Research Methods for ELT

Vicky Hansly, MA: Research Methods for ELT

The gap between the English language classroom and TESOL research can

often times seem too wide to bridge. By synthesizing real life ELT classroom

experiences with relevant research literature, the relationship between these

two sides of TESOL becomes much more cohesive. Through my observing a

live English language classroom, I witnessed multiple corrections by the

instructors on incorrect pronunciation, as well as an activity focused on

teaching students more accurate pronunciation and fluency between English

words. These classroom exercises relate directly to TESOL research concepts,

such as the effectiveness of pronunciation training, what it means to be native-

like, and diversity and inclusion in the English language teaching space. While

conducting my observations, I witnessed three separate instances of

mispronunciation of English words by the students that were then verbally

corrected by the instructor. The words that were mispronounced in these

occurrences were island, pronounced as ice-land, difficulty, pronounced as

difficultly, and labyrinth, pronounced as lab-inth. For all of these mistakes, the

instructor verbally corrected the student’s error, by saying the words correctly

and explaining the difference between what the student said, and what the

correct pronunciation of the word is. Also, during the lesson there was an

39

entire activity devoted to the pronunciation of English words and the fluidity

between words. The instructor explained that in order to sound more fluent, a

word starting with a vowel can take on the sound of the final consonant in the

previous word, so “two apples” would sound more like “two wapples”, and

“four oranges” would sound closer to “four roranges”. These classroom

activities, particularly the fluency activity, are efforts to make a language

student sound more native like in their speaking. However, making native like

speaking a goal in the English language classroom is controversial in the

TESOL community, and requires the considerations of its efficacy, its

implications on culture, and what being a “native like” speaker truly means.

When examining the pedagogy of pronunciation, we must confront the issue of

the native speaker model. Davies (1991) defines a native speaker as being a

speaker of their L1, intrinsically linked to childhood development and their

first exposure to language. Regardless of L2s, or a native speaker’s later

dissociation with their L1, they will always hold the title of native speaker in

their respective language (Cook, 1999). Traditionally in the field of TESOL, it

has been thought that the goal of an English language learner should be to

become as native like as possible, to speak English that sounds as close to that

of a native speaker as possible. However, this type of teaching ideology is a very

shallow view on the English language, given the many dialects, accents, and

40

colloquialisms of English all around the globe. Pronunciation training in the

English language classroom walks a fine line between functional language

training and placing this narrow definition of the “native speaker” above the

language learner. Pronunciation training can tend to favor the monolingual

perspective, rather than the multilingual perspective, which should be the

priority in a language classroom (Cook, 2016). This being said, the efficacy,

cultural impact, benefits, and possible negative effects of teaching

pronunciation in the English language classroom requires precise analysis and

examination.

Saito & Lyster (2012) investigated the impact of form focused instruction and

corrective feedback on the pronunciation development of 65 adult Japanese

intermediate level English speakers. The study focused mainly on the /ɹ/ sound,

as previous research has found this to be particularly difficult for Japanese L1

learners to grasp. The experiment group was given four lessons over the course

of two weeks of form focused instruction, centralizing the acquisition of the

target form, /ɹ/. The participants were given 3 pretests and posttests to measure

their acquisition of the target form, as well as an acoustic evaluation to measure

their enunciation and phonological use of the /ɹ/ sound more precisely. The

results found that through communicative instruction, an improvement on L2

pronunciation can be developed. Saito and Lyster’s study found this

41

improvement in pronunciation accuracy not only in controlled speech, but also

in spontaneous speech, displaying some improvement in accurate implicit

knowledge of English pronunciation. Yeldman & Choy’s 2021 study took a

similar approach, examining the effects of pronunciation instruction within a

task-based language teaching curriculum. The participants included low-

intermediate to intermediate level L2 English speakers, residing in Hong Kong,

all with Cantonese as their L1. The target forms of pronunciation were long

vowel/diphthong sounds, /t/ and /d/ sounds in the final syllable position, and

fricative consonants. Similarly to Saito & Lyster’s work (2012), these target

forms were intentionally selected as L1 Cantonese speakers tend to struggle

with this particular aspect of English phonology. The participants were given a

pretest and posttest between the instructional sessions consisting of read aloud

speaking exercises featuring the target forms. The results of the study found

that the experiment group, the group given explicit pronunciation instruction

and feedback, significantly outperformed the control group in all three of the

target forms, particularly within the long vowel/diphthong form, and /t/ and

/d/ sounds in the final syllable position (Yeldman & Choy, 2021). Kissling

(2018) suggests that pronunciation instruction in second language education

could reap benefits that extend further than just accurate speaking skills.

