English language and literature

2.1 Curriculum

2.2 Forming group work

Conclusion…………………………………………………..22

Glossary…………………………………….………………..24

Reference…………………………………………………….26

Chapter one: Responsibilities of individuals in teaching foreign languages

1.1 The Role of the Teacher

The role of the teacher undergoes fundamental changes with the delivery of a multidimensional second-language program. As the Core French classroom moves from teacher-centred to student-centred and from a language-based to a needs-based approach, the teacher's responsibilities also change.

The primary role of the teacher in a multidimensional language class is to establish conditions and develop activities so that students are able to practise the language in a meaningful context. It is one of the teacher's greatest responsibilities to develop in the students a positive attitude to learning French as a second language.

It is the teacher who acts as facilitator, resource person and language model for the second- language classroom. If developing units, the teacher needs to predict the possible needs of the students and have communicative language activities readily available to meet these needs. The activities should be designed so that the students experience a high degree of success. Teachers will also experience greater success when activities are planned around the students' interests and take into account subjects that they have some knowledge about.

The teacher is also instrumental in creating a positive and supportive learning environment within the class. Students who feel safe and secure are much more willing to practise a second language. A healthy classroom climate promotes risk-taking and allows the students to experiment. Positive experiences in the classroom lead to an excellent attitude toward language and culture.

The constant re-entry and review of linguistic content throughout the different units enable the students to practise and internalize the language. Although this spiral approach is ideal in language learning, the teacher must be aware of the program objectives and ensure that the objectives are being met. Instruction and evaluation must reflect these objectives.

The teacher will continue to serve as a language model for the students. While remaining the person with whom the students will communicate most often, one of the main functions of the teacher will now be to discover or invent ways to encourage students to communicate meaningfully with each other. Instead of actively directing and controlling all activities the teacher will aim to set up conditions for meaningful practice and then take on the role of a resource person.

The classroom becomes student-centred rather than teacher-centred; the students do most of the talking and the role of the teacher is to facilitate, advise, assist and offer direction. As the students most often work in small groups the teacher will observe the activities, noting problem areas for future work. During these activities, the teacher will interrupt to correct students only if the errors are so serious as to block communication. The role of the Core French teacher in the classroom has traditionally been to convey knowledge. As the teacher moves toward being a facilitator of language learning, the students acquire skills that will enable them to be independent language learners.

Teachers are encouraged to become more knowledgeable about theories and methods of second language instruction. This can be done through reading and attending workshops, professional development days and conferences whenever the opportunity lends itself. Mini-immersion or immersion courses are instrumental in providing the opportunity for improvement/maintenance of communicative competence. Meeting with colleagues, formally or informally, also provides an opportunity for discussion, sharing and practising the language on another level.

The Role of the Secondary Student

The role of the students is also evolving in the second language classroom. Students are becoming more active in their role as learners and are playing a major part in many aspects of the Core French class.

One significant development is the amount of student input and decision-making that naturally occurs in the development of the unit. In the initial phase of a unit, students are asked for their input and the knowledge that they possess on a particular subject. It is this input phase that begins to motivate the students. Students are encouraged to make a number of decisions. They need to decide what vocabulary and structures are important for their activities and projects. The decisions that are made regarding the projects reflect the interests and strengths of the students. Although there are specific objectives and guidelines that need to be met in the second language classroom, students who are allowed some freedom to move within the parameters are more likely to remain motivated and on task.

The experiential goal at the end of the unit gives the students the opportunity to work toward their potential. The students become aware of this project in the early stages of the unit. They are then able to tailor their vocabulary, their activities and their thinking toward the final task. As the students realize that the work they do within the class leads them toward their final goal, they are much more inclined to stay on task. Students are able to personalize their projects and use their personal abilities and talents. Students with a strong French background may wish to expand on the oral or written aspect of the projects. Students with artistic or creative talents may wish to add an original dimension to the finished product. Students with a lesser degree of language skill will also be able to work toward their own potential. Students learn in different ways and at a different pace and their final projects will reflect these unique differences.

As students become more responsible for their own language learning, their success in the second language class increases. The work that students do in the Core French class takes on new meaning as the students work toward a final task. Student self-evaluation becomes more common as the students reflect on what they have learned, how they have learned and what they still need to learn.

