Teaching EFL Learners Shadowing for Listening

Developing learners' bottom-up skills

Yo Hamada

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9781138935983
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317387190
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Education General
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

Shadowing, an active and highly cognitive technique for EFL listening skill development, in which learners track heard speech and vocalize it simultaneously, is gradually becoming recognized. However, there remain a lot of mysteries and misunderstandings about it. This book uncovers shadowing in terms of theory and practice. This book cements shadowing as a separate technique from other similar techniques such as Elicited Imitation, Mirroring, and simple repetition, and provides ample empirical data to explain the function of Shadowing. It also elaborates on how Shadowing should be used in terms of materials, procedure, and learners' psychology, which would aid in instructors' use of Shadowing in teaching. A guide on a method effective in improving learners' bottom-up listening skills, this book will certainly prove useful to English Language learners and instructors in their linguistic pursuits.

1 What is shadowing?

Chapter 1 will answer the following four questions.

1 Where has shadowing come from?

2 What is shadowing?

3 How different is shadowing from other similar techniques?

4 How does shadowing contribute to listening?

Chapter 1 covers a brief history of shadowing, a definition of shadowing, and the mechanism of shadowing. In the history of shadowing, we will see how shadowing originated with studies in selective attention and then became popular in the field of simultaneous interpreting before being co-opted for EFL teaching. We will then define shadowing by disambiguating its meaning from the similar techniques of repetition, mirroring and elicited imitation. In the mechanism of shadowing, we will start with an overview of listening processes, referring to working memory, and will focus on the bottom-up processes, especially that of phoneme perception. Since the definite mechanism of shadowing has not been fully established, the mechanism will be discussed from several possible explanations. We will also compare L1 shadowing and EFL shadowing, and in doing so, reveal the secret of why shadowing in EFL contexts benefits learners.

1.1 History of shadowing

1.1.1 Where does it come from?

The concept of shadowing came into existence in the 1950s, in the domain of selective attention (Cherry, 1953). In the following decades, shadowing was used in the early stage training of simultaneous interpreters. Tamai (1992) was the first to publish an academic paper on the use of shadowing in EFL learning contexts. Then, the next decade saw the development of shadowing as an EFL teaching technique in Japan, and recently it has been gradually spreading in Asian EFL contexts.

Cherry’s experiment is famous for the cocktail party effect. Imagine a situation in a party; your friends are talking about your favorite music band behind you. You are just enjoying yourself alone. Though surrounded by various noisy sounds, the conversation about your favorite band will somehow keep coming into your ears. This is an example of the cocktail party effect. In Cherry’s (1953) experiment, the participants were engaged in the dichotic listening task, in which two different messages were presented but one for one ear and the other for the other ear via headphones. The participants were asked to repeat the heard message aloud simultaneously to show they are actually attending to one message. This process is now called shadowing. Interestingly, they were not aware of the message presented in their unattended ear and they could not clearly remember the message they shadowed, due to the fact that participants focus more on vocalization than comprehension. Waugh and Norman’s research yielded the same result (1965, cited in Lambert, 1988). This may sound odd because they actually “listened” but did not recall what they heard. In other words, these results suggest that during shadowing we direct our attention, whether consciously or subconsciously, not to the meanings of the incoming information but to its superficial features.

1.1.2 Shadowing for interpreters

Shadowing is relatively well known in the field of interpreting, because it has been commonly used in the early stage of interpreter training to learn how to listen and speak simultaneously (from one language into the same language) before attempting to interpret (Lambert, 1988, 1991, 1992). Because the cognitive load when working on simultaneous interpretation is quite heavy (Tommola and Hyona, 1990), beginner interpreters first practice shadowing in their first language, then move on to simultaneous interpretation.

Using Lambert’s (1988) description of the activities involved in simultaneous translation (p. 378), we can compare the general procedure for simultaneous translation and the one for shadowing to see why beginner interpreters practice shadowing before moving on to simultaneous translation practice.

Simultaneous interpretation

1 to receive part of the sentence (chunk);

2 to begin translating and conveying chunk 1;

3 at the same time as vocalizing chunk 1, chunk 2 is also processed auditorily and stored until chunk 1 has been dealt with.

