26.4896, Review: Applied Ling; Socioling: King (2013)

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-26-4896. Tue Nov 03 2015. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 26.4896, Review: Applied Ling; Socioling: King (2013)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
              http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 15:29:25
From: Tanya Roy [armonia941 at gmail.com]
Subject: Silence in the Second Language Classroom

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36052977


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/24/24-4343.html

AUTHOR: Jim  King
TITLE: Silence in the Second Language Classroom
PUBLISHER: Palgrave Macmillan
YEAR: 2013

REVIEWER: Tanya Roy, University of Delhi

Reviews Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

This is a book written for all language teachers as I am sure all will come up
against baffling moments of silence in the classroom. Such silence varies
greatly from classroom to classroom and from learners to learners. Not always
is it detrimental but it can become so. How should a teacher understand this
and deal with it? Silence is a phenomenon that varies widely culturally and
King’s book helps us look into a society with norms that may differ greatly
from ours and are therefore more difficult for us as teachers to understand.

The book is divided into eight chapters from Introduction to Conclusion. In
the Introduction itself, the author Jim King tells us “this book explores the
silent behaviour of learners studying English within the Japanese university
second language (L2) classrooms.” (p.2)

The Introduction is divided into three parts. In the first, the section titled
“L2 Pedagogical Beliefs and Assumptions”, the author notes that silence in
itself is not a negative phenomenon, but it is not to be denied that classroom
interaction helps in language acquisition and that silence beyond a certain
point is detrimental.

King looks at this issue specifically in the Japanese L2 learning context. He
was in Japan as trainer of Japanese teachers of English (JTE). His courses
acknowledge the importance of adopting a methodology appropriate to the
context in an eclectic combination of methods and activities. King cites the
opinions of Ehrman, Dörnyei, Jacobs, Da Silva, Iddings and Oxford (p.4) in
works spanning over 10 years from the 1990s to the 2000s that  language
learning can only take place where there is overt verbalization in the
students’ own language or in the L2. As a long term resident of Japan and a
learner of Japanese, King learnt how silence was viewed by the Japanese,
particularly in more formal settings. This  influenced his attitude and
judgement of the silence of Japanese language learners.

The second part of the introduction looks at the theoretical approach of the
book. In order to examine the issue of silence, King adopts an eclectic
approach and the Dynamic Systems Theory (DST). While seemingly complex, DST
enables us to consider a learner’s oral behaviour as a result of a number of
factors. 

The third part of the introduction examines the structure of the entire book.

Two major interpretive works (Basso and Saville-Troike) draw on fields like
sociology, linguistics, psychology (Ephratt 2008) and ethnography. Basso
complements Saville-Troike in an ethnographic framework. The other
interpretive approaches looked at are Jaworsky's 'fuzzy categories' and
Kurzon's model of intentionality. The psychoanalytic and psychological aspects
are looked into through the  works of Granger and Crown and Feldstein.  After
that King looks at silence in the classroom while exploring the studies of
Gilmor and that of Jaworsky and Sachdev.

At the end of the chapter, after having looked at different studies and
frameworks King concludes that “no single paradigm has been able to provide
definitive answers to our questions about people's silent behaviour.” (pp.30).
King goes on to sum up the major points that have emerged from the overview. 
Clearly silence has to be studied specific to the culture in which it is, as
well as the relative value of speech and silence in it.

