Cover not available
Part of
Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages
Edited by Jörg-U. Keßler, Anke Lenzing and Mathias Liebner
[Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching 5] 2016
► pp. 193–206

Diagnosing L2-English in the communicative EFL Classroom

A task-based approach to individual and developmentally moderated focus on form in a meaning-focused setting

| Ludwigsburg University of Education
| Carl-von-Ossietzky Gymnasium in Bonn
In this paper, we outline a solution to the problem that teachers for students in heterogeneous EFL classrooms need to provide lessons that enable language acquisition at different levels (here: stages of the PT Hierarchy). Therefore, we describe a learner- and learning-centred application of Processability Theory (henceforth PT; Pienemann 1998 and 2005) which covers a teaching unit that combines a communicative teaching approach with Second Language Acquisition diagnosis in order to foster L2 acquisition of individual learners in heterogeneous EFL classrooms. The focus here will be on how teachers can cope with heterogeneity in the classroom by offering suitable teaching units. We show how a combination of Task-based Language Teaching (e.g. Ellis 2003; Eckerth & Siepmann 2008) and PT provide the necessary theoretical framework for this teaching unit. Furthermore, Rapid Profile and the Diagnostic Task Cycle (Keßler 2008) are used within this overall framework for the teaching unit presented in this paper. This diagnostic approach should be seen as conceptual since it can be applied to various classroom settings. In the example presented here, students read a novel suitable for teenagers and produce Podcasts and thereby record natural communication in the classroom. This learner output delivers precise knowledge about second language development of each learner in a classroom. On this basis, the teacher can offer developmentally moderated treatment (e.g. Keßler 2008) and developmentally moderated focus on form (Di Biase 2008) to individual learners in heterogeneous EFL classrooms.
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 29 June 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.5.09lie
References
Cook, V.
(1996) Second language learning and second language teaching. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
DiBiase, B.
(2008) Focus-on-form and development in L2 learning. In J.-U. Keßler (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Duncan, L.
(1978) Killing Mr. Griffin. Easy reader. Britt Keson (Ed.) (2005) Egmont: Aschehough & Alinea.Google Scholar
Eckerth, J.
(2008) Task-based language learning and teaching – old wine in new bottles? In Eckerth & Siepmann (Eds.), pp. 13-46.Google Scholar
Eckerth, J., & Siepmann, S.
(Eds.) (2008) Research on task-based language learning and teaching. Theoretical, methodological and pedagogical perspectives. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gil, G.
(2002) Two complementary modes of foreign language classroom interaction. EFL Journal, 56(3), 273-279.Google Scholar
Grießhaber, W.
(2005) Sprachstandsdiagnose im Zweitspracherwerb: Funktional-pragmatische Fundierung der Profilanalyse. Accessed on 6 March 2009 from: [URL]
Keßler, J.-U.
(2005) Fachdidaktik meets Psycholinguistik – Heterogenität im Englischunterricht erkennen, verstehen und als Chance nutzen, In K. Bräu & U. Schwerdt (Eds.), Heterogenität als Chance. Vom Umgang mit Gleichheit und Differenz in der Schule (pp. 263-284). Münster: LIT; S.Google Scholar
(2006) Englischerwerb im Anfangsunterricht diagnostizieren. Linguistische Profilanalysen am Übergang von der Primarstufe in die Sekundarstufe I. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
(2008) Communicative tasks and second language profiling: Linguistic and pedagogical implications. In Eckerth & Siepmann (Eds.), pp. 291-310.Google Scholar
(2009) Englischdidaktik in ‚Erklärungsnot’: Implizites und explizites Wissen und die Rolle der Bewusstmachung im schulischen Englischerwerb. In R. Vogt (Eds.), Erklären: Gesprächsanalytische und fachdidaktische Perspektiven (pp. 93-107). Tübingen: Stauffenberg.Google Scholar
Keßler, J.-U., & Keatinge, D.
(2008) Profiling oral second language development. In J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp. 167-197). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Keßler, J.-U., & Kohli, V.J.
(2006) Erhebung von Sprachprofilen im frühen Englischerwerb: Kommunikative Tasks in Forschung und Fremdsprachenunterricht. In M. Pienemann, J.-U. Keßler, & E. Roos (Eds.), Englischerwerb in der Grundschule. Ein Studien- und Arbeitsbuch (pp. 89-96). Paderborn: Schöningh/UTB.Google Scholar
Keßler, J.-U., & Liebner, M.
(2011) Diagnosing L2 development: Rapid Profile. In M. Pienemann & J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Studying Processability Theo6ry. An introductory textbook (pp. 133-147). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Medienbasierte Lernstandsdiagnostik und individuelle Lernerförderung – Neokommunikativer Fremdsprachenunterricht in heterogenen Lerngruppen. In M. Reinfried & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Medien im neokommunikativen Fremdsprachenunterricht. Einsatzformen, Inhalte, Lernerkompetenzen (pp. 303-317). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Keßler, J.-U., & Plesser, A.
(2011) Teaching grammar. Paderborn: Schöning/UTB.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N.
(2006) How languages are learned (3rd rev. ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Long, M.H.
(1996) The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of research on second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Müller-Hartmann, A., & Schocker-von-Ditfurth, M.
(2011) Teaching English: Task-supported language learning. Paderborn: Schöningh/UTB.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(1992) Assessing second language acquisition through Rapid Profile. Ms. Sydney.Google Scholar
(1998) Language processing and second language development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Spracherwerb in der Schule. Was in den Köpfen der Kinder vorgeht. In M. Pienemann, J.-U. Keßler, & E. Roos (Eds.), Englischerwerb in der Grundschule. Ein Studien- und Arbeitsbuch (pp. 33-63). Paderborn: Schöningh/UTB.Google Scholar
(2011) The psycholinguistic basis of PT. In M. Pienemann & J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Studying Processability Theory. An introductory textbook (pp. 27-49). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M., & Keßler, J.-U.
(2007) Measuring bilingualism. In P. Auer & L. Wei (Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics, Vol. 5: Multilingualism and multilingual communication (pp. 247-275). Berlin: Mouton/de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2012) Processability Theory, In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 228-247). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M., Keßler, J.-U., & Liebner, M.
(2006) Englischerwerb in der Grundschule: Untersuchungsergebnisse im Überblick. In M. Pienemann, J.-U. Keßler, & E. Roos (Eds.), Englischerwerb in der Grundschule. Ein Studien- und Arbeitsbuch (pp. 67-88). Paderborn: Schöningh/UTB.Google Scholar
Seedhouse, P.
(1997) Combining form and meaning. ELT Journal, 5(14), 336-344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vollmer, H.J.
(2008) Constructing tasks for content and language integrated learning and assessment. In Eckerth & Siepmann (Eds.), (pp. 227-290).Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Kawaguchi, Satomi
2023. Chapter 2. Studies of Japanese as a second language and their contribution to Processability Theory. In Processability and Language Acquisition in the Asia-Pacific Region [Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching, 9], ► pp. 27 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.