Organization of Teaching Units

Teaching units provide the framework for the delivery of the Core French program. The units are based on fields of experience taken from the interests of the students. Each of the units includes an introductory or pre-activity phase, a main or activity phase and a post or reflection phase.

In the introductory phase, (pre-activity), the teacher activates any knowledge that the student may have about the topic to be covered. The students share their knowledge and explore their attitudes in this area. Some French vocabulary may be reviewed or explained at this point, however it is not the purpose of the introductory phase to formally teach a pre-determined list of vocabulary. This phase stimulates interest in the topic and provides the impetus for further discussion and activity.

In the main phase, (activity) the students perform a number of tasks and activities in order to develop language skills, knowledge and attitudes in the field of experience. At this point, the students spend time developing their language skills in a meaningful context. The activities move toward the experiential goal and at the end of the unit, the students will produce a final project.

The post or reflection phase, (post-activity) allows the teacher and students to step back and reflect on what they have learned and the strategies used. It includes discussion on French vocabulary and structures as well as new knowledge they have gained about the topic. It is also a time to reflect on how the experience may have affected their attitudes and behaviours and how they may transfer what they have learned to new situations.

The organization of the teaching unit allows the students to become interested in a topic, become familiar with the experiential goal at an early stage and do activities that will give them success with the final product. The final product and the reflection on the unit give the students a sense of completion and accomplishment. As the students begin the next unit, linguistic structures will re-emerge and this spiral approach will ensure that the students continue to practice and apply what they have learned during the unit.

A teaching unit is thus organized as follows:

Field of experience:

This identifies the aspect of the students' experience which will provide the content.

Topic to be developed: This narrows the focus to content around which the student already has some experience, knowledge and behaviour.

Experiential goal:

This goal or task creates a need to know certain vocabulary and grammar in order to be able to do the task in French. The goal should always involve creating a product, something concrete, whether written or oral.

Suggested steps

These steps are organized in logical order. Each unit has a beginning (brainstorming, motivation, introducing the goal or task); a middle phase (where students are involved in meaningful activities where they learn the language and general knowledge necessary to complete the task and actually do things in French) and an end (where they complete the task and demonstrate the product.) Some are language activities while others involve general knowledge development.

First Step: Students and teacher share what they already know about the topic, both in language and content. In the process, students become interested in the topic and motivated to learn more about it.

Second Step (Approximately): The experiential goal for the unit is introduced. Students decide with the teacher what elements of French they will need to learn and they select from the suggested steps those which they will complete in order to achieve the goal.

Subsequent steps: Students learn more about the topic, focussing on the information they need to complete the task. Group work and cooperative learning are an important part of this phase. A resource-based learning approach is necessary.

Second last step: The students present their version of the completed task or product.

Final Step: The last part of every unit involves having the students step back and reflect upon the experience of doing the unit. They try to identify what new knowledge they gained from the experience, what language they acquired, what new strategies they found most appropriate and suggest how these strategies could be used in new situations.

2.1 Traditional classroom roles

A. The LiteratureSources of Evidence and Information

Language-proficiency course books

Examination of popular course books, including but not limited to, students' book, teachers' book and audio tapes, and sometimes resource/practice book for supplementary grammatical practice, reveals that learners are given little or no choice within the course book to organize their learning. And while units or sections may be omitted, the students' pathway through the course is relatively inflexible. In addition, learners are rarely encouraged to evaluate their learning through specific exercises. Textbooks then, along with teacher-training courses, reflect the expectation that the whole class will react to the same (or at least related) text as input under the teacher's supervision.

A fitting example of such a paradigm is the East-West series (American English) published by Oxford University Press. In their introduction to Book One of this popular series, authors Graves and Rein (1988) assert that they identified the linguistic features students would need most in order to communicate effectively, and based their text on these elements. The authors acknowledge that "Students become motivated when they are interested and engaged in what they're learning...." (p. ix) and then proceed to explain how they decided what students should be interested in. Also seen as a positive feature is the fact that the book is organized such that "Each unit is carefully designed to build on the previous one..." (ibid.). This statement makes clear that students are meant to progress through the book starting at the beginning to the end in a linear fashion, with no deviation from the pre-determined path. The teacher'smanual also identifies which exercises are "optional" or "alternative," again suggesting curricular decisions rest with the individual teacher. That is, students have no say as to which exercises will or will not be completed, and in what order.

