日本大学歯学部紀要 51，1‒5，2023

Using Literature as Space to Navigate Cognition inSecond Language Acquisition：
Intentions, Successes, Challenges, andReconceptualization of the Course
Aaron J. Armstrong
Nihon University School of Dentistry
Abstract

This paper reviews a recent English course where literature was used for Second Language
Acquisition (SLA) of academic discourse skills. Language learners (LLs) in a required English
course, whose primary area of study is not English, can exhibit a wide range of proficiency
levels when entering the acquisition process. This leads to specific challenges in delivering acourse that is pragmatically useful and accessible to all learners. This review will firstsummarize the intentions of the approach, before highlighting the successes. The paper willthen go over some of the challenges that were met, followed by a speculation into their reasons
with possible improvements on future course design and delivery.

Key words : interactional competence, multilingual, course design, successes, challenges

Personal Statement
If I were to promptly decide which academic communication skills are most valuable in theSLA of academic discourse skills, I would choose the understanding of the language structure, asolid grasp of the language style, and a sense of how to organize ideas in a logical direction.
These three aspects of academic communication—structure, style, and direction—can only beascertained if we understand that there is a shared space to position our cognitive choices
within. Language acquisition, then, requires a LL to not only see themselves in the language
they are learning, but also to know where they are within the interactive communicative space.
Language is not only a tool to make private thoughts public and visible (Carsten, & Dai, 2021),
but it serves to answer questions related to navigation, as stated by Hutchins, “Given that weare where we are, where shall we proceed in a particular way for a particular time?” (Hutchins,1995). For this purpose, for this shared space which we can navigate within, to and from,
communication becomes the interactive continuum of turn taking and repositioning of cognitionand literature becomes the tool to provide such a shared space.

日本大学歯学部〒101-8310

外国語分野（英語）

東京都千代田区神田駿河台 1 − 8 −13（受理：2023年10月 6 日）

DepartmentofForeign

Languages(English),

Nihon

University School of Dentistry
1-8-13 Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8310, Japan─ 1 ─日本大学歯学部紀要 51，1‒5，2023

Introduction
In this research paper I will review my personal approach to using literature as a space fornavigation as cognition (Hutchins, 1995) and illustrate the importance of structure, style, anddirection in academic communication. It will review the course scopes to activate improved SLA;
it will highlight some clear successes as to the choices made in course delivery and reveal wherethe course implementation was unable to equally meet the wider range of English proficiency
levels of these LLs. In the final section of the paper, I will look at some of the responsive
modifications taking place with my current cohort of LLs to help reduce the range of English
proficiency levels moving forward, which in turn will prompt a future discussion of how wemight expand our realm of assessment to make use of a more up to date socially contextualized
definition of language (Salaberry & Burch, 2021).

ScopesThe primary aim of this course was to build a productive English discourse around text
analysis. To reveal from the text, elements of theme, character, action, and setting, a variety ofrelated lectures on these topics, as well as online practice were provided. In class LLs wereasked to work in groups organized by theme, and to formulate their individual academic
discourse skills, involving structure, style, and direction. LLs were asked to work on a different
theme related open-response question or prompt each day and find evidence in the text tosupport their opinions. Working in groups allowed them to provide one another with the support
they needed when interacting in a multilingual fashion, which allowed them to better analyze
the text closely and find the information they were looking for.
As the background, in the previous course delivered at the same level, the learners wereallowed to choose their own text. It was not a bad practice until the limitations began to emerge
when the wider range of theme, character, and setting derailed most of the attempts to share anexperience of close analysis. This in turn provided little opportunity for group work and in-depthclass discussion. The result was a high rate of isolated students, relying on translations over theuseful actual language interaction and practice.
To mitigate the lack of choice of text, a graded reader of Goerge Orwell 1984 was chosen, as itprovided a wide variety of accessible themes that could potentially suit the varying interests ofthe students. Themes such as information control, personal freedom, community pressure,personal relationships, love, death, rebellion, coercion, surveillance, and many more are a part ofthe book. Using these themes, my goal was to provide the students with a self-reflexive classexploration so that they could build personal connections with those themes, as well as with one
another, thus providing a content loaded space to interact multilingually and share in theexperience of interacting in academic English.
─ 2 ─

Using Literature as a Space to Navigate Cognition in Second Language Acquisition：Intentions, Successes, Challenges, and Reconceptualization of the Course

At the beginning of the course, I made online grammar reviews available. Those offered ascaffolded practice of the grammar structures, intended for the students to practice on their owntime. For most of the course, as the students worked on open-response worksheets, where they
responded to writing prompts around the text elements of theme, character, and setting; they
were asked to choose from those elements a research direction and utilize the academic
discourse skills of structure, style, and direction to form written responses to the daily prompts.
As they worked, we exchanged ideas both within the class and individually. Guidance wasalways available to them, and the blackboard was used for any larger ideas, questions, orproblems they encountered.

