Language Use and Speaking Strategies

Speakers of English, especially where it a second laguage, will have to be able to speak in a range of different genres and situations, and they will be able to use a range of conversational and conversational strategies. They will also expected to be able to survive in typical functional exchanges, too (Harmer, 2007). Having watched the three video clips of speaking strategies in International English Language Test System (IELTS), I would like to provide my opinions on the topic discussion, the language and learning strategies. This video pictured Ms. Osi, the teacher of the class, gave guidance and treatment to some students who are getting their IELTS speaking test.

From the observation, the class seems normal. In this case, Ms. Osi acted as a observer as participant where her presence was known by the group she was observing (Alwasilah, 2011). The discourse analysis particulary in taking turns was fluent. Teacher talked and students listened, and vice versa. There seemed no significant problems in discussion because the teacher encouraged the students in speaking English. She presented strategies-based instructions, a learner-centered approach to teaching that has two major components: (1) students are explicitly taught how, when, and why strategies can be used to facilitate language learning and language use tasks, and (2) strategies are integrated into everyday class materials, and may be explicitly or implicitly embedded into the language tasks. In other words, strategies-based instruction aims to assist learners in becoming more responsible for their efforts in learning and using the target language. It also aims to assist them in becoming more effective learners by allowing them to individualize the language learning experience.

 However, she applied teacher-centered approach instead of student-centered, which does not allow the students to improve their speaking ability. It was noticed there were some passive students and only several were actively responsed to the teacher’s stimulus. Students were seated individually while for speaking learning, it is in best condition if students are seated in pairwork or groupwork because it dramatically increases the number of talking of opportunities for individual students. Also, it allows teacher time to work with one or two pairs while the other students continue working (Harmer, 2007).

One of the factors that influence language learning is the age factors (Brown, 2007). The age of students is a major factor in teachers’ decisions about how and what to teach (Harmer, 2007). The students observed in the video can be categorized into adult learners. Their characteristics are (1) they can engage with abstract thought, (2) they have a whole range of life experience to draw on, (3) they have expectations about the learning process, and they already have their own set patterns of learning, (4) adults tend to be more disciplined than other age groups, and they are often prepared to struggle on despite boredom, (5) they come into classroom with a rich range of experiences which allow teachers to use a wide range of activities with them, (6) they often have a clear understanding of why they are learning and what they want to get out of it. Here, the teacher understood the age factors. She encouraged their students to use  their own life experience in the learning process, too.

The topic discussion was speaking strategies and learning how to use language. Strategies for language learning and language use have been receiving evergrowing attention in the areas of foreign language teaching and learning (Oxford 1990, Cohen 1990, O'Malley & Chamot 1990, Wenden 1991, Brown 1991, Rubin & Thompson 1994, Mendelsohn 1994, McDonough 1995 in Cohen, A. D. Weaver, S. J. and Li, T.Y. 1996). It is fair to say that language educators in many different contexts have been seeking ways to help students become more successful in their efforts to learn and communicate in foreign languages. A strategy is considered to be "effective" if it provides positive support to the students in their attempts to learn or use the foreign language. Seeing Ms. Osi teaching, she was seen as a great supporter of her students by giving positive feedback and when the students made mistakes, she corrected immediately without embarassing them.

The broad definition of foreign language learning and use strategies consists of the steps or actions selected by learners to improve the learning of a foreign language, the use of a foreign language, or both. Language learning strategies are used with the explicit goal of helping learners improve their knowledge and understanding of a target language. They are the conscious thoughts and behaviors used by students to facilitate language learning tasks and to personalize the language learning process. Language learning strategies have been differentiated into four distinct categories: cognitive, metacognitive, social, and affective (based on Chamot 1987, Oxford 1990). Cognitive strategies usually involve the identification, retention, storage, or retrieval of words, phrases, and other elements of the target language (e.g., using prior knowledge to comprehend new language material, applying grammar rules to a new context, or classifying vocabulary according to topic). Metacognitive strategies deal with pre-planning and self-assessment, on-line planning, monitoring and evaluation, as well as post-evaluation of language learning activities (e.g., previewing the language materials for the day's lesson, organizing one's thoughts before speaking, or reflecting on one's performance). Such strategies allow learners to control the learning process by helping them coordinate their efforts to plan, organize, and evaluate target language performance. Social strategies include the actions that learners select for interacting with other learners, a teacher, or with native speakers (e.g., asking questions for clarification, helping a fellow student complete a task, or cooperating with others). Affective strategies serve to regulate learner motivation, emotions, and attitudes (e.g., strategies for reducing anxiety, for self-encouragement, and for self-reward).