Shadowing

1 to receive part of the sentence (chunk);

2 to begin conveying chunk 1;

3 at the same time as vocalizing chunk 1, chunk 2 is also processed auditorily and stored until chunk 1 has been dealt with.

When interpreting, the translator holds chunk 2 in an echoic or phonemic store until chunk 1 is transmitted. While producing the translation of chunk 1, the interpreter continuously monitors his/her output for its correctness (Gerver, 1974, cited in Lambert, 1988). When shadowing, the procedure is similar except for the phase of production of the translation of chunk 1. Both of the procedures are similar, and shadowing is like a “non-translation” version of simultaneous interpreting. This is why shadowing was “imported” smoothly from interpreter trainings to EFL education.

Some L1 studies have further examined these actions in terms of cognitive process. In the 1970s and 1980s, two studies compared cognitive processes of the three actions: pure listening, interpreting, and shadowing. Gerver (1974, cited in Lambert, 1988) analyzed nine trainee interpreters’ performance in the three conditions, and found the listening group showed the highest comprehension scores (58 percent), and simultaneous interpretation group followed (51 percent), while the shadowing group did not even achieve 50 percent (43 percent). Lambert (1988) adds support to this finding. Analyzing 16 interpreters’ performance, the order was the same as in Gerver’s (1974) study: listening group (87.5 percent), simultaneous interpretation group (75.65 percent), and shadowing group (68.13 percent). Lambert suggests that the listening group can devote their full attention to the processing task and do not share attention between multiple tasks as in the cases of shadowing and simultaneous interpreting. Cherry’s (1953) research reveals that deeper processing occurs during listening than in simultaneous interpretation and shadowing.

These results support the basic theoretical underpinnings of shadowing that attention shifts from comprehension to sounds when working on shadowing and that simultaneous interpreting and shadowing are mentally overwhelming tasks, compared to listening. Also, when comparing simultaneous interpreting with shadowing, shadowing involves less comprehension. The cognitive process of shadowing is to be more discussed later in this Chapter 1.

We have briefly reviewed the historical beginning of shadowing in the light of selective attention and simultaneous translation training. To approach the topic from a slightly different perspective, we would like to delineate the common aspects that successful language learners and interpreters share. Lambert (1991) enumerates five essentials for success as an interpreter trainee (p. 586).

1 profound knowledge of active and passive languages and cultures;

2 ability to grasp rapidly and convey the essential meaning of what is being said;

3 ability to project information with confidence, coupled with a good voice;

4 wide general knowledge and interests, and a willingness to acquire new information;

5 ability to work as part of a team.

The cognitive processes of simultaneous interpreting and shadowing account for why shadowing was “imported” to language learning, and research has exclusively focused on these processes. The features above have not been empirically supported but are probably factors that bridge simultaneous interpreting and shadowing. For example, profound knowledge of the target language and culture is essential in understanding what people say. While comprehending another person’s utterance smoothly is mediated through having wide general knowledge, interests, and sensitivity to new information. Indeed this is the basis of communication. Next, just as interpreters need to be confident, confidence also plays an essential role in language learners’ motivation (Clément, Dörnyei, and Noels, 1994). Through shadowing training, learners will eventually grow their confidence in listening, which should ultimately contribute to their confidence in L2 communication and motivation. In addition to the similarity of cognitive process between the shadowing in interpreter training and the shadowing for language learning, these additional features may account for the smooth “import” of shadowing for interpreters to shadowing for EFL shadowing.

1.2 Definition

1.2.1 Shadowing

Please first imagine the word shadow, the dark shape that something makes between the object and the light. This may help you understand what shadowing is like in the case of language learning. In L1 contexts, Lambert (1992, p. 266) describes shadowing as “a paced, auditory tracking task which involves the immediate vocalization of auditorily presented stimuli, i.e. word-for-word repetition, in the same language, parrot-style, of a message presented through headphones.” In EFL contexts, Tamai (1997), one of the first well-known researchers who started shadowing research in Japanese EFL contexts, defines shadowing as an active and highly cognitive activity in which learners track the speech that they hear and vocalize it as clearly as possible while simultaneously listening. Since this book focuses on EFL shadowing, whenever the word shadowing appears, it means EFL shadowing from here onward unless specifically defined in other ways such as L1 shadowing.

