Invited Speakers

Asst. Prof. Ho Keat Leng, 

National Tsing Hua University

Dr. Leng Ho Keat is currently an Assistant Professor with National Tsing Hua University. He has taught marketing for more than 20 years in various tertiary educational institutions including at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. He has published more than 50 research papers in journals such as Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. His latest publication is a co-edited book on sports sponsorship and branding published by Routledge as part of the World Association for Sport Management Book Series. He received several awards for his research including the Emerald Literati Award in 2020 for a research paper on social media marketing published in the International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship. He has also received more than US$400,000 in research grants. He is currently the Associate Editor for the journal Managing Sport and Leisure and the editorial board member of several academic journals.

Title: Teaching in English to non-native speakers: Misconceptions, Mistakes and Missed Opportunities

Abstract: Many universities in countries where English is not the native language have embarked on initiatives to use English as a medium of instruction so as to better prepare their students for the global workplace. The literature has suggested that there are many challenges including fear or discomfort in using the language and the tendency for students to switch back to their native language. Consequently, educators have suggested several strategies including providing a safe environment for students to use English during class and a strict adherence to using only English in class. In this presentation, I will share my experience in teaching in English to non-native speakers in Singapore and Taiwan. While I have adopted some of the suggested strategies in the literature, I also realised that there are caveats particularly when considering the differences across countries. Consequently, mistakes were made in both instruction and assessment. The presentation ends with some suggestions on what educators can do when teaching students in a non-native language. 

 

Assoc. Prof. Nattama Pongpairoj, 

 

Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Nattama Pongpairoj received Bachelor of Arts (English) (First-Class Honors) from Chulalongkorn University, Master of Arts (Linguistics) from The University of Oregon, and Ph.D. (Linguistics) from The University of York, UK. Her research interests include Applied Linguistics, specifically representations and processing in Second Language Acquisition. Nattama is currently an associate professor of the English as an International Language Program (EIL), Graduate School, Chulalongkorn University, a committee member of Applied Linguistics for Language Education Research Unit (ALLE), Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University, and Editor-in-Chief of Manusya Journal of Humanities, Chulalongkorn University. Some of her former positions include Vice Dean for Research Affairs, Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University; Head, Department of English, Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University, and Chairperson, Strategic Agenda Team: Humanities and Fine Arts, Thailand Science Research and Innovation (TSRI), Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation.

Title: To Avoid or Not to Avoid in Second Language Acquisition: Significance & Implications

Abstract: This talk underscores two opposing hypotheses on the (non-)avoidance phenomenon in Second Language Acquisition (SLA), i.e., the Avoidance Behavior Hypothesis (ABH) (Schachter 1974) and the Factors of Non-avoidance Hypothesis (Thiemtawan & Pongpairoj 2016). Based on the ABH, non-existence of L2 grammatical features as well as L1-L2 differences could cause avoidance among L2 learners. On the contrary, according to the FNAH, in the same scenario, it is not necessary that avoidance would occur due to some related factors. Three research studies, i.e., Thiamtawan & Pongpairoj (2016), Thiamtawan & Pongpairoj (2019), and Wang & Pongpairoj (2020), are raised to demonstrate that, not only avoidance but also non-avoidance could occur with the same linguistic features: It will be shown that L2 (non-)avoidance can be accounted for by a common construct. While Thiamtawan & Pongpairoj (2016) and Thiamtawan & Pongpairoj (2019) examined whether Ll Thai learners would avoid producing the English participial reduced relative clause structure (PRRC) and English inversions after copular verb phrases and/or long subjects and negative adverbs, respectively, Wang & Pongpairoj (2020) investigated L1 Chinese learners’ avoidance behaviour of English passive construction. The tasks used to measure the avoidance behaviors were a comprehension test to ensure learners’ knowledge of the investigated linguistic features, followed by indirect preference assessment tasks, e.g., a cloze test, a Thai-English translation test, and an indirect preference elicitation task. L1 Thai learners were required to demonstrate their preference between PRRCs and relative clauses (RCs) in Thiamtawan & Pongpairoj (2016), and their tendency to avoid or not to avoid the inversion structures after copular verb phrases and/or long subjects in Thiamtawan & Pongpairoj (2019). The L1 Chinese learners were supposed to show their preference of English actives or passives in Wang & Pongpairoj (2020). The results showed the L1 Thai learners’ tendency not to avoid the PRRC structure and the inversion structures following negative adverbs. The L1 Chinese learners were found not to avoid the inversion structures following negative adverbs. The findings could be accounted for by the FNAH, but not the ABH, as there were some possible factors involved with the L2 learners’ non-avoidance, i.e., the L2 learners familiarity with the non-avoided L2 structure, simplicity of the non-avoided structure, the nature of the tasks, as well as transfer of training. All the results signified that it is not always the case that L2 avoidance would occur due to non-existence or difficulties of the L2 features as claimed by the ABH. A common explanation is that L2 learners had a tendency not to avoid L2 structures due to some influential factors, in support of the FNAH. The findings on L2 non-avoidance behaviors yielded theoretical implications for SLA as well as pedagogical ones.
Keywords: (non-)avoidance, SLA, the Avoidance Behavior Hypothesis, the Factors of Non-avoidance Hypothesis
References: Schachter, J. (1974). An error in error analysis 1. Language Learning, 24(2), 205-214. Thiamtawan, S., & Pongpairoj, N. (2013). Avoidance of the use of English participial reduced relative clauses among L1 Thai learners. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 6(2), 12-34. Thiamtawan, S., & Pongpairoj, N. (2019). A study of L2 English inversion structures by L1 Thai learners. International Journal of Communication and Linguistic Studies, 17(1), 11-22. Wang, Y., & Pongpairoj, N. (2021). Avoidance of the English passive construction by L1 Chinese learners. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 14(1), 294-316.