Kissling investigated the effects of pronunciation instruction on 116 beginner

Spanish L2 university students in the United States. The target pronunciation

42

features of the study were segmentals and suprasegmentals. The participants

were enrolled in a two-semester long course and were given a pretest at the start

of the course and a posttest at the course’s conclusion. Kissinger (2018) found

that the experimental group given explicit pronunciation instruction

performed the target forms more accurately than the control group. In addition

to this, the results point to the possibility that pronunciation instruction could

benefit a learner’s L2 listening and processing skills. The results showed the

experiment group also scored higher on comprehensibility than the control

group. This pattern suggests a possible link between pronunciation training

and accurate processing skills of L2 learners, however, the author recognizes

the need for further research into this potential link before making any solid

conclusions (Kissling, 2018). It is also important to note that Kissling’s study

was not conducted in an EFL classroom, it was conducted on L1 English

speakers learning Spanish as an L2, so the validity of these findings in TESOL

should be investigated.

Given these studies, it could be argued that pronunciation instruction is

beneficial to L2 speech development and potentially could assist in other areas

of language development. However, despite these benefits, the goal of striving

for a learner to be as native speaker-like as possible remains controversial. The

concept of the native speaker is extremely limited; with the ideal being white,

43

monolingual, and usually British or American. This strict image of the ideal

English speaker has significant consequences, affecting hiring processes for

English language teachers, and setting standards for exams such as IELTS and

TOEFL (Schreiber, 2019). Schreiber (2019) studied the perspectives, differences,

and relationship between nonnative speakers and native speakers through the

online interactions of Sri Lankan MA TESOL students and undergraduate

university students in New York, as well as English language use in their

respective surroundings. The Sri Lankan students commented on the diversity

of accents within the group of New Yorkers, such as the Brooklyn accent, or

African American Vernacular English. Further, nonstandard linguistic choices

in the urban New York dialect such as replacing “were” with “was” struck the

Sri Lankan students as something they had never before seen in the English

language. The American students were struck with the formality and decorum

of the Sri Lankan student’s speech and writing (Schreiber, 2019). In the

discussion forum exercises, the American students regularly used casual

language such as contractions, informal expressions, and frequent grammatical

errors, whereas the Sri Lankan students were much more formal, well edited,

and academically focused on their posting. Within these circumstances, the Sri

Lankan group outperformed the American group in traditionally correct

English writing (Schreiber, 2019). This performance poses an interesting

contradiction to the pervasive concept of native speaker superiority. The

44

English language classroom and the TESOL research space can often feel like

two different worlds. By contextualizing real life classroom experiences through

research literature, the gap between the two areas can be minimized. During

my time in the classroom, I observed multiple corrections and a classroom

activity on English pronunciation. While the efficacy of pronunciation

instruction cannot be denied, as seen through various studies, the concept of

ideal pronunciation and the native speaker must be handled with care, by

respecting multilingualism, diversity, and prioritizing the language learner.

45

References

Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 185–209. doi:10.2307/3587717

Cook, V. (2016). Where Is the Native Speaker Now? TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 186–189. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/tesq.286

Davies, A. (1991). The native speaker in applied linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Pp. x 181. Language in Society, 22(2), 313316. doi:10.1017/S0047404500017231

Kissling, E. (2018). Pronunciation Instruction Can Improve L2 Learners’ Bottom-Up Processing for Listening. The Modern Language Journal (Boulder, Colo.), 102(4), 653–675. https://doi.org/10.1111/ modl.12512

Saito, & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of Form-Focused Instruction and Corrective Feedback on L2 Pronunciation Development of /ɹ/ by Japanese Learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00639.

Schreiber, B. (2019). “More Like You”: Disrupting Native Speakerism Through a Multimodal Online Intercultural Exchange. TESOL Quarterly, 53(4), 1115–1138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.534

Yeldham, & Choy, V. (2021). The effectiveness of direct articulatory–abdominal pronunciation instruction for English learners in Hong Kong. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 1–16. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/07908318.2021.197847