<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<title>Graduate School of Education</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/1983/941" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle/>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/1983/941</id>
<updated>2013-05-14T08:16:18Z</updated>
<dc:date>2013-05-14T08:16:18Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>Phonological memory, attention control, and musical ability: effects of individual differences on rater judgments of second language speech</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1834" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Isaacs, T</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Trofimovich, Pavel</name>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1834</id>
<updated>2012-06-12T05:25:58Z</updated>
<published>2011-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Phonological memory, attention control, and musical ability: effects of individual differences on rater judgments of second language speech
Isaacs, T; Trofimovich, Pavel
This study examines how listener judgments of second language speech relate to individual differences in listeners’ phonological memory, attention control, and musical ability. Sixty native English listeners (30 music majors, 30 nonmusic majors) rated 40 nonnative speech samples for accentedness, comprehensibility, and fluency. The listeners were also assessed for phonological memory (serial recognition), attention control (trail making), and musical aptitude. Results showed that music majors assigned significantly lower scores than nonmusic majors solely for accentedness, particularly for low ability second language speakers. However, the ratings were not significantly affected by individual differences in listeners’ phonological memory and attention control, which implies that these factors do not bias listeners’ subjective judgments of speech. Implications for psycholinguistic research and for high-stakes speaking assessments are discussed.
</summary>
<dc:date>2011-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Integrating form and meaning in L2 pronunciation instruction</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1736" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Isaacs, T</name>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1736</id>
<updated>2011-05-03T23:35:29Z</updated>
<published>2009-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Integrating form and meaning in L2 pronunciation instruction
Isaacs, T
One of the central challenges of ESL teaching is striking the right balance&#13;
between form and meaning. In pronunciation pedagogy, this challenge is compounded&#13;
because repetitive practice, which has been shown to enhance phonological&#13;
acquisition and promote fluency, is widely viewed as being incompatible with&#13;
communicative principles. This article provides a brief historical background for&#13;
modern pronunciation pedagogy (from World War II to the present) as part of a&#13;
backdrop for understanding the current disjuncture between pronunciation and&#13;
communicative language teaching. A discussion on form-focused instruction, its&#13;
applicability for pronunciation pedagogy, and challenges in implementation follows&#13;
with reference to a recent article that presents evidence for the appropriateness&#13;
of a communicative instructional framework for teaching L2&#13;
pronunciation (Trofimovich &amp; Gatbonton, 2006). Finally, a communicative activity&#13;
that encourages repetitive practice while integrating pronunciation with&#13;
other components of language use is proposed.
</summary>
<dc:date>2009-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>I want to choose too</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1188" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Watson, DA</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Feiler, AC</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Tarleton, EJ</name>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1188</id>
<updated>2008-11-01T00:35:52Z</updated>
<published>2007-06-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">I want to choose too
Watson, DA; Feiler, AC; Tarleton, EJ
A resource for teachers and others for including promary school age children with little or no speech in decision-making
</summary>
<dc:date>2007-06-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Alternative conceptions of comparability</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1004" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Baird, J-A</name>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/1983/1004</id>
<updated>2011-07-27T09:50:21Z</updated>
<published>2007-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Alternative conceptions of comparability
Baird, J-A
Newton, Paul; Baird, J-A; Goldstein, H; Patrick, Helen; Tymms, Peter
Comparable examinations have to be at the same standard. But what do people mean by ‘examination standard’ and what kinds of comparibility are expected? How is evidence to be gathered about these types of comparability and are all of these approaches valid? This chapter outlines different definitions of examination comparibility used in England by academics and the expectations of the media and general public.  The purposes to which assessment results are put are discussed, as the alternative conceptions of examination comparability are linked to the uses of the assessment results.  Given that there are different approaches, some commentators have proposed that we should select a single definition of examination standards and stick to it, so that the system is clearer and false expectations are not raised about that the examination system can realistically deliver. Whether a particular definition of examination standards can be prioritised above others is considered, we well as the implications of doing so.
</summary>
<dc:date>2007-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
</feed>
