Sunday, October 14, 2012

IBLT Wk 6 Corpus Summary

Gloria Lee (이가람)
Wk6-IBLT summary
2012-10-14
Perez-Paredas 2011 Uses of corpora
Reinhardt 2010

Reinhardts paper offers rough and expansive knowledge about relationship between the corpus and L2 pedagogy. According the Reinhardt (2010) corpus-informed L2 teaching has not spread far (p.240). To give out the reason why L2 teaching does not reflect corpus linguistic so much, he starts off by early debates and discussion about the corpus. Corpus language have meaningful and authentic language that it seemed like it is relevant to learners need in terms of learners development (Reinhardt, 2010). However, there were some criticisms to corpora. One, it cannot and not tell us everything there is to understand about language use (Reinhardt, 2010, p. 242) Another criticism is corpora data are mostly very native speaker like which the learners will never attain that it may disempower the learners and reduce their agency in learning process (Reinhardt, 2010). Finally, he showed 4 reasons that why corpora and L2 pedagogy did not spread together. It is because that corpus research has been exaggerated by the researchers and corpora do not capture authenticity or real context in a language. Thus, corpora can be just as prescriptive as other approaches (Reinhardt, 2010). However, corpus findings did made an small innovation in L2 learning and Reinhardt introduced data-driven learning (DDL) which used corpus technique in L2 classroom. As he was introducing DDL he mentioned that learners may be overwhelmed by the huge number of same lines repeated over and over that teacher need to train the learners develop researchers mindset which means they have to have analytic mind (Reinhardt, 2010, p. 244). In the last part of the paper, Reinhardt suggested future potentials of corpus data. According to Susan Conrad (2000), corpus linguist should direct research into L2 pedagogical implication, and the findings should be part of the picture and not a panacea. The findings also should be expected as something that can be integrated into L2 pedagogy not something that can revolutionize it. Finally, she mentioned teacher themselves should be willing to drop traditional grammar teaching (Conrad, 2000, as cited from Reinhardt, 2010). He ended his paper by saying if the corpora material was more numerous, accessible, user friendly, and preferably web-based, corpus data would have had more impact on L2 teaching (Reinhardt, 2010).
In contrast, Perez-peredes paper showed close observation of students behavior on using corpus program under certain situations. The actual research question was whether learner interaction with corpus-based resources differ under different corpus consultation conditions (Perez-peredes, 2011). Therefore, the research was observing students computer-tracked behavior in guided and non-guided corpus group. The guided consultation group had a specific direction of how to use corpus and the other group had to do their own. The researcher looked at number of browser event launched, different websites visited, activities completed, number of BNC searches, and number of words, wildcards, and tags per search. The result was the experiment group which was guided corpus group had higher number in everything except the number of activities completed. Perez-peredes (2011) mentioned that this may be because the EG searched BNC almost three times more than CG.
           I liked Reinhardt paper much better than Perez-Paredes’ paper. While Reinhardt’s paper showed overall explanation about the relationship between corpus and L2 pedagogy, Perez-Paredes’ paper focused more on explaining learners’ behavior using corpus data under different conditions. Even though I had a very little idea about the function of corpus and its use, Reinhardt paper was very easy to understand and follow however, Perez-Paredes’ paper was little confusing to focus. It did not offer definition of specific terms and lacked enough explanation. I had hard time to follow and understand. I think the author just assumed the reader have this much of basic knowledge to understand.  
           Thus, I have a few clarification questions and application questions. From Perez-Paredes’ paper, I did not understand what BNC was. Also, one of the searching categories was number of words, wild card, and tags. I did understand the words searching but did not get what wild card and tags were. For the application question, if the corpus were to applied in a L2 class room how much of authenticity in the corpus data and material can a teacher allow for the students. I thought as authentic as it is; it is hard for teachers to decide how much authenticity he/she can have in L2 class.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Blog Activity

Gloria Lee (이가람)
2010.10.11
Blog Activity
1. Objectives- Students will be able to write correct form of descriptive adjectives and adverbs when describing a picture.

2. Student – 13~16, Middle school students, High intermediate

3. Activity Location- Home, school lab, Anywhere but in actual learning class

4. Overview of the activity- Students will describe a picture of historical event by using as many adjectives, adverbs, and prepositions as possible. Also, they will give peers error correction if they have made one. The students will be separated into 5 groups and each group will have 5~6 people. In groups, the students will give each other grammatical or just simple responsive feedback. They will negotiate meaning by posting reply under the friend’s posts. The teacher can also leave a feedback under the students who seem confused or mislead.

5. Guiding SLA theory- Multimedia theory (Teachers use pictures to prompt the students to write and the other students can compare peers descriptions and the actual picture: having both visual and written statement.) Interaction hypothesis (Students give feedbacks to each other and when there are conversation break downs, negotiation of meaning happens.)

6. CALL context – Through computer they will communicate with their friends on blog, They will also work around the computer when they are working in a school lab

7. Students / computer ratio- It will be one on one

8. Technology difficulty level (do Ss have experience with the technology? How long will it take them to learn about the tech?)- Some students may already have experience with their own personal blogs some may don’t have experience. The teacher will give a brief tutorial lecture on blog in class. The teacher will use the class blog that almost every student is well aware of.

9. Students’ Instructions- You are going to write a brief description about the pictures that the teacher upload every week. Please try to log on to our class blog every week. You will work as a group so 5~6 people will work together. Each of you have to describe a picture in 3~4 sentences. MUST use the descriptive words we have learned in class. After you have finished your posting take a look at you group members’ posting and leave at least one reply. If can be an agreement, disagreement or a correction their mistake.

10. Examples of input / output / collaboration, etc. – Teacher will give different set of pictures like this to different group. The historical picture will be the input that the students get. The students will try to describe picture in several sentences using at least 4 different descriptive words; adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, and etc. The students will try to help each other by giving corrections on peers’ error. They will work in groups so peer feedback they should give out will be only 4~5. Including what they have to produce they will have 5~6 chances to make production. If the student accept peer’s feedback and make a correction they can have more. The teacher will also be the source of collaboration by helping them out when they look confused from reading the blog postings.
<Pictures of historical event>

11. Examples – students’ product
S1: The wall looks very messy. The men will hit the wall heavy. It is very rainy day.
S2: You mean heavily?
S1: What?
S3: She means you should say “The men will hit the wall heavily”.
S1: Oh, I see. J