Boers (2021) outlines six explicit vocabulary and grammar teaching practices that are backed up by research.
He does so almost apologetically, noting that most of the practices align with more traditional/conventional methods, and that they also seem ‘commonsensical’.
I lack common sense, so the findings are useful for me. Here are a few ways in which I seek to apply the practices outlined by Boers in our EAL teaching/curriculum planning:
Pre-teaching vocabulary
I’ve mentioned how we are approaching vocab pre-teaching in our context here.
Regular reviews of subject content
As mentioned in this previous post, we schedule subject content reviews in our hybrid EAL curriculum. This gives learners repeated exposure to content input (which we can make more comprehensible if needed), richer opportunities for output (that may help develop oracy skills), and retrieval practice. If learners are confident with the content and the key language, we can extend the language input to include more useful structures and vocabulary. This was also my thinking behind the approach to EAL resources I wrote for Ellii. Although the examples in that post don’t show it well, I wanted to draw out more collocations/colligations from content-focused input. Adri and I provide examples of approaches to further language development in Clements and Szlapak (2024).
Varying approaches to explicit instruction
As Boers’ point 2 suggests, when it comes to explicit instruction there’s more than one way to cook an egg. As mentioned in my previous post, leading with presentation of new language in a deductive fashion is not the only way to approach teaching grammar (and may not be the most effective either). There’s some evidence in favour of alternative approaches (e.g. guided inductive learning), and inductive tasks are fairly commonplace in evidence-informed (?) ELT coursebooks from major publishers – Nitta and Gardner 2005 is worth a read on that. Delayed focus on form is another way to approach grammar instruction. I often find it less intrusive, more at-the-point-of-need for the learners, and incidental within the natural flow of communication. It fits well in EAL contexts.
Basically – if yes to explicit instruction, yes to a variety of explicit techniques. Boers mentions the importance of nuance and also highlights limitations to certain research findings (notably the lack of detail provided regarding the researchers’ own instructional methods) so I still think it’s worth going beyond ‘just tell them’ type methods that I see mentioned a lot in mainstream learning contexts.
Creating the conditions for ‘real’ communication
Boers explains how practice tasks should emphasise communicative use of the language. We try to build this into our curriculum through output tasks with a clear audience, format, and purpose. Examples:
- Making YouTube style science explainers of new content for peers
- Preparing presentations related to new content/language to be delivered in a KS3 assembly with the purpose of informing/persuading
- Conducting research into SDG-related topics in our context (e.g. responsible consumption around school) and presenting findings to the leadership team/Eco Committee.
These are a great vehicle for authentic communication that requires using the target language in clear, meaningful contexts. They also provide opportunities to discuss and develop disciplinary literacy – recognizing how best to use specialized language to suit audience, format, etc.
Something I get wrong
We do veer towards language exercise/practice activities MFL style at times in our classroom. I’m not dissing this too much as language practice activities do have some value. That said, if these activities do have a place then I’d prefer it to be in homework time. It’s that trade-off with learner expectations at times though. For lots of my learners, I think controlled practice activities (like your gap fills, matching, transformations, etc) are more familiar, seem more achievable, and feel more focused. There’s probably more I could do re: learner training/task design-wise to help learners see the value of more communicative tasks.
Regular vocab reviews
I mentioned a few activities for this in a post on EAL CPD. We often spend 10-15 minutes in class reviewing the learnt vocabulary from our word envelopes. When it comes to collecting new vocabulary, I keep a Google doc open during lessons to record emergent vocabulary. If it’s something that’s worth remembering, I’ll note it down and add it to our vocabulary envelopes (which are also full of key academic language on topics covered).
‘Increasing the chances of incidental acquisition’
Boers Point 5 relates to consciousness-raising activities, both as a feature of explicit language instruction and for incidental acquisition. In Chapters 2/3 of the book, Boers mentions that enhancing textual input (e.g. bold typeface for target text, images for support, etc) may have benefits for incidental acquisition. The text enhancement techniques that Boers mentions are designed to remove obstacles and facilitate incidental acquisition – increasing noticeability, perceived relevance, and so on. The author stresses that these techniques may increase the *likelihood* of acquiring new language incidentally, but there are too many variables for conclusive evidence in this area. I use strategies like text modification in my practice, but this does feel like a leap of faith at times.
All about context
Boers’ practices are evidence-informed, they can be embedded in everyday practice, and for the most past their impact is measurable. They are practical within the (time) constraints of formal instruction, and I wouldn’t say they are as conventional as suggested. Boers’ even points out that what is considered ‘conventional’ is context-bound anyway…
It’s important, however commonsensical it might seem, to identify the evidence basis for our practice. Boers may arrive at fairly predictable findings but he reviews a fair amount of research in the process. The evidence-informed practices outlined in the penultimate chapter are a pretty good checklist for establishing how principled your own approaches to teaching grammar/vocab are. Well, based on evidence from a series of selective research summaries, that is. More ways to cook an egg and all that.
Reference:
Boers, F. (2021). Evaluating second language vocabulary and grammar instruction: A synthesis of the research on teaching words, phrases, and patterns. Routledge.
Categories: General, reflections
ELT Planning 
Leave a comment