Search

The awarding organizations that create and administer high-stakes assessments for beginner-to-low-intermediate 16-year-old learners of French, German, and Spanish in England provide optional topic-driven word lists as guides for teachers and textbook writers. Given that these lists are developed by the awarding organizations, they exert a powerful washback effect on teaching and learning. However, we do not know how much of these lists have actually been used in exams. We therefore analyzed the extent to which these lists have been used when developing the General Certificate of Secondary Education listening and reading exams, a corpus totaling 116,647 words. One key finding showed that approximately half of the awarding organizations' lists had never been used in any of the exams to date. Given recent changes to curriculum policy, we also investigated how word list type--frequency-informed versus the awarding organizations' topic-driven lists--affected lexical coverage of the exams. Overall, our findings suggested that using the topic-driven lists was likely to be a suboptimal use of lesson time, as they did not provide learners with enough words to understand any given text with ease. Frequency-informed word lists, however, seemed to better prepare learners for the exams.

This study advances previous research about the effects of explicit instruction on second language (L2) development by examining learners' use of verbal morphology following different types of explicit information (EI) and comprehension practice. We investigated the extent to which additional EI about the first language (L1) can reduce the effects of crosslinguistic influence in L2 oral production. Sixty-nine English-speaking learners of L2 French undertook either: (a) a 'core' treatment of EI about the L2 with L2 comprehension practice, (b) the same L2 core + L1 comprehension practice, (c) the same L2 core + L1 comprehension practice + EI about L1, or (d) outcome tests only. Results showed that providing additional EI about the L1 benefitted the accuracy of oral production immediately after the instruction and then 6 weeks later. These results suggest that tailoring instruction, specifically the nature of the EI, to the nature of the learning problem can facilitate L2 learning. In particular, EI about L1 can facilitate L2 learning by increasing learners' awareness of similarities and differences in how L1 and L2 express the same meanings.

Within limited-input language classrooms, understanding the effect of distribution of practice (spacing between practice) on learning is critical, yet evidence is conflicting and of limited relevance for young learners. For second language (L2) grammar learning, some studies reveal advantages for spacing of 7 days or more, but others for shorter spacing. Further, little is known about the role of cognitive individual differences (e.g., language analytic ability; LAA) in mediating practice distribution effects for L2 grammatical knowledge development and retention. To address this gap, this classroom-based study investigated whether distribution of practice and LAA moderated the effectiveness of explicit, input-based grammar instruction for young first language (L1) English learners of French (aged 8 to 11). The study revealed minimal differences between longer (7-day) versus shorter (3.5-day) spacing of practice for learning a French verb inflection subsystem, at either posttest or delayed posttest. Minimal group-level gains and substantial within-group variation in performance at posttests were observed. Accuracy of practice during training and LAA were significantly associated with posttest performance under both practice schedules. These findings indicated that within an ecologically valid classroom context, differences in distribution of practice had limited impact on learner performance on our tests; rather, individual learner differences were more critical in moderating learning. This highlights the importance of considering individual learner differences in the development of resources and the potential of digital tools for dynamically adapting instruction to suit individuals.

This study partially replicates McManus and Marsden (2017), who found that providing L1 explicit information (EI) plus task-essential practice led L2 learners to make more accurate and faster interpretations of French morphosyntax. The current study removed the original study's L1 EI component to examine the role of the L1 practice. This design tested whether providing L1 task-essential practice only (alongside a core treatment of L2 EI plus L2 practice) resulted in similar online and offline learning gains compared to the original study's L1 EI plus L1 practice. We used the same online and offline tests, with a similar population of English-speaking learners of L2 French (n = 19). For accuracy and speed of online and offline L2 processing, the findings suggest that additional L1 practice without L1 EI was no more beneficial than L2 EI plus L2 practice alone, indicating that the original study's combination of additional L1 EI with L1 practice appeared to contribute to previously observed learning benefits.