In a long and detailed third chapter King gives us an interdisciplinary
overview of silence in Japan. Silence is not just negative absence of speech.
King says “ ...in Japanese society, silence may be positively regarded and
welcomed, whereas  overt verbalisation is often viewed with suspicion and is
seen as having the potential to cause great loss of face.” (pp. 32). King
looks at both macro and micro-silences and then goes on to Japan's
philosophical roots as a post-Confucian society. This has influenced
interpersonal communication as well as status differences and the concept of
“uchi/soto” (inside/outside)

This is followed by the “nihonjinron” approach: the Japanese way, and its
themes. A part of this chapter is dedicated to sociocultural clues to
attitudes towards silence, after which King goes on to look at socialisation
and silence, a section in which he examines child-rearing practices in Japan
that “play a crucial first role in socialising discourse norms” (pp.44).  He
goes on to look into “amae” and silent dependency,  as well as empathy
training and “sasshi,” taking us from sociocultural clues to a
socio-psychological examination of silence including a silence-inducing
hyper-sensitivity to others and fear of others in the classroom.
Psychology leads to psychoanalysis, pragmatics and linguistics. In all of
these, the attitude towards an ever present “other” remains overridingly
important in determining politeness or  turn-taking strategies.  

The next three chapters look at the three phases of the research project. Each
phase looks at a different kind of data and each one is elicited in a
different way. First we have structured observations of 924 students in 30
classrooms across 9 universities in Japan. The  Classroom Oral Participation
Scheme (COPS) strategy is used to gather data in this part of the research.
Then come semi structured interviews (using The Silence and Oral Participation
Guide-SOPIG) with preparation to avoid further reticence, and finally
stimulated recall studies. The results of the three kinds of data are
discussed in the final chapter at .

The concluding chapter sums up the results of the studies, interviews and case
studies described in the last chapters of the book. The fact that different
methods have been used is due to the influence of the over-arching
DSTframework.  After that the author looks into possibilities for future DST
oriented research into language learner silence.

The first part of the chapter, before summarizing the results of three sources
of data, puts forward the idea of how Japanese children are “socialised into
patterns of communication which rely heavily on non-vocal, implicit
understanding and which eschew direct verbalisation” (p. 151) . In the
structured observation, the scheme used was the Classroom Oral Participation
Scheme (COPS) which used a minute by minute real time strategy involving 924
students from 30 classes taken from 9 universities. Student initiated talk is
dramatically low when compared to teacher initiated talk as is student speech
when compared to instructor talk. According to King “...silence has now formed
a semi-permanent attractor state within Japan's university language
classrooms...this indicates that a single-cause, linear explanation...is
unlikely...”. (p.154)

Next we come to the results of the semi-structured interviews considered
necessary to complement COPS quantitative data with an individual level
analysis.  The aim was to look at silence and lack of verbalization as the
personal experiences of the learners. To get more data than would have been
forthcoming in interviews without any preparation, a translation of the guide
to SOPIG was given to the interviewees beforehand. Other pre-interview
measures were taken to ensure trust and confidence in the interviewees.  

Language learner silence can develop for multiple reasons and may express
multiple feelings. One strange fact that emerged from the interviews is that
many Japanese learners experienced unease during the moments or periods of
silence in the language classroom. Another feeling that showed up was that of
passive resistance to the instructor or the teaching method or practice.
Silence could also be a strategy employed by the learner when speaking was not
required for assessment purposes.

This phase of the project thus helped in tracing silence back to attractors
within the system. Attractors may be both external and internal as seen in the
Dynamic Systems Theory. Factors also interact with each other leading to
change within a learner's classroom talk system.

The final phase of the research project was dedicated to stimulated recall
study results. The recall was stimulated by completed COPS sheets as well as
audio recordings from the (silent) classroom in the observational phase of the
project i.e. silence at the micro level. A number of reasons made it difficult
to get students to speak during such recall sessions so timing (almost
immediately after the session) and language (L1) were used to mitigate
matters. One of the results suggests that identity construction may be
fruitful and could help to trace a number of causes of silence in the language
learner.

The two sections on limitations, suggestions for further research and the
practical implications of this study are very interesting and important in
summing up all that has been talked of so far with a critical eye.

Limitations of phase one: COPS was successful in measuring macro-silences. It
would be useful to use a technique like conversation analysis that would
permit us to measure micro-silences as well. Also the limited resources
available meant that there was only one observer throughout, and this limited
the number of students per class that could be monitored. With more resources
and a greater number of observers, more students could be individually
monitored. Of course this would also lead to complications and steps would
have to be taken to ensure inter observer reliability.

