Toward SLA Theory Formation

In his similarly titled chapter, Brown discusses the process by which we must go about
formulating a theory for ourselves, which by no means is an easy process (2007, p. 285) (See the
conclusion at the end of the paper for how the process ultimately turned out at the end of my
MATL experience). The process of formulating my own theory is not that dissimilar to the way
many view the SLA process. That is, hypotheses are formed, tested, and a structure is modified
as a result. Of course, this is in some senses the very essence of the scientific method.
Much of my understanding of SLA began long before this course, and even my first
course in the MATL program. When my interested in teaching languages was stimulated, I
began searching out resources online. Some of the resources I discovered (Center for Academic
Research on Language Acquisition [CARLA], Foreign Language Teachers Guide to Active
Learning, and Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen, to name a few) led me to
begin making hypotheses about how SLA took place. However, most of my understanding and
self-made hypothesis was extremely binary (e.g., I must use this type of instruction since Blaz
said so and not that other kind) and continued to be. Although I was successful with many of
the methodologies I did incorporate into my teaching repertoire, much of my understanding
increased my ego and made me extremely defensive and incapable of learning or accepting other
methodologies as appropriate.
It was not until I sought out to find a more balanced and systemic program to increase my
skills as a practitioner, that I entered the MATL program and ultimately, this course. The course
work in the MATL program drove my understanding through many phases of questioning,
testing and retesting of my beliefs about SLA and its implications on my teaching methods. My
understanding is now much more balanced and comprehensive than it ever was in the past.
Additionally (and what is ultimately most important to my future success as a learner), I now
more willingly listen to others points of view about SLA and consider how valid claims could be
incorporated into my understanding. Although I know I will never possess a complete and
definitely not static understanding of SLA, I acknowledge that I now possess much more
understanding about how so many factors work together in SLA and how that should affect my
instruction.
The aforementioned list represents some of the theories that I have taken in and begun to
include in what I believe SLA is. As a consequence to this understanding, there are numerous
pedagogical implications. Some questions I must ask myself when planning lessons and
instruction are: how much and what type of input should I provide to my students?, when and to
what extent should I require output, especially for novice level learners?, how can I best lower
students affective filters?, what strategies can I use to maximize time in the TL, both for me and
the students?, and what will I accept as evidence as learning and what will I not?. The list could
go on and on, however I will not attempt to address all facets of SLA in a single assignment.
This accentuates the fact that SLA is indeed complex and is something that I could never (for
temporal and cognitive reasons) attempt to implement so many things in my own classroom. For
this very reason, my understanding has pushed me to seek out colleagues in other places as a
form of hypothesis testing and result sharing.
Seeing as research will continue and that we will continually learn more and more about
SLA, it is imperative that I continue learning and testing out new ideas. As I approach the end of
my coursework, I am already considering what I need to do to be able to have access to research
databases so that I may continue personal research interests outside of my graduate studies.
Additionally, the MATL program has provided me with invaluable professional resources such
as the FLTEACH listserv through which I have been exposed to #langchat on twitter once a
week, LangCamp on Google+ and numerous other websites and resources that continually help
me to enhance my abilities as a teacher. The result of knowing so much more about SLA
furthers its own cause.
Part B: Dispelling a Common Myth: Im Not a Language Person!
This is a phrase that I often hear repeated by students who are struggling with foreign
language classes or adults who had issues in their foreign language classes in high school or
college. For some time I concurred with individuals who said this, but in recent years I have
come to a different conclusion. Prior to covering academic research that I believe stands in
contrast to this, I would like to take a moment to address the how this statement and others like it
are extremely limiting of oneself. I am first very saddened when I hear individuals use this as it
sounds as if they feel they are innately incapable of learning another language. This is an
attitude I wish to help my students overcome in whatever endeavors they have. I know that in
my life, having the feeling that I can truly do whatever I want, so long as I am willing and ready
to work hard, has helped me tremendously. Statements such as this one immediately shut down
that possibility. I will later relate my feelings toward this with academic research regarding it.
Research Review
To begin, I would like to question whether individuals who are saying the statement Im
not a language person are making the statement based out of belief in their inabilities or in their
difficulty to learn the language at the time they were in a class. The former, language aptitude, is
an elusive concept. In many cases, it is has been something difficult for scientists to measure
and more current research is leading toward a general learner aptitude that is not specific to
languages (Brown, p. 105-107). Contrastingly, another way of looking at language learning is by
a means of learning styles, a willingness-to-communicate, and other individual factors. That is
that language aptitude, if there is such a thing, would be a combination of many factors.
However, as we have seen with the intricacies of SLA, one cannot simply state that one factor
can completely explain the process of SLA. If language aptitude is a factor in SLA, then it
cannot be a single explanation for not acquiring a language.
Another point to be made is about UG and its implications with SLA. If we indeed all
possess a language acquisition device, then any aptitude for learning a language may be present,
but everyone has it by nature of the device. Since we all have acquired a language, it seems that
our LAD is working fine. Of course, according to Gass (2013, Aptitude, para.2) there is not
much research relating to language aptitude and L1, unless it is related to cognitive deficits. This
might require further investigation. However, difficulty in SLA may be a result of other factors
(an affective filter, general intelligence, current L1 ability, etc.) as opposed to a single language
aptitude.
It would seem then that my first comments about a students difficulty with learning a
language hold more to the mentioned factors as opposed to an inability to acquire a second
language. Furthermore, could it be that making statements like Im not a language person
indeed demonstrate the notion of affective factors on learning? If I believe I cannot learn a
language, I may not succeed at it for that very reason.
Concluding Remarks
I enrolled in this course in my next to last semester of the MATL program and it is the
last of the foreign language pedagogy courses that I must take to graduate. Interestingly though,
it has no prerequisites. Throughout this course I have seen theory after theory that has been
introduced in other courses crop up. Having already been partly exposed to these ideas has
facilitated the synthesis of all of the information presented throughout this course. Not to say that
it would be beneficial prior to taking other courses, of course. It has, for me, punctuated the end
of these courses for me in a way that I feel I have truly have begun to grasp the concept of SLA.
This final assignment serves as an integral part in demonstrating my understanding of how the
pieces of the SLA puzzle fit together, not only demonstrating what I have learned in this course,
but in all of the foreign language pedagogy course I have taken in the program. While the
assignment was meant for this purpose, its importance to my knowledge base cannot be
understated.

References
Blaz, D. (1999). Foreign language teachers guide to active learning. New York, NY: Eye on
Education.
Brown, H.D.(2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New York, NY:
Pearson Education.
Gass, S.M., Behney, J., & Plonsky, L. (2013). Second language acquisition: An introductory
course (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge
Goo, J., & Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition. 35, 127-165.
doi:10.1017/S0272263112000708
Lee, J., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language teaching happen (2
nd
ed.).
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Russell, V. (2014). A closer look at the output hypothesis: The effect of pushed output on
noticing and inductive learning of the Spanish future tense. Foreign Language Annals,
47(1), 25-47.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/flan.12077