This study investigated the effectiveness of providing L1 explicit information (EI) with practice for making more accurate and faster interpretations of L2 French "Imparfait" (IMP). Two treatments were investigated: (a) "L2-only," providing EI about the L2 with L2 interpretation practice, and (b) "L2+L1," providing the exact same L2-only treatment and including EI about the L1 (English) with practice interpreting L1 features that are equivalent to the IMP. Fifty L2 French learners were randomly assigned to either L2-only, L2+L1, or a control group. Online (self-paced reading) and offline (context-sentence matching) measures from pretest, posttest, and delayed posttests showed that providing additional L1 EI and practice improved not only offline L2 accuracy, but also the speed of online L2 processing. To our knowledge, this makes original and significant contributions about the nature of EI with practice and the role of the L1 (Tolentino & Tokowicz, 2014), and it extends a recent line of research examining EI effects in online sentence processing (Andringa & Curcic, 2015).

The aim of this paper is to describe vocabulary use during semi-spontaneous oral production among instructed learners of French and Spanish at two different stages in the UK educational system: year 9 (near beginners) and year 13 (approximately low-intermediates). The paper mainly focuses on comparing lexical diversity (range or variety of vocabulary used) across languages and across years, including analyses of different word classes. The data are taken from two publicly available learner language oral corpora. These corpora are described briefly, before the details and results of the current study are presented. It is hoped that the oral task, the measures and the results will provide points of reference for teachers, given that there are few, if any, such points of reference currently available. (Contains 9 tables and 2 notes.)

This article feeds into debate about the feasibility and usefulness of educational experiments by discussing methodological issues arising out of a study which sought causal links between teaching and learning of one aspect of French as a foreign language. The study involved two small-scale experiments which tested a hypothesis regarding the learning of second language grammar within a particular theoretical, and its related pedagogical, framework (Input Processing and Processing Instruction respectively), and has been described in full elsewhere. The current article uses that example to suggest some circumstances (contextual, methodological and theoretical) within which educational experiments may be able to both test a learning theory and inform educational practice. It is argued that despite the complexities and limits of small-scale educational experiments, an experimental design which combined a range of methods was able to generate new and useful (in a range of senses) substantive knowledge. (Contains 9 notes.)

The research reported here tests the claim made in the Input Processing approach to second language (L2) acquisition that interpreting the meaning of language form is essential for learning. This claim has been put forward as an underlying part of the pedagogical package known as Processing Instruction (PI) (VanPatten, 1996, 2002a, 2004). Two experiments compared PI with a type of "Enriched Input" (operationalized as the same brief grammar explanation as in PI, followed by equal numbers of exemplars of the target features but where attention to the forms or their meanings was not necessary to the task). In a pretest, posttest, delayed posttest design, first language (L1) English speakers' oral and written interpretation and production of L2 French verb inflections for tense, number, and person were examined. The impact of proficiency level on the necessity of making integrated form-meaning connections was also examined, by carrying out the same experiment with two groups at different levels of proficiency. Results from both experiments were generally compatible with the Input Processing claim earlier, although contextual- and measurement-dependent factors affected the results from the writing and oral measures in the second experiment.

This cross-sectional study of first language (L1) English adolescents learning French as a second language (L2) uses their development of negatives in relation to finite and non-finite verbs to investigate the status and nature of functional categories in these learners' emerging grammars. Analysing oral data from elicited production tasks from instructed learners, it provides evidence for a lack of functional categories in the Initial State and the earliest L2 grammars (Vainikka and Young-Scholten, 1996; Hawkins, 2001). However, the results from the study also indicate that the functional category I (or T) then emerges reasonably rapidly. The pattern of development of negation and finite and non-finite verbs in these learners' grammars also suggests that feature values are in place for the functional categories once they are projected, as learners consistently raise the verb. The learners do use root infinitives but the properties of these root infinitives differ to those found in L1 acquisition (Pierce, 1992; Wexler, 1994; 1998), thus supporting Wexler's maturational account of Optional Infinitives in L1 acquisition. Additionally, the rare occurrence of raised non-finite verbs would indicate that there is a problem with the realization of surface morphology in accordance with the Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis of Prevost and White (2000a) rather than an impairment in the grammar (Meisel, 1997; Hawkins, 2000).