Using COPS one could also study silence in the non foreign language classroom.
Its presence there would mean that silence is not only a result of L2
limitations.

Also it is essential to use the same tool in other cultures so as to be able
to compare them.

Limitations of the second phase: to further our understanding of L2 classroom
silence it would be important to get an insight into the instructor's point of
view.

The third phase is highly dependent on the students' capacity for  recall
including their verbal skills and perceptiveness. This study has tried to
address these problems, but a question remains in the mind of the author
regarding this point.

The use of the DST framework  was appropriate to the interdisciplinary nature
of this study. It is “particularly so in relation to, firstly, the notion of a
stable attractor state of silence existing across diverse L2 tertiary
contexts; secondly, the idea that students' silent behaviour is influenced by
multiple, concurrent attractors; and thirdly, the concept that these
attractors are likely to be related to learner internal factors and external
environment agents acting in concert”. (p.164) One drawback here is the
cross-sectional design not permitting a longitudinal perspective that has been
pointed out by different scholars as fruitful in the the DST framework.

Pedagogical suggestions: these are at times tentative but concern the
following points:
- a movement away from teacher centric towards learner centric classroom
practices
- reorganization of the present  excessive TTT (Teacher Talking Time) and not
enough time for the learners to speak in L2
- gradation of  teacher talk so as to give comprehensible input
- increase of wait time on the part of the teacher as that may give more
student responses
- choice of appropriate and stimulating teaching materials
- non-public space for student interaction
- reduction of error correction and emphasis on accuracy so as not to
demotivate students and let them gain fluency
- attention to group dynamics within the classroom and intervention when
necessary to 
- avoid formations that will lead to no participation in some students.

To end the book King says that we cannot expect something the instructors do
not do: speak in L2. It is necessary to move toward a more communicative
approach. Finally, some of the levels of learner disengagement uncovered in
this study show that Japan's university level education policy needs to
address some serious concerns.

EVALUATION

The use of the DST framework in linguistics continues the line of study  first
looked into by Diane Larsen-Freeman . It would be worth taking the study to
longitudinal examination to see if parallels work there as well in the
movement of a system from attractors to inertia, the intervention of factors
to move out of that state of inertia and on to a higher level of equilibrium.

I think that could be a worthwhile next step for a study of this kind in which
one also needs to define the boundaries of silence. Coming to more pedagogical
questions--what is considered silence in a language classroom? Can interaction
be expected in any given condition and how to go about changing those
conditions in a culture that promotes those very conditions? And of course,
what is not seen in the instructor's behaviour cannot be expected in the
students. So how to change language learning if that requires verbal
interaction in a society that values highly non-verbal interaction?

REFERENCES

Larsen-Freeman, D., 1997, Chaos,/complexity science and second language
acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2):141-65

Gleick, J.,1987, Chaos. Making a new science. London. Vintage Books.

Nelson, M. E.,and Kern, R., 2012, Language teaching and learning in the
postlinguistic condition?, in Principles and practices for teaching english as
an international language, Routledge, New York, N. Y., pp.47-66. 

Kumaravadivelu B.,, 2003,  Beyond Methods: Macrostrategies for Language
Teaching , Yale University Press,  New Haven and London


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Tanya Roy is an Associate Prof. in Italian at the Department of Germanic and Romance Studies, University of Delhi. She has been teaching Italian in India since 1994. She has coordinated and taught a Teacher Training Course run in her department for French, German, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. She is interested in making linguistic research and classroom teaching meet in what in Italian is called Didattica Acquisizionale. She thinks that linguistic research starts from data collected in the classroom and then goes back to the classroom for verification. This makes the role of the classroom teacher a central one.<br />She finds the link between Chaos and SLA/FLA intriguing.




----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-26-4896	
----------------------------------------------------------