Seite 29 [29]
OCR
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND implicit knowledge, it can only be transformed into explicit knowledge through conscious reflection on ones implicit knowledge. The main argument against the non-interface position was the overemphasis on fluency, as even though learners in immersion programs are exposed to a plethora of L2 input which enables them to improve their fluency, accuracy is also of great importance when it comes to communication because learners also need to produce comprehensible output, which ultimately requires a certain degree of accuracy (Swain 1985). Furthermore, Schmidt (2001), in his noticing hypothesis, underlined the role of attention to form in SLA and claimed that “SLA is largely driven by what learners pay attention to and what they understand of the significance of the noticed input to be” (Schmidt 2001: 3-4). This is one of the reasons the non-interface position is no longer supported by most researchers, as attention plays a significant role in second language acquisition. As opposed to the non-interface position, the strong interface position holds that explicit knowledge can be derived from implicit knowledge and can also be turned into implicit knowledge (Ellis 2009). Ellis explains this by pointing out that [IJearners can first learn a rule as a declarative fact and, then, by dint of practising the use of this rule, can convert it into an implicit representation, although this need not entail (initially, at least) the loss of the original explicit representation. (Ellis 2009: 21) The strong interface position — as opposed to the weak interface position — also intends to develop conscious knowledge of L2, which means that the different linguistic forms should be learned and, more importantly, taught explicitly (Schwartz 1993). This position assumes that there is direct interaction between explicit and implicit learning and thus between implicit and explicit knowledge, too, and L2 learning takes place through a conscious and explicit focus on L2 linguistic forms. The strong interface position promotes the so-called PPP (present-practice-produce) method, where 1) the targeted structure is presented through explicit instruction, then 2) the structure is practiced by the learners, and this is followed by 3) the producing stage of the structure, when learners can put their knowledge into practice (cf. Hedge 2000, Ur 1996). Proponents of this position claim that through practice and drills, successful learning may be achieved (DeKeyser 1998). However, similarly to the noninterface position, the strong interface position has also received criticism over the years, mainly because of its strong emphasis on form and giving little room for fluency. As for extramural English activities, this position is not necessarily a viable option, as this position assumes formal instruction, which is not necessarily involved when learning L2 through EE activities. + 27e