That language instruction should be conducted this way is in direct opposition to what Second Language Acquisition research tell us about individual differences and the impact such differences have on language acquisition. Issues ranging from age at first L2 exposure, to aptitude, cognitive factors like learning style and field dependence/independence, affective factors like motivation and attitude, as well as risk-taking and use of learning strategies have been discussed in the literature. Research into these issues has consistently shown that they are not to be taken lightly; that a complex interrelation of all these factors result in each individual learner having a different way as well as rate of acquiring language (Ellis, 1994; Long & Larsen-Freeman, 1991). Despite such findings, most authors and publishers in the field, while admitting to the reality of individual differences, continue to create course books that ignore such important differences. This may be sensible from a marketing point of view but is pedagogically unsound.

Teacher-training textbooks There has been an explosion in the number of authoritative titles about teacher training in recent years, and it is difficult to narrow these down to a selective list. One very popular title is Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (Richards and Rodgers, 1986) which has a clear section on teacher roles within each approach or method analyzed. Jeremy Harmer's the Practice of English Language Teaching (1987) has been a favorite of British-based Royal Society of Arts Certificate and Diploma courses in foreign-language teaching throughout the '80s and '90s. This provides a comprehensive and general overview. In a similar tradition to Harmer, Donn Byrne's (1986) Teaching Oral English and Matthews, Spratt & Dangerfield's (1985) At the chalkfacepractical techniques in language teaching are still quite popular. More recent teacher- training books, such as Omaggio's (1993)Teaching Language in Context mention teacher roles and learner autonomy, but still default to the view of learners as a group, thus relegating any curriculum negotiation to a discussion of what is best for all.

Byrne (1986) describes three basic teacher roles in the oral English classroom.These are 'presentation,' when the teacher introduces something new to be learned; 'practice,' when the teacher allows the learners to work under his/her direction; and 'production,' when the teacher gives the students opportunities to work on their own.

This broad division of the oral class into these stages with the teacher as a conductor has been paradigmatic in British teacher-training courses for some time now. While the classroom in these cases is no longer simply an institutionalized location for the transmission of a foreign language system, the teacher retains tight responsibility for planning material, and for pacing and controlling student activities. In this aspect, the teacher's role has not changed much from the Grammar Translation class.

The above mentioned texts all describe roles and activities in the lock-step classroom, which Dickinson (1987) defines as one in which all students are more or less engaged in studying the same thing at the same time . In such a classroom, students might be all listening to the same audio cassette, watching the same video, or working on the same tasks in the same textbook. As Johnson et al (1995) has argued, research findings from studies on Second Language Acquisition and on learner differences do not necessarily validate such an approach. Interestingly, Breen (1985) views the classroom as a cultural setting where social realities "...specify and mold the activities of teaching and learning" (142). He concludes the classroom cultural setting is generally highly normative and inherently conservative. We feel that the conservative framework of most educational establishments has institutionalized the lockstep classroom as their modus operandi. In other words, political and institutional considerations subsume pedagogical concerns so that alternative ways of teaching and learning are not addressed. The overall role of the teacher remains the planning and directing of orchestrated lock-step learning.

Teacher-training syllabi

Teacher-training courses tend to be oriented towards particular methods, and therefore instruct people to teach within the confines of those methods. Most of the methods promoted by these teacher-training courses place the teacher at the center of the class as described earlier. An extreme case of this is the Grammar-Translation method, which is a true transmission classroom and places few demands on teachers. Audio-lingualism is also a teacher-dominated method and the teacher's role is central and active. According to this method, language learning results from active verbal interaction between teacher and learners.

The 1970s gave rise to a variety of methods in the generally-held belief that there must be an optimum way to stimulate learners' acquisition and cognition of language. A number of methods attained brief notoriety until the broad-based approach, Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), won general acceptance in English teaching circles. This approach sees communicative competence as the goal of language teaching, and proposes procedures for such teaching based on the interdependence of language and communication. Minimally, students are expected to interact with other people; fluency and acceptable language are the primary goals. Generally speaking, several roles are assumed for teachers in CLT, a central one being to facilitate interaction. Richards and Rodgers (1986) hold that other roles include "needs analyst," "counselor," and "group-process manager"

The 1994-1995 RSA/Cambridge Diploma teacher-training schedule in Tokyo reflects the roles mentioned within the description of CLT above. Theoretical components of the course include "the learner and learning styles" and "learner strategies and the good language learner" but overall the teacher is assumed to be responsible, to a great extent, for the learners' motivation. This necessarily follows, since, "...intrinsic motivation will spring from an interest in what is being communicated by the language" (Finocchiaro and Brumfit, 1983, p. 91) and teachers are responsible for materials and tasks in the classroom. However, decision-making and control over what is studied has evolved more towards the learner recently, though we believe not enough (see learner-centeredness, part

CHAPTER TWO: Roles and responsibilities and groups in teaching foreign languages

2.1 Curriculum

The curriculum emphasises the fundamental values of democracy and cooperation as shown in the following two quotes.