Language use strategies, in turn, include both language performance and communication strategies. Performance strategies include strategies for rehearsing target language structures, such as through form-focused practice. In the case of communication strategies, the focus is on getting a message across in the target language despite gaps in target language knowledge. For example, learners may use a new lexical item to communicate a thought in class. In the case of communication strategies, in contrast to performance strategies, the use of the language material (e.g., a new word) may purposefully be in order to learn it, as well as to communicate a thought. There have been relatively few studies investigating the benefits of providing second language learners with formal training in the applications of strategies for speaking. In one study, O'Malley and Chamot (1990) compared the improvement on certain language tasks for three groups of learners, and related the learners performance to the strategy training they had received. On the speaking task, the group given explicit training in metacognitive, cognitive, and social-affective strategies improved significantly more than the control group

        In conclusion, Ms. Osi has been done a good work as a teacher, motivator, supporter, corrector and she knows her students quite well. However, a further elaboration of teaching speaking strategies may be needed if she wants to continue her teaching on speaking area, particulary on the teaching approach and class management. Knowing the fact that learning strategies have become more and more popular among the scholars nowadays, professionals on speaking specialist are urgently needed to create an effective language learning and speaking strategies.

Bibliography

Alwasilah, A.C. 2011. Pokoknya Kualitatif. Jakarta: PT Dunia Pustaka Jaya.

Brown. H. D. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 5th edition.

         Pearson. Longman ELT

Cohen, A. D. Weaver, S. J. and Li, T.Y. 1996. The Impact of Strategies-based

         Instruction on Speaking A Foreign Language. University of Minessota:

         Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition.

Engleberg, I & Raimes, A. 2004. Pocket Keys for Speakers Lucas, S.E. (2001)

         The Art of Public Speaking (pp. 302-303)

Harmer, J. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. 4th edition.

         Pearson Longman ELT

Nelson, P., Titsworth, S., & Pearson, J. 2007. Public Speaking A Guide for the

        Engaged Communicator (pp. 37, 146-147) UNCG University Speaking  

        Center, 256-1346, speakingcenter.uncg.edu

Critical Analysis of a Statistic Journal Article

L. Huang (2007). The Contribution of Home Background to Student Inequality in Secondary School in Norway in Standards in Education, pp. 331-345

In this essay, I would like to provide my critical understanding of a journal article entitled The Contribution of Home Background to Student Inequality in Secondary Schools in Norway written by Lihong Huang. There are 6 questions asked dealing with the inequality in secondary schools in Norway. Before moving to the main issue, I shall be discussing the social structure and education system of Norway. Then finally I will come up with the burning issue.

Education system in Norway allows children to start school when they are six year old. Compulsory education is ten years that includes seven years primary school and three years lower secondary school. 98 percent of young people enter upper secondary school education after they have finished lower secondary education (Markussen, 2003). Upper secondary education is three years optional schooling provided by the government to children between 16 and 19 years old. Before 2006, students would choose from three educational paths in their upper secondary schooling, namely (1) academic path which leads into university entrace qualifications after three years of study, (2) merchantile path which leads to a trade or journeyman’s certificate after four years of study, and (3) professional path which leads to certain vocational competence such as mechanic, carpenter, or electrician after three years of study.

In fall 2006, graduates from lower secondary school will apply either a general education path which leads to university entrance or professional path which leads to vocational competence for their upper secondary education. Finally, around 35 percent of upper secondary school graduates continue to tertiary education right away and about 50 percent of the Norwegian young population choose tertiary education after completion of upper secondary education at some point in their life.

Huang argued that the specific structure of educational system in a country has implications for social mobility of the individual who make careers in the system (Allmendinger, 1989). A flat structured society plays an important role in Norwegia as there are some clear features of cultural fractions within the middle class and among different occupational groups.  

In contrast, social status refers to a set of hierarchical relations that express perceived, and to some degree accepted, social superiority, equality and inferiority among individuals, which reflect not their personal qualities, but rather the degree of ‘social honour’ attaching to certain of their positional or perhaps purely ascribed attributes, such as ‘birth’ or ethnicity (Chan and Goldthorpe, 2004).

To sum up, the issue proposed by the author is that, the inequality in secondary school in Norway was influenced by the student family background. There is a relationship between the student home backround and student  motivation and achievements. The author based this issue on the sociocultural, psychological and environmental educations from parents, teachers, and others.

Answering the question number 2: The author argues that ability and social background are the key factors affecting students’ decision to undertake higher studies. Do you agree with him? What are the other likely factors which motivate/do not motivate students to undertake tertiary education?

