","authors":"Marco Triulzi, Ina-Maria Maahs","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2020-0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2020-0010","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Integration courses in Germany started in 2005 as a consequence of the newly promulgated immigration law, the so-called Zuwanderungsgesetz, a set of laws that restructured the 2005 legislation on foreigners in the Federal Republic of Germany with the first version of the Residence Act and the Freedom of Movement Act. Since then, although these laws have experienced changes in structure and audience, what has not changed is the presence of multilingual competences in classrooms in German as the norm. The mere presence of multilingualism in the courses does not automatically equal multilingual pedagogy. In this article, we present a quantitative study participants concerning the attitudes towards multilingualism and multilingual pedagogy of teachers in courses of German as a Second Language. The results indicate that one third of the participants present a consistent and marked “monolingual habitus” (Gogolin 1994; 1997), possibly influencing how open they are to including multilingual practices in their teaching. The remaining two thirds indicate openness to a multilingual orientation, but still engage in predominantly monolingual teaching practices: a contradicting stance in need of further investigation.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2020-0010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49663700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. Vincze, Marko Dragojevic, Jessica Gasiorek, Milica Miočević
Abstract The purpose of the present paper was to investigate the propositions of ethnolinguistic identity theory among young Hungarian speakers in Slovakia. Specifically, we aimed to explore the role of ethnolinguistic identification, vitality and boundary permeability in coping with negative ethnolinguistic identities, and also how these effects impact language use. Self-report questionnaire data were collected among Hungarian-speaking secondary school students in (N = 311). The data were analyzed using a Bayesian moderated mediation analysis with informative priors for coefficients based on an earlier study. The results provided mixed support for the hypotheses. Ethnolinguistic mobility appeared to be an outcome of a complex process, where identification, vitality and permeability operate interactively; at the same time, ethnolinguistic competition was independent of the perception of vitality and permeability, but a sole consequence of strong Hungarian identification. In addition, the results indicated that identification, vitality and competency in the outgroup language were factors predicting language use, whereas there was no support for the anticipated mediating effect of coping strategies. Findings are discussed in relation to ethnolinguistic identity theory and to the particular qualities of the local context.
{"title":"Ethnolinguistic Identity, Coping Strategies and Language Use among Young Hungarians in Slovakia","authors":"L. Vincze, Marko Dragojevic, Jessica Gasiorek, Milica Miočević","doi":"10.1515/EUJAL-2019-0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/EUJAL-2019-0008","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of the present paper was to investigate the propositions of ethnolinguistic identity theory among young Hungarian speakers in Slovakia. Specifically, we aimed to explore the role of ethnolinguistic identification, vitality and boundary permeability in coping with negative ethnolinguistic identities, and also how these effects impact language use. Self-report questionnaire data were collected among Hungarian-speaking secondary school students in (N = 311). The data were analyzed using a Bayesian moderated mediation analysis with informative priors for coefficients based on an earlier study. The results provided mixed support for the hypotheses. Ethnolinguistic mobility appeared to be an outcome of a complex process, where identification, vitality and permeability operate interactively; at the same time, ethnolinguistic competition was independent of the perception of vitality and permeability, but a sole consequence of strong Hungarian identification. In addition, the results indicated that identification, vitality and competency in the outgroup language were factors predicting language use, whereas there was no support for the anticipated mediating effect of coping strategies. Findings are discussed in relation to ethnolinguistic identity theory and to the particular qualities of the local context.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/EUJAL-2019-0008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48980705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Language in the Balkan region of Southeastern Europe has a complex and turbulent history, acutely embodied in the tripartite and trilingual state of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in which Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs all make claim to their own mutually-intelligible varieties of local “languages”. This study utilizes a linguistic landscape methodology to consider language use in Sarajevo, the capital of BiH, approximately 20 years after a brutal war that led to the establishment of the country. Data originate from three municipalities within the Sarajevo Canton – namely, Old Town, Center, and Ilidža – because of their representation of the region’s diversity and history. Signs were classified according to the three primary language varieties, i.e., Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian; BCS, representing a common core among the three varieties, as well as English, other languages, and mixed languages. The application of BCS uniquely positions the present research in comparison to other studies of language use in the region and allows for a more nuanced, less politically and ethnolinguistically fraught analysis of the communicative tendencies of users. More specifically, data indicate that actors in the linguistic landscape transcend the boundaries of their national, ethnic, and religious identities by tending towards the more neutral BCS, suggesting an orientation towards more translingual dispositions than previous variety-bound approaches have indicated. Thus, instead of the divisiveness of linguistic identity politics, the linguistic landscape of Sarajevo indicates a tendency toward inclusion and linguistic egalitarianism.
