Best practices

1. Vocab - memory/forgetting curve (first exposures/repetitions of new vocab are

the most important):

Start each class by reviewing vocab (or grammar points) learnt in the
previous class (plus this reduces lesson planning time)

2. Vocab vocabulary profiler (www.lextutor.ca/vp/bnc): Inferencing from context,
while a popular learner strategy, is not very effective (learners only have approx.
25% success rate of guessing correct meaning Nassaji, 2003 and Bensoussan
& Laufer, 1984). Instruction in inferencing may do more to improve reading
comprehension than the ability to infer word meaning from context
(Walters, 2006).

Ideally need 98% (Hu & Nation, 2000) or higher coverage for both reading and
listening comprehension (i.e. in order to read a wide variety of texts, sts need to
know 98% of the words in those texts in order to substantially understand those
texts) - maybe a few % lower for listening comprehension. More realistic goal is
95% coverage (Laufer, 1989 for written; Bonk, 2000 for listening) for both reading
and listening comprehension, which translates to knowledge of approx. 2000-
3000 word families (i.e. if sts know the first 3,000 most frequently occurring word
families they will likely be able to understand 95% of the words in a written or oral
text). N.B.: the efficiency (i.e. ratio of % coverage increase to number of word
families learned) of learning word families beyond the first 3,000 most frequent
ones dramatically decreases since learning the next 5,000 most frequent word
families (i.e. for a grand total of 8,000 word families) only increases coverage by
3% - i.e. to 98% coverage (i.e. 98% coverage for written vocabulary translates to
8,000-9,000 word families: Nation, 2006)

Use a vocab profiler to choose texts with as many words as possible in the
first 2,000-3,000 most frequently occurring word families [simply dump the
electronic copy of the text into the lextutor.ca vocab bnc profiler]

3. Vocab - pre-tests:

Use vocab pre-tests to determine sts current vocab knowledge -
(www.lextutor.ca/tests/)

4. Vocab providing definitions in sts L1: Research has shown that using L1
translations can be much more effective than providing L2-based meanings
[Ramachandran & Rahim, 2004 study on secondary school Malaysian learners;
Laufer & Shmueli, 1997 study on Hebrew students]. Using the L1 to facilitate the
form-meaning linkage (by providing an easy access to meaning) may allow more
cognitive resources to be focused on form (Barcroft, 2002). For more details see
Schmitt, 2008 article, p. 98 in Saito Coursepack).

At the beginning stages (i.e. when a new vocab item is first introduced),
research indicates that there is little disadvantage to using the sts L1 to
establish initial meaning [In subsequent stages, however, L2 context is
needed to enhance contextual word knowledge]

5. Vocab Explicit focus: Intentional vocabulary learning (i.e. when the specific
goal is to learn vocabulary, usually with an explicit focus) almost always leads to
greater and faster gains [than learning from incidental exposure], with a better
chance of retention and of reaching productive levels of mastery (Schmitt, 2008
referring to Laufer, 2005 review of research studies). Research suggests that 8-
10 incidental reading exposures may give learners a reasonable chance of
acquiring an initial receptive (but not productive) knowledge of words; this is the
equivalent of reading 1-2 graded readers per week which is not feasible for most
learners (Laufer, 2005).

Create explicit vocabulary exercises (i.e. ones that give explicit attention to
the learning of the lexical items themselves) rather than simply incidentally
exposing sts to new vocab. [see point 2, above, for choice of vocab items;
and remember to use frequent and repeated exposures see point 1,
above ]

6. Pronunciation Lingua Franca Core Syllabus (Jenkins, 2002, Applied
Linguistics, 23, 83-103)

Prioritize pronunciation target items for non-native speaker to non-native
speaker intelligibility purposes (i.e. suprasegmentals such as word stress,
stress-timed rhythm, weak forms, intonation, and other features of
connected speech may be irrelevant to NNS-NNS intelligibility)

7. Instructional method Corrective feedback: Almost all the research points to
corrective feedback as improving sts accuracy (on both receptive and productive
measures) when combined with a communicative instructional method because
corrective feedback provides negative evidence (i.e. evidence of what is not
possible in English) to supplement the positive evidence (i.e. evidence of what is
possible) given in communicative instruction

Incorporate the principled (i.e. regular and consistent) use of corrective
feedback (recasts, prompts, explicit corrections) when delivering lessons

8. Instructional method Processing Instruction (VanPatten & Cardierno, 1993,
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225-243): In addition to the PPP
method, insert an interpretation stage after the initial presentation that
explains metalinguistic features of the target structure (including where and why
L2 sts commonly make errors with this structure - e.g. false similarities with the
sts L1) and that does not require sts to produce anything but simply to
demonstrate that they have understood the target language feature that was
presented [e.g. if teaching the passive voice, give sts multiple examples of active
and passive sentences and ask them to identify the (subject and object) or (agent
and subject) of the sentence]

Use a PiPP model: Present Interpret Practice Produce
[NB: Beware, however, of making lesson too teacher-centric]

9. Instructional method Content-based instruction: Research (Harley and Swain,
1984) has shown that while CBI (i.e. subject-matter/immersion teaching
methods) can improve sts fluency in the L2, CBI does not generally lead to high
levels of linguistic accuracy. Similarly, while sts receiving CBI may develop BICS
(basic interpersonal communication skills), they do not necessarily develop CALP
(cognitive academic linguistic proficiency).

Content-based language teaching is still language teaching (i.e. still need
to focus on language forms grammar, syntax, etc. - within subject-matter
teaching)

10. Syllabus Developmental Sequences: Pay attention to the research-proven
developmental sequences for second language learners. Grammatical
morphemes and relative clauses may be more practical to teach according to
developmental sequence because their sequences seem to follow along
grammatical parts of speech instead of along learners developing (i.e.
ungrammatical) interlanguage. NB: Since only a small number of language
features have been described in terms of a developmental sequence, the
developmental sequence is not in itself a template for a syllabus (Lightbown &
Spada textbook, p. 165). Also, it seems that the L1 of the English language
learner may have an impact on developmental sequence (i.e. different L1s =
different developmental sequences).

Research-proven developmental sequences exist for the following
linguistic features: **grammatical morphemes**, negation, questions,
possessive determiners, **relative clauses**, and reference to the
past (see Lighbown & Spada textbook, pp. 83-92 for more details).
Developmental sequences can help determine in which order the various
aspects of these linguistic features are taught.