Syllabus. When reading the syllabi for the two subjects there are several points where group work can be useful or beneficial in reaching the goals. There are more situations in the subject of English as the students are expected to have come further in their studies, however, several of them are relevant for modern languages as well as seen in the table below.

Table 1. Comparison of the syllabi for English and Modern languages

Group work

Definition. Cohen defines group work as students working together in a group small enough so that everyone can participate on a task that has been clearly assigned”. The fact that the different members of a group bring different knowledge to the gathering indicates that the more members that there are in a group the more knowledge they have available. Sjödin also points out that as the group gains more members the difficulties in communicating also grow. According to Stensaasen and Sletta 26 there are different kinds of groups. People standing in line waiting for something are a group of people, this type of group they define as a non-social group. This is not the type of group meant when discussing group work they define this type of group as a social group. An example of their definition of what a social group is (my translation):

“A group consists of two or more people who have a mutual influence on each other and are mutually dependant on another in the sense that that they have to trust each other to get their needs satisfied and achieve their goals.”

After giving this definition Stensaasen and Sletta go on to state the three criteria that make a social group. The first one being, a group consists of two of more people. The second one being, mutual influence, the members of a group need to be engaged in some form of social interaction. The third criteria, mutual dependence, what one member does has meaning to the other members.

For the purpose of this essay I am going to limit group work to students working in groups of two to five students. This means that I am including pair work in group work as it means that the students are not working alone. The upper limit of five students has been set so that the group is still small enough that the students are all able to participate on the assigned task.

Why group work?

“Group work is an effective technique for achieving certain kinds of intellectual and social learning goals. It is a superior technique for conceptual learning, for creative problem solving, and for increasing oral language proficiency.”

Cohen states that group work at some times can be more effective than traditional teaching methods. Cohen goes on to state that group work is good when two conditions are met; the task should make use of conceptual thinking instead of memorization or applying a rule. Also the group needs to have then knowledge to correctly complete the task. Another good assignment is when a question has no clear answer, the students then need to think and discuss different answers; something that all members of the group benefit from.

One learns how to communicate by communicating with others according to Lindberg. She further states that communicative language learning is a large part of learning a language. Teachers must provide a classroom climate and exercises that allow the students to develop the verbal aspect of the language, as this knowledge will be needed outside the classroom. Chirac and Hempel state that group work can be a way to learn how to think for yourself, as well as developing the students‟ argumentative abilities and critical thinking. They go on to say that in a study by Johnson and Johnson it has been shown that student collaboration leads to higher productivity and greater results. Students that together with the teacher actively participate in the classroom benefit not only by gaining greater knowledge but also language wise and socially

. Gröning also states that an abstract subject can through group work become more concrete and easier for the students to understand. Britton states that when students work with and discuss a task in smaller groups, they learn more individually, as well as a group.

2.2 Forming group work

Hammar Chiracdescribes Steiners theory of group process and group productivity and states that a groups achievement has three deciding factors, “the task demands, the resources in the group and the group processes”.

The demands of the task can be characterized by three aspects. The first one is whether or not the problem is devisable or unitary. A problem that is devisable can be broken into smaller parts and divided between the group‟s different members. The unitary problem on the other hand cannot be divided in that way. The second aspect concerns the group‟s achievement, and whether the goal of the

task is maximizing (quantity and a high tempo) or optimizing (adapting to a predefined standard). The last aspect is how the group decides to combine their resources, how they use their time and how much effort they put into the work. The groups‟ resources include all the knowledge abilities that the group have at their disposal, how this is distributed amongst the members. The group processes include all steps the group takes when confronted with a problem, both inter- and intra- personal actions. Through a combination of the three factors in deciding a group‟s achievement different problems can be devised for group work. Hammar Chirac explains the five distinctive problem types that Steiner has found.