{"title":"Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian: Inherent Translanguaging in the Linguistic Landscape of Sarajevo","authors":"Ana Tankosić, Jason Litzenberg","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2019-0041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0041","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Language in the Balkan region of Southeastern Europe has a complex and turbulent history, acutely embodied in the tripartite and trilingual state of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in which Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs all make claim to their own mutually-intelligible varieties of local “languages”. This study utilizes a linguistic landscape methodology to consider language use in Sarajevo, the capital of BiH, approximately 20 years after a brutal war that led to the establishment of the country. Data originate from three municipalities within the Sarajevo Canton – namely, Old Town, Center, and Ilidža – because of their representation of the region’s diversity and history. Signs were classified according to the three primary language varieties, i.e., Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian; BCS, representing a common core among the three varieties, as well as English, other languages, and mixed languages. The application of BCS uniquely positions the present research in comparison to other studies of language use in the region and allows for a more nuanced, less politically and ethnolinguistically fraught analysis of the communicative tendencies of users. More specifically, data indicate that actors in the linguistic landscape transcend the boundaries of their national, ethnic, and religious identities by tending towards the more neutral BCS, suggesting an orientation towards more translingual dispositions than previous variety-bound approaches have indicated. Thus, instead of the divisiveness of linguistic identity politics, the linguistic landscape of Sarajevo indicates a tendency toward inclusion and linguistic egalitarianism.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2019-0041","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47708828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract As Ferris (2014) states, teachers have received insufficient research attention regarding their perceptions and practices of feedback. This study, therefore, was an attempt to qualitatively explore Iranian EFL teachers’ feedback-related perceptions and practices. In addition, the discrepancies between the reported perceptions and practices were examined. The data collection consisted of qualitative interviews with 14 teachers. The data analysis (i. e., data coding using the grounded theory approach) helped develop a coding scheme in which a number of thematic categories and subcategories were delineated with regard to feedback. The findings, accordingly, revealed some noteworthy discrepancies between the teachers’ perceptions and practices. For instance, although the teachers valued peer-feedback and selective correction, they reported providing teacher-generated feedback and comprehensive commentary on grammatical errors, respectively. Also, the teachers were aware of the importance of indirect methods of correction (e. g., to promote learner autonomy), but mostly gave explicit feedback on their students’ grammatical issues. Overall, we showed that these discrepancies primarily resulted from students’ expectations. We also discussed the findings in light of sociocultural considerations and the tenets of learner engagement with feedback.
{"title":"Discrepancies in Teachers’ Perceptions and Reported Practices: The Case of Written Feedback in an EFL Context","authors":"Hooman Saeli, A. Cheng","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2019-0033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0033","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As Ferris (2014) states, teachers have received insufficient research attention regarding their perceptions and practices of feedback. This study, therefore, was an attempt to qualitatively explore Iranian EFL teachers’ feedback-related perceptions and practices. In addition, the discrepancies between the reported perceptions and practices were examined. The data collection consisted of qualitative interviews with 14 teachers. The data analysis (i. e., data coding using the grounded theory approach) helped develop a coding scheme in which a number of thematic categories and subcategories were delineated with regard to feedback. The findings, accordingly, revealed some noteworthy discrepancies between the teachers’ perceptions and practices. For instance, although the teachers valued peer-feedback and selective correction, they reported providing teacher-generated feedback and comprehensive commentary on grammatical errors, respectively. Also, the teachers were aware of the importance of indirect methods of correction (e. g., to promote learner autonomy), but mostly gave explicit feedback on their students’ grammatical issues. Overall, we showed that these discrepancies primarily resulted from students’ expectations. We also discussed the findings in light of sociocultural considerations and the tenets of learner engagement with feedback.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2019-0033","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67361026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The focus of this article is the multilingualism of advanced university students of languages other than English. Our research questions are the following: 1) How many foreign languages do students know and use in their everyday life? 2) In which contexts do they use their various languages? 3) How do they reflect on their multilingualism? The data were collected at the University of Helsinki by means of an electronic questionnaire, through which students were invited to answer open questions about their language use. In all, 53 students of French, German, and Swedish answered the questionnaire. The results of this qualitative study have been presented from a holistic perspective, focusing on the dynamic nature of individual multilingualism (Jessner 2008). In the paper, we also discuss how the languages in the students’ language repertoire could be interpreted as being a part of (or outside) their dominant language constellation (Aronin and Singleton 2012). The results show that students were aware of their language competence in their various L2s, although many of them did not seem to experience themselves as multilingual. Many students were strongly focused on one specific L2, but in some cases, it could be possible to talk about a more holistic multilingual identity (Henry 2017) beyond the individual language-specific identifications.
{"title":"“I’m in contact with foreign languages every day”","authors":"A. Huhtala, Anta Kursiša, Marjo Vesalainen","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2019-0034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0034","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The focus of this article is the multilingualism of advanced university students of languages other than English. Our research questions are the following: 1) How many foreign languages do students know and use in their everyday life? 2) In which contexts do they use their various languages? 3) How do they reflect on their multilingualism? The data were collected at the University of Helsinki by means of an electronic questionnaire, through which students were invited to answer open questions about their language use. In all, 53 students of French, German, and Swedish answered the questionnaire. The results of this qualitative study have been presented from a holistic perspective, focusing on the dynamic nature of individual multilingualism (Jessner 2008). In the paper, we also discuss how the languages in the students’ language repertoire could be interpreted as being a part of (or outside) their dominant language constellation (Aronin and Singleton 2012). The results show that students were aware of their language competence in their various L2s, although many of them did not seem to experience themselves as multilingual. Many students were strongly focused on one specific L2, but in some cases, it could be possible to talk about a more holistic multilingual identity (Henry 2017) beyond the individual language-specific identifications.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2019-0034","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41528730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：