In respond to this question, I would say that I agree with the author’s arguments. It is found in Norway that children whose parents take completed tertiary education have higher achievement and have much higher of participation in tertiary education. The fact that different social strata in Norway have their own specific class cultures determines the individual occupations. Also, different social strata manage to pass their cultures along generations through influencing their children’s educational career choices. Parents’ social class will be seen through their children education and occupations. This social strata affects on the students from immigrant families. They tend to study harder and have more encouragement from home to aim higher in their career development (Lauglo, 1999, 2000).

Other factor which motivates students to undertake tertiary education is the gender issues which were known as gender segregation. This issue ensure men and women have equal access to a higher education, equal opportunities for participation in the labor force and in choice of occupation. Today, women and men have more or less equal levels of education, and women’s participation in working live has increased dramatically since 1960s.

The third question: In this research the author derives his hypotheses from three theories. Formulate an hypotheses and a research question based on each of these theories. What type of statistical tools would you choose for your stated hyphoteses? For the response of this questions, I would like to list three theories used. The first theory is forward test anxiety theory which suggest that children strive for approval from parents and significant others and fear for disapproval (Skinner and Fester, 1957). The second theory is the need achievement theory that suggests that children strive for success or avoid failure according to the values placed on either success or failure (Atkinson and Feather, 1966). The last theory is the theory of motivation that explains motivation to learn as a competence acquired through children’s experience but stimulated mostly by modelling, communication of expectations, direct instruction or socialization by parents, teachers expectation, and significant others (Brophy, 1987).

Allow me to formulate a hyphothesis based on these theories. I would derive the hypotheses from the null hyphotheses, that is, there is no relationship between the student home social backround and the student achievements.  In addition, I would like to propose the Correlation Coefficient as the statistical tool. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, also known as r, R, or Pearson's r, a measure of the strength of the linear relationship between two variables that is defined in terms of the (sample) covariance of the variables divided by their (sample) standard deviations.

The question number 4 about the figures 14.1 page 337 will be explained as follows: Figure 14.1 is an analytical model based in theories and previous research. The model contains four latent clusters. Two separate variables – family social status and family economic status are hypothesized to constitute student home socio-economic status. The hyphothesized links between student family social status, family economic status with student motivation and student achievement are tested in the model, using LISREL techniques. The arrow directed from student motivation to student achievement in a hypothesis that students who aim high in their educational plans eventually do better in their studies. 

The answers of questions number 5 are as follow: Table 14.1 explains about the students’ parents. Among them, only 12 percent of the fathers and 10 percent of the mothers report lower secondary school as their highest level of education while 36 percent of fathers and 35 percent of mothers have educational attainment equal to and above tertiary level. As table 14.1 shows, parental educational attainments from the dataset are not significantly different from the national total. Concerning family financial situation, 6.5 percent of the students claim to be poor while 67 percent of them say that their family’s financial situation is rather good and 22 percent of them feel that their family is in a better financial situation than the average family in their neighborhood.

Table 14.2 summarizes correlations between student-family social background, student educational motivation and student achievement. First, father’s and mother’s education levels correlate almost equally with student motivation and achievement. Second, all correlations are positive, which means that parents with high educational attainment tend to have children with high educational motivation and high achievement as well. Third, all the correlations are rather moderate but statistically significant. The positive correlation in Table 14.2 provide us some explanations of students planning of education and their school achievement. It implies that students have higher educational goals if their parents have higher educational attainment. The same implication also applies to student achievement in theree subjects. Nevertheless, these relationships need more careful exploration, achieved by testing the linear structural mode in the following.

Table 14.3 presents the statistical result of a linear structural model linking student home socio-economic status, student motivation and student achievement. It shows that home social status, measured by father’s and mother’s educational attainments have a very strong positive and direct effect on student motivation and a strong total effect on student achievement. Home economic status seems to have very little effect on either student motivation or student achievement. Student motivation has a strong and positive effect on student achievement.

For the last question, I would like to explain about the likely factors for better academic performance of children from more educated parents and immigrant families. Norway is one of the few countries in the world that have achieved social equality to some extent. As long as there is segregation in the society, occupational or cultural, the education system will be there to maintain and reproduce it.

There are two blocks here, for more educated parents, it is believed that they would influence their children to get tertiary education to secure their social status. The other block is from the immigrant families that tend to study harder in order to reach a better career development. Those two blocks are the reason why is that the tertiary education choosing should be based on the children interests for better academic performance.

This study showed that student motivation and student achievement are also influenced by the other factors, for example: cultural capital of the family as well as its social and economic capitals, student school experience, school learning environment, teacher attitude and treatment towards different students, etc.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chan, T.W., Birkelund, G. E., Aas, A. K., Wiborg, O. (2010). Social Status in Norway. University of Oslo.

Huang, L. (2007). Standards in Educations: The Contribution of Home Background to Student Inequality in Secondary Schools in Norway, 331-345.

Kilden. (2006). Gender in Norway: Policy Areas.