 Additive problem – this problem adds all members‟ individual achievements together, no singular contribution is more important than another. This problem type is always unitary and maximizing. An example of this type of problem could be rope pulling, all members of the group work together to be strong enough to beat the other group.

 Disjunctive problem – one singular answer is the representation of the group‟s achievement. One group member‟s answer will be the group‟s answer; all other answers will be discarded. This problem type is unitary and either maximizing or optimizing. An example of this type of problem could be individual problem solving. The group is given a problem that has one correct answer and the first person to get it right answers for the group as a whole.

 Conjunctive problem – all group members are needed to solve the problem. The group is therefore dependant on its weakest member. This problem type is usually unitary and optimizing but can be devisable and maximizing. An example of this type of problem could be mountain climbing, the group only succeeds if all the group members get to the top they therefore have to work together and help each other.

 Compensating problem – each members individual answer is important, all answers are then averaged together to find the answer wanted by most. This problem type is usually unitary and optimizing. An example of this type of problem could be deciding who is going to be class president, all member get a say and the person that most want is then chosen.

 Complementary problem – each individual in the group does what s/he is best at, the sum of each individual part is the group‟s end product. This problem type is devisable and optimizing. An example of this type of problem could be writing an anthology, each member does his or her part these are then added together to for the end product.

Sjödin proposes four different deciding factors when discussing group productivity; group size, group constellation, group norm and problem type. Where problem type refers to the same five different problem types that Hammar Chirac describe. When discussing group size Sjödin refers to Steiners model of group productivity, where the actual productivity is the process loss subtracted from the potential productivity. When the size of the group grows the process loss also grows as a result from coordination difficulties. He does, however, also point out that very few studies have been made on larger groups as that requires more students to study. Sjödin describes group constellation as the way a group is put together, where the different members of a group represent different resources.

In a heterogeneous group these differences can be very obvious, while in a homogeneous group the differences may be very small. Further Sjödin says that the group process can be stimulated or inhibited by the group constellation. Group norm is described by Sjödin as the set of rules that are developed by the members of the group as a result of the respective group member‟s ethnic, social, economic and political background. Hammar Chirac and Hempel state that the opinion is divided on whether or not teachers should divide the students into groups or if the students should be allowed to group themselves.

The dilemma of group work

As all other methods of learning group work has both good and bad points 40 . One reason why group work fails can be unclear problems; another reason can be that the group is not aware of what is expected of them when working in groups. Studies have shown that students who are taught how to work in groups are more likely to get better results. Hammar Chirac and Hempel discuss different aspects that are important for the group members to be aware of and able to perform to be successful.

To improve their group work students should know:

• 
  How to take notes
  
• 
  How to divide responsibilities
  
• 
  How to break a problem into smaller parts
  
• 
  How to listen actively
  
• 
  Cooperation strategies
  
• 
  How to formulate ideas
  
• 
  How to stand for your opinion
  
• 
  How to make democratic decisions
  
• 
  And how to give constructive criticism
  

Using group work puts a lot of demands on both students and teachers. Students need to learn how to work in groups and teachers need the knowledge to know what material is going to stimulate the students to work together. Hammar Chirac and Hempel state that group work where the students have a need of each other has a higher likeliness of being successful. The only way for a student to do well is if all the members of the group are successful.

Hammar Chirac and Hempel discuss the two group processes social facilitation and social loafing. With social facilitation they mean that a student is affected in a positive way by the presence of the other group members either by receiving help from them or simply by their presence. One example of social facilitation can be a student presenting a topic in his or her group, the fact that the student is aware of the fact that the other students are evaluating their presentation can lead to higher motivation and greater performance by the student. Social loafing on the other hand can be viewed as the opposite, where a student instead is affected negatively by the presence of other students. Hammar Chirac and Hempel give the reason for this as if students believe that someone else is doing the work, and then they do not have to. They go on to state that researchers think that group size; how well the students know each other; trust and interest in the exercise have great importance in whether or not social loafing occurs. The larger the group the higher the risk of social loafing, although Hammar Chirac and Hempel give some examples of how to avoid social loafing; group members that know each other, that the exercise is engaging and interesting, each individual is aware that their performance is being evaluated, and each individual has trust that the other members will do their work and that they feel the exercise is meaningful.