Targeted Successes and Challenges
Did choosing one book have a positive effect on the practice? The research confirms thatdenying the choice of a text to the group provided the shared space, where they could work
together on exchanging different ideas related to one text. They worked in small groups, editing
each other’s answers, using the text together. They were asked to work together but use
different lines from the text to complete their work. Yet occasionally, usually the same specificstudents, would write the same thing, with minimal attention to providing fully formedsentences. Unfortunately, a good many of the students seem to have failed to read past the first
five pages. For these students, I chose a less complex level of understanding of the text
requirements and doubled down on looking for content in the text to respond better to the dailyprompt.
Did the students benefit from the written practice? A good number of students showed anincreased level of achievement in writing. There had been a considerable difference in thestructure of their sentences over the weeks; many students were excited to be able to see theirformal language style improving, proving that their literacy changed in a positive way during
the course. The content scope of their ideas also improved. With each week passing by, there
was a functional repetition and experimentation apparent in their responses; there was certainly
an increase in the proper use of the discourse markers, conjunctions, and vocabulary. The ability
to create written discourse involving evidence and personal opinions was also improved.
Did the open-response worksheets assist in developing text analysys skills? The student
response was varied. Many students were still at the stage of approaching the activity usingtranslation methods. Although I provided time to students to ask questions and showed many
examples, for some students, it was still quite difficult to connect with the process of reading atext to gather information about theme, character, and setting. It is difficult to conclude whether
this was the evidence of inability or disinterest.
Did the students build personal connections with one another around the themes of the text?
Yes, students were seen both in class and around the campus reading and talking together─ 3 ─

日本大学歯学部紀要 51，1‒5，2023

actively using the text. I can assume that they were reading and translating it from the target
language, exchanging information, and assisting one another in a multitude of ways. However,were they discussing and building personal connections with a theme, using English; it seems
this would be unlikely outside of the class as unless they were responding formally to thequestions I posed in class, or sharing their written work with the class, they mainly spoke about
the text in Japanese during the class.
Did the course build a productive English discourse around theme, character, and setting? A
majority of the students were able to express their opinions on those elements of the text withrelative comfort. The end of course assessment including eight questions conducted as aninterview; it was conducted by most of the groups to completion. Individual grading was doneon the spot. A small number of students did not perform well enough to earn the final grades
for the course; however, this does not indicate their inability to write in a formal way but rather
their lack of confidence and ability to recall their work vocally.

Discussions and Conclusions
So, why does this troubling state of proficiency persist, and what actions can be taken with
beginner language learners to rectify this problem? One method I have already used is choosing
a textbook that effectively provides students with an iterative, or scaffolded, experience of theskills they need to acquire and use for their higher education research. The text chosen is theBBC Speak Out 3 rd edition B 1 published in 2022 by Pearson Education Limited. There areclear set goals that align with the elements of the close analysis they are expected to practice inthe course. Through this text, the students should be able to not only familiarize themselveswith the academic elements of structure, style, and direction, but use these new tools while theyshift their focus from reading and comprehension, and to the interactive communication requiredin the next course.
Let us ask this question though, when a student's success is seen only in their ability to
adeptly practice written communication, if they still find true interaction with peers difficult,have we succeeded? Again, language is not only a tool to make private thoughts public andvisible (Roever & Dai, 2021), but it serves to provide a style of ephemeral navigation, sociallyspeaking, and discussing ideas of where we are, where shall we proceed, and in what way shallwe proceed (Hutchins, 1995). Authoring one’s internal thoughts is a creative act of language andan act of navigation in that language (Hutchins, 1995) Should we not try as hard as we can tofoster this ability in the language learners? What classroom tasks and assessments can wedevelop, which would move us away from mere performance and elicitation and move us toward
an alignment with the tenants of interactive competence?
In the last 30 years, the definition of language has moved, and we need to move with it.
Moreover, our current testing models are unable to assess a definition of language that includes
─ 4 ─

Using Literature as a Space to Navigate Cognition in Second Language Acquisition：Intentions, Successes, Challenges, and Reconceptualization of the Course

elements of turn taking, sequence, preference organization, repair, and non-verbal elements.
Thus, my final question is whether we are effectively capable of adapting to this new sociallycontextualized definition of language (Salaberry & Burch, 2021) and would this adaptation
provide a greater service to our students.
References

Chalhoub-Deville, M (2016, April 30) Context/task-centered interactional second/foreign language
testing constructs and validation [Conference presentation]. Symposium on the Teaching andTesting of L 2 Interactional Competence, Rice university, Houston, Texas, United States [Video].
YouTube. https：//www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHvy_aGcAOk&list=PLk 5 U9448SpzpYcl_yCLK
dRmQC 0 BsdOzC_&index=12&t=1566s
Clare, A., Wilson, JJ. (2022). BBC Speak out ( 3 rd ed.) Pearson Education Limited
Hammond, M., & Wellington, J. (2013). Research methods： The key concepts. Routledge.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. The MIT Press.
McAteer, M. (2013). Action Research in Education. SAGE Publications, Limited.
Roever, C., Dai, W. D. (2021). Reconceptualizing interaction competence for Language Testing. In
Salaberry, M. R., & Burch, A. R. (Eds.). Assessing speaking in context： Expanding theconstruct and its applications. Multilingual Matters.
Salaberry, M. R., & Burch, A. R. (2021). Assessing speaking in context： Expanding the constructand its application. In Salaberry, M. R., & Burch, A. R. (Eds.). Assessing speaking in context：
Expanding the construct and its applications. Multilingual Matters.
Orwell, G. (2003). 1984： Penguin Books： reprinted in Person English Graded Readers 2018.
Waring, Z. H. (2016, April 29-May 1 ) Developing interactional competence with limited
linguistic resources [Conference presentation]. Symposium on the Teaching and Testing ofL 2 Interactional Competence, Rice university, Houston, Texas, United States
YouTube. https：//www.youtube.com/watch?v=gctqe05mDNE&t=724s─ 5 ─[Video].