This article presents arguments for using listening and reading activities as an option for techniques in grammar pedagogy. It describes two possible approaches: Processing Instruction (PI) and Enriched Input (EI), and examples of their key features are included in the appendices. The article goes on to report on a classroom based quasi-experiment which compared their effectiveness for the learning of French verb inflections amongst 13- to 14-year-olds from two different secondary schools in England. The key feature of PI is that it comprises activities which systematically force learners to interpret the "meaning" of formal features in the input, rarely seen in published material and classroom activities. In this study, EI provided brief awareness-raising strategies followed by a flood of the target features. The study suggested that PI may indeed constitute a viable and effective option for grammar pedagogy for learners who are starting to develop a verb inflection system. These results were clear in the class from school 2 but more "fuzzy" from school 1, demonstrating the importance of taking contextual factors into account when gathering evidence regarding practice. (Contains 2 figures, 4 tables, and 22 notes.)

Vocabulary knowledge strongly predicts second language reading, listening, writing, and speaking. Yet, few tests have been developed to assess vocabulary knowledge in French. The primary aim of this pilot study was to design and initially validate the Context-Aligned Two Thousand Test (CA-TTT), following open research practices. The CA-TTT is a test of written form–meaning recognition of high-frequency vocabulary aimed at beginner-to-low intermediate learners of French at the end of their fifth year of secondary education. Using an argument-based validation framework, we drew on classical test theory and Rasch modeling, together with correlations with another vocabulary size test and proficiency measures, to assess the CA-TTT's internal and external validity. Overall, the CA-TTT showed high internal and external validity. Our study highlighted the decisive role of the curriculum in determining vocabulary knowledge in instructed, low-exposure contexts. We discuss how this might contribute to under- or over-estimations of vocabulary size, depending on the relations between the test and curriculum content. Further research using the tool is openly invited, particularly with lower proficiency learners in this context. Following further validation, the test could serve as a tool for assessing high-frequency vocabulary knowledge at beginner-to-low intermediate levels, with due attention paid to alignment with curriculum content. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Surprisingly little is known about the number and frequency level of words that beginner‐to‐low‐intermediate 16‐year‐old learners of French, German, and Spanish are expected to know when taking high‐stakes national exams in England. This study presents exploratory analyses of the lexical content of the listening and reading tests of these exams, a corpus totaling 116,647 running words. Specifically, it seeks to understand the number and frequency level of words that (a) this demographic seems to be expected to know and (b) could be needed for awarding organizations to create exams year‐on‐year. Key findings include that the proportion of low(er)‐frequency words in the corpus of exam papers seemed large, given the stage of the learners and the purpose of the assessments. Critically, these low(er)‐frequency words changed at a high rate between papers, likely incurring a heavy reliance on the lexical inferencing abilities of these relatively inexperienced language learners. The Challenge: Every year, approximately 250,000 16‐year‐olds in England sit high‐stakes exams in French, German, and Spanish. But how many and what kinds of words do these learners need to know to understand the listening and reading exam texts? And how often do these words change year‐on‐year? This article aims to address these questions by analyzing a corpus of exam papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vocabulary profiling with computational tools and word lists is an established step in the development of pedagogical materials for learners of English. However, existing tools and word lists lack sensitivity to the orthographical, morphological, and grammatical systems of highly-inflected and declined languages. This limits the degree to which lexical profiling can be usefully implemented in the creation of materials intended for use with beginner/low-intermediate learners of such languages who have only partial knowledge of these systems. In this article, we present MultilingProfiler , a vocabulary profiling tool designed to support nuanced profiling of texts in French, German, and Spanish. We introduce the concept of 'bespoke' word families tailored to the needs of learners at various stages of development, and outline key features of the tool that operationalise this concept (the functionality to select which inflected, derived, and multiword forms of headwords are included in the profile; sensitivity to orthographical systems; embedded word lists aligning with specific programs of study; and cumulative word lists that grow with learner knowledge). We present two case studies that find MultilingProfiler 's features to be effective in highlighting potential mismatches between the lexical demands of texts and the expected knowledge of learners, and consider applications of the tool in research methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]