Below is a list of studies comparing
comprehension-based methods with traditional methods that demand the conscious
learning of grammar. The list includes studies contrasting comprehension-based
methods with traditional methods for beginning foreign language teaching and
intermediate foreign and second language teaching, as well as studies showing
the superiority of self-selected reading over traditional instruction for
intermediate second and foreign language students.
All studies included comparison
groups and subjects were high school age or older. In addition, there are a multitude of studies
that confirm these results using multivariate techniques and case histories
(Krashen, 2004).
References
Krashen, S. 2004. Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
BEGINNING FOREIGN LANGUAGE: COMPREHENSION BASED METHODS
Asher, J. 1965. The strategy of the total physical
response: an application to learning Russian. International Review of Applied
Linguistics 3: 291-300.
Asher, J. 1969. The total physical response approach
to second language learning. Modern
Language Journal 53:
3-17.
Asher, J. 1972. Children's first language as a model
for second language learning. Modern
Language Journal 56:
133-139.
Asher, J., Kusudo, J. and De La Torre, R. 1974,
Learning a second language through commands: the second field test. Modern Language Journal 58: 24-32.
Dziedzic,
J. 2012. A comparison of TPRS and traditional instruction, both with SSR.
International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 7(2): 4-6.
Hammond, R. 1989. Accuracy versus communicative
competency: The acquisition of grammar in the second language classroom.
Hispania 71: 408-417
Isik, A. 2000. The role of input in second language
acquisition: more comprehensible input supported by grammar instrution or more
grammar instruction? ITL: Review of Applied Linguistics 129-130: 225-74.
Kunihara A, S. and Asher, J. 1965. The strategy of the
total physical response: an application to learning Japanese. International Review of Applied Linguistics 4: 277-289.
Nicola,
N. 1989. Experimenting with the new methods in Arabic. Dialog on Language
Instruction. 6: 61-71.
Swaffer, J. and Woodruff, M. 1978. Language for
comprehension: Focus on reading. Modern Language Journal 6:27-32.
Varguez, K. 2009. Traditional and TPR
Storytelling instruction in the Beginning High School Spanish Classroom.
International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 5 (1): 2-11.
Watson,
B. 2009. A comparison of TPRS and traditional foreign language instruction at
the high school level. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 5
(1): 21-24.
Winitz, H. 1996. Grammaticality judgments
as a function explitict and implicit instruction in Spanish. Modern Language
Journal 80 (1): 32-46.
Wolfe, D. and Jones, G. 1982. Integrating total
physical response strategy in a level 1 Spanish class. Foreign Language Annals
14: 273-80.
INTERMEDIATE FOREIGN
LANGUAGE: SHELTERED
Burger, S. 1989. Content-based ESL in a sheletered
psychology course: Input, output, and outcomes. TESL Canada Journal 6:45-59.
Edwards,
H., Wesche, M., Krashen, S., Clement, R., and Kruidenier, B. 1984. Second
language acquisition through a subject-matter learning: A study of sheltered
psychology classes at the University of Ottawa. Canadian Modern Language Review
41: 268-282.
Hauptman,
P., Wesche, M., and Ready, D. 1988. Second language acquisition through
subject-matter teaching: a follow-up study at the University of Ottawa.
Language Learning 38: 433-71.
Lafayette,
R. and Buscaglia, M. 1985. Students learn language via a civilization course –
a comarison of second language acquisition environments. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 7: 323-42.
Sternfeld,
S. 1993. Immersion in first-year language instruction for adults. In J. Oller
(Ed.) Methods That Work. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
INTERMEDIATE
FOREIGN LANGUAGE: SUSTAINED SILENT READING
Bell,
T. 2001. Extensive reading: Speed and comperhension. The Reading Matrix, 1 (1)
Hitosugi, C. I., and Day, R. 2004. Extensive reading
in Japanese. Reading in a Foreign
Language 16 (1). http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/April2004/abstracts.html#hitosugi
Hafiz, F., and I. Tudor. 1990. Graded readers as an
input medium in L2 learning. System 18(1): 31-42.
Lao, C.Y. and Krashen, S. 2000. The impact of popular
literature study on literacy development in EFL: More evidence for the power of
reading. System 28: 261-270.
Lee, S.Y. 2007. Revelations from three consecutive
studies on extensive reading. RELC Journal
38 (2), 150-170.
Lee, S. Y. and Hsu, Y. Y. 2009.
A three-year longitudinal study of in-class sustained silent reading
with Taiwanese vocational college students. Indonesian Journal of English
Language Teaching, 5(1): 15-29.
Lituanas, P. M., Jacobs, G. M., and Renandya, W. A.
1999. A study of extensive reading with remedial reading students. In Y. M.
Cheah & S. M. Ng (Eds.) Language instructional issues in Asian classrooms
(pp. 89-104). Newark, DE: International Development in Asia Committee,
International Reading Association.
