Skill Acquisition Theory - LELB Society

Skill acquisition theory of language acquisition draw on the distinction between declarative and  (, 1983).  (1993) has proposed a ‘cognitive behaviourist’ model called , which sees learning as building up response strengths through a twofold division into  (individual pieces of information) and  (procedures for doing things). As declarative facts get better known, they are gradually incorporated into procedures, and several procedures are combined into one, thus cutting down on the amount of memory involved.
According to  and  (1996), there are two different views about the concept of . On the one hand, if adult SLA is an , process, then one would expect to find the same patterns of learning as for other . They (1996) continue, “knowledge acquired in declarative (explicit) form is then transformed and automatized through analogical reasoning and specific kinds of practice” (p. 614). On the other hand, if SLA in adults draws on a specific module of the mind, or on more general  mechanisms, then neither explicit learning nor practice in production play an important role, that is, acquisition is the implicit process of generating  from input and the capacity to produce results from this acquired competence (, 1982, 1985, 1994). According to  (1988), “… the whole concept of controlled practice in language teaching should be reconsidered” (p. 1).
As DeKeyser (1997) has said, “Initial practice of a task has very different effects (proceduralisation compared to subsequent practice (automatisation) of ” (p. 211).
Anderson’s  helps us to explain why it is highly difficult for the majority of L2 learners to use the target language in spontaneous outline communication; the transition from declarative to automatised knowledge takes a very long time and requires a lot of good practice. One of the requirements for good practice is that the practice match the three stages of skill acquisition (DeKeyser, 2007).
Although Anderson’s skill acquisition theory can account for some aspects of language learning, especially the transition from controlled to automatic processing of linguistic knowledge, it should be noted that the theory has limitations in explaining other aspects of L2 acquisition. For example, as Anderson makes no distinction between language and other cognitive systems, his models provide little explanation for the acquisition of properties unique to language (, 1993;  & , 1998). ACT Models and other  ignore the notion of grammatical structure, which makes up the core of language knowledge. Consequently, it is difficult to see how production systems operate in the acquisition of complex grammatical structures. It can be concluded that ACT models are useful for explaining how knowledge is proceduralised, not for explaining how new linguistic knowledge, especially complex knowledge, develops in learners’ minds (hypothesis formulation) (DeKeyser, 2007).

πŸ“‚ Study the complete archive of TESL Issues.

πŸ“Ί English Lessons on Aparat and YouTube

πŸ“· English Flashcards on Instagram and Telegram Channel

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Artificial Intelligence IELTS Listening and Reading Practice

Sociocultural Theory in Language Learning - LELB Society