Conclusions

In this course we have attempted to examine the roles of teachers intraditional (present) foreign-language classrooms and measure these against current conceptual trends within the discipline of foreign-language learning and teaching. We have argued that these trends, especially those in interpersonal communication and learner autonomy, require a new view of the roles of the foreign-language teacher in the classroom.

In language teaching classes; There may be more than one language as the language of verbal and written instructions put forward directly by the instructor or in the course materials, questions directed to the instructor or instructor’s explanations about the issues that are thought to be not understood, as well as learner questions and demand statements.

These languages can be divided into three groups:

Target language is the language that the individual learns and is used in contrast to the mother tongue (Richards, & Schmidt, 2002). The target language may not be the language in which the instructor speaks as the mother tongue. For Turkish, this is particularly the case in areas where Turkish is not spoken as the mother tongue, while the proportion of the target language in teaching varies depending on these situations.

Medium (language) of instruction: For communication between the instructor who is a native speaker of the target language and the learner whose language is different, the parties may sometimes need a third language (Mostly this language is one of the languages which has high international status).

The mother tongue (first language, L1) was created to conceptualize a person's early language development; (a) a historical term that is based on the assumptions that the first language of the person will normally be the language spoken at home by the caregiver at home, and that the person would be the mother, but this learning is a natural acquisition process by assimilation rather than by explicit instruction (Thompson, 2017). As one of the elements that the learners carry to the language teaching classes, the mother tongue is a third language besides the target language and the medium of instruction in foreign and second language teaching.

Glossary

Activate-The phase in a lesson where students have the opportunity to practice language forms. See “controlled practice”, “guided practice”, and “free practice”.

Active listening-A technique whereby the listener repeats (often in other words) what the speaker has said to demonstrate his or her understanding. Active listening is an especially useful alternative to directly correcting a student error. Compare active listening.

Active vocabulary-Vocabulary that students actually use in speaking and writing.

Attitude-A complex mental state involving beliefs, feelings, values and dispositions to act in certain ways. Attitude affects a student’s ability to learn, but is unrelated to aptitude.

Classroom climate-Environment created in the classroom by factors such as the physical environment and also the interrelationship between the teacher and the students, and among the students.

Deductive teaching-Also known as deduction, from the verb “to deduce”; a teaching technique in which the teacher presents language rules and the students then practice those rules in activities. Deductive teaching is usually based on grammar-based methodology and proceeds from generalizations about the language to specifics. (See “Inductive teaching and Grammar translation method”.)

Inductive teaching-Also known as induction, from the verb “to induce”; a facilitative, student-centred teaching technique where the students discover language rules through extensive use of the language and exposure to many examples. This is the preferred technique in communicative language teaching

Student and teacher-Teachers have eight roles in the classroom. They are authorities and sources of knowledge; entertainers; caregivers; role models; counsellors and sometimes friends; classroom disciplinarians; directors and managers; facilitators, coaches and guides. The most important person in the classroom is the student. The teacher’s primary focus must be on effective ways to have the student practice using his or her language. Classes should be planned so they enable the student to use just a little more language than they are comfortable with. This is known as “i+1” – an idea popularized by Stephen Krashen. This formula is short for “comprehensible input plus one.” Comprehensible input is language the students can understand.

Worksheets-Teacher-developed, paper-based activities to help students comprehend, use, and learn language; can be used in association with all skill levels and in individual and group work.

References

1. 
   ACTFL. (2010, May 22). Use of the target language in the classroom. Retrieved from http://www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=5151
   
2. 
   Agar, M. (1994). Language shock: Understanding the culture of conversation. New York: Quill.
   
3. 
   Allami, H., & Naeimi, A. (2011). A cross-linguistic study of refusals: An analysis of pragmatic competence development in Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 385–406.
   
4. 
   Beebe, L., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. Scarcella, E. Anderson, & S. Krashen, (Eds.), Developing communication competence in a second language (55–73). New York: Newbury House.
   
5. 
   Hatch, E. M. (1983). Simplified input and second language acquisition. In R. W.Andersen, (Ed.), Pidginization and creolization as language acquisition (pp. 64-86). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
   
6. 
   Kelly, G. A. (1955). A Theory of personality: the psychology of personal
   

constructs. New York: Norton & Co.

7. 
   Wright, T. (1987). Roles for teachers and learners. Oxford: Oxford University
   

Press.