Bearing the definition in mind, let’s see how shadowing has been variously referred to. Shadowing is used as an umbrella term, referring to the repetition of “all or part of what the speaker has said” (Rost and Wilson, 2013, p.114), so there are several variations. The first ones stem from L1 shadowing; phrase shadowing (also called delayed shadowing) and phonemic shadowing (Norman, 1976, cited in Lambert, 1992). The time lag between the input and the output draws the line between the two. In phrase shadowing, one repeats what one hears slightly behind the input, while in phonemic shadowing, one repeats each sound simultaneously. The time lag influences the depth the shadowed message is processed to. Grammatical analysis of the input can occur in phrase shadowing but not in phonemic shadowing. The amount of recall of the shadowed information is larger in phrase shadowing, which implies that deeper processing occurs in phrase shadowing (Lambert, 1992). We have to be aware that the common ground where these arguments are made is in L1 shadowing and the case does not directly apply to EFL shadowing.

Expanding the interpretation slightly wider, shadowing varieties are briefly summarized in Table 1.1. These variations cover EFL shadowing as well as L1 shadowing, and application and adjustment of shadowing technique has received more attention than careful examination of the effectiveness of each type of shadowing in EFL contexts. Complete shadowing and phonemic shadowing mean the same. Mumbling is also basically the same but with smaller voice, so it is used when learners are not confident in shadowing or when a classroom contains so many learners that hearing the model audio is disturbed by other people’s voice. In selective shadowing, learners shadow only selected words instead of shadowing everything they hear. For example, teachers can tell learners to shadow only content words or key words. This does not sound very difficult, but selective shadowing is much more challenging than it sounds. Parallel reading allows learners to read aloud the target scripts while shadowing. In content shadowing, learners are told to shadow and think about the meanings of what they are shadowing simultaneously. Interactive shadowing and conversational shadowing share the same concept that learners shadow in a conversational style. When I use interactive shadowing, learners shadow some parts of the partner’s utterance and add questions, while in conversational shadowing, learners have more freedom, so sometimes shadow one sentence and sometimes a few words of a sentence, and add questions.

As explained above, the terminology shadowing in classroom seems to cover a wide range of shadowing-related activities and include some activities that go beyond the territory of shadowing. For example, clinging to the original definition, parallel reading poses a question because learners are supposed to shadow without looking at texts. Interactive shadowing and conversational shadowing also raise a question because shadowing does not involve interaction since interaction would potentially ruin the benefit of shadowing. In essence, shadowing requires simultaneous repetition, so in this book I define shadowing as the act of repeating simultaneously what one hears as accurately as possible.

Table 1.1 Examples of shadowing varieties (Kadota and Tamai, 2004; Lambert, 1992; Murphey, 2001; Norman, 1976)

Name	Procedure
Complete shadowing	Learners shadow everything speakers say
Selective shadowing	Learners select only certain words and phrases to shadow
Parallel reading	Learners shadow while reading the text
Content shadowing	Learners concentrate on both shadowing and the meaning
Mumbling	Learners silently shadow the incoming sounds without text
Interactive shadowing	Selective shadowing, and adds questions and comments to make it more natural and show more involvement on the part of the learners
Conversational shadowing	Learners repeat conversation partner’s words
Phrase shadowing	Learners shadow phrase by phrase with a slight delay
Phonemic shadowing	Learners shadow each sound as soon as they hear

Source: Based on Hamada, 2016b.

1.2.2 Similar techniques to shadowing

As was mentioned above, the terminology shadowing has been used as an umbrella term, and it has been “arranged” in various ways. This section, 1.2.2, will lay out the specifics of a teaching methodology that features shadowing as its central component. Because shadowing is often confused with other s...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• List of abbreviations
• 1 What is shadowing?
• 2 General effectiveness of shadowing
• 3 Towards more effective shadowing
• 4 Shadowing in and out of the classroom
• 5 Shadowing and teaching paradigm
• 6 Limitations and future studies
• 7 Q&A about shadowing
• 8 Concluding remarks
• References
• Index