Liu, C.K. 2007. A reading program that keeps winning. Selected
Papers from the Sixteenth International Symposium on English Teaching, English
Teachers’ Association – Republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.
Mason, B. 2006. Free voluntary reading and autonomy in second
language acquisition: Improving TOEFL scores from reading alone. International
Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 2(1), 2-5.
Mason, B. and Krashen, S. 1997. Extensive reading in
English as a foreign language. System 25: 91-102.
Robb,
T. N. & Susser, B. 1989. Extensive reading vs skills building in an EFL Context.
Reading in a Foreign Language, 5, 2, 239-51.
Rodrigo, V., Krashen, S., and Gribbons, B. 2004. The effectiveness
of two comprehensible-input approaches to foreign language instruction at the
intermediate level. System 32(1): 53-60.
Sheu, S. P-H. 2004. Extensive reading with EFL
learners at beginning level. TESL Reporter, 36(2), 8-26.
Sims, J. 1996. A new perspective: Extensive reading
for pleasure. The Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on English
Teaching, pp. 137-144. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.
Smith, K. 2006. A comparison of “pure” extensive
reading with intensive reading and Extensive Reading with Supplementary
Activities. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching (IJFLT), 2(2):
12-15.
Smith, K.
2007. The effect of adding SSR to regular instruction. Selected Papers from the
Sixteenth International Symposium on English Teaching, English Teachers’
Association – Republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.
Smith, K. 2011. Integrating one hour of in-school weekly SSR:
Effects on proficiency and spelling. International Journal of Foreign Language
Teaching, 7(1): 1-7.
Tudor, I., and Hafiz, F. 1989. Extensive reading as a
means of input to L2 learning. Journal of Research in Reading 12(2): 164-178.
Tsang, W-K., 1996. Comparing the effects of reading
and writing on writing performance. Applied Linguistics 17(2): 210-233.
Yuan, Y. P., and Nash, T. 1992. Reading subskills and
quantity reading. Selected papers from The Eighth Conference on English
Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 291-304. Taipei: Crane.
Distance learning for International Students?
ReplyDeleteAsvab Practice Math Question
ReplyDeleteDiscover a Surefire Method to Teach Your Child to Read
There are many different methods and opinions on how to teach a child to read - while all are well-intentioned, some methods could actually lead to reading difficulties in children. Learning to read is a critical step towards future academic success and later on success in life. If you cannot read, you cannot succeed. There is an amazingly simple method - actually, a combination of two methods - that can teach anyone to read, even children as young as 2 and 3 years old.
The combination of these two methods has been used in the Children Learning Reading program to successfully teach thousands of young children to read. So what are these methods?
It is the combination of synthetic phonics and phonemic awareness. Most have probably heard of phonics, but phonemic awareness is a concept less well known and ?it's not something you hear about often. Certainly, phonics is absolutely necessary to develop fluent reading skills; however, there are different types of phonics including embedded, analogy, analytical, and synthetic phonics. While using some type of phonics is better than not including any phonics instructions at all, you will achieve FAR BETTER results by employing synthetic phonics, which is by far the most easy and effective method for teaching reading. Multiple studies support this.
In a 7 year study conducted by the Scottish Education Department, 300 students were taught using either analytic phonics or synthetic phonics. The results found that the synthetic phonics group were reading 7 months ahead and spelling 8 to 9 months ahead of the other phonics groups. At the end of the 7 year study, the children were reading 3.5 years ahead of their chronological age.
Very impressive!
Through their amazing reading program, the creators (Jim & Elena - parents of 4 children and reading teachers) have taught all of their children to read phonetically by 3 years old and have helped thousands of parents to successfully teach their children to read as well! Some are small 2 or 3 year old toddlers, others are young 4 or 5 year old preschoolers, and still others at ages 6, 7, 8 or even older.
>> Click here to watch amazing videos of young children reading, and see the amazing results so many parents are achieving with their children.
The Children Learning Reading program works so well that many children will achieve reading ages far ahead of their chronological age.
Take Jim & Elena's children as an example: their oldest child, Raine, was reading phonetically at 2 years 11 months old, and by the time she entered kindergarten at 5 years old, she was reading at a grade 5 level with a reading age of 11.9 years - almost 7 years ahead of her chronological age. Their second child, Ethan, learned to read phonetically by 2 years 9 months, and at age 3, he was reading at a grade 2 level with a reading age of 7.2 years - progressing at a similarly quick pace as his older sister. Find that hard to believe? You can watch the videos posted here.
There are many different phonics programs out there, but rarely do you ever hear a mention of phonemic awareness (PA), and PA is absolutely an equally critical component to developing reading skills in children. What makes the Children Learning Reading program so unique and amazingly effective at teaching young children is that it seamlessly combines the teaching of synthetic phonics along with phonemic awareness to enable children to develop superb reading skills.
>>> Click here to learn more about the Children Learning Reading program and teach your child to read today