English Language Teaching in its Social Context

COMPREHENSION AND PRODUCTION STRATEGIES 85being trained to be obtained. The former is based on a five-step scale on which globalproficiency can be estimated (supplemented by plus scores for each numerical category) .Thelatter gives separate ratings for syntax, vocabulary, fluency, and other skill areas. In this way,the longitudinal development of the learners can be monitored through an examination ofthe profiles generated by the analytic markings scheme over several points in time.Higgs and Clifford (1 982) report that profiles of students at earlier points of instructioncan be used predictively to estimate the likely later gain of the candidates in question. Giventhe basic five-stcp scale, candidates whose grammar ratings were above or equal to theirratings in vocabulary or fluency tended to continue to progress and reach hgher performancelevels as they received more instruction. In other words, balanced analytic ratings or highergrammar predicted continued gain and capacity to profit from instruction. In contrast,students whose earlier profiles showed strong fluency and vocabulary skills did not manifestthe same degree of sustained improvement. Higgs and Clifford (1982) called these learners‘terminal 2’s’ (from the five-step scale), suggesting that the earlier profile was associated witha probable plateauing in achievement at around Level 2. It seemed as though the earlier fluencyand vocabulary gains comprised continued development, and may have been associated withfossilization. These learners corresponded, in some ways, to Schmidt’s Wes, since earliercommunicative effectiveness (and the higher fluency and vocabulary scores earlier ininstruction might be connected with a communicative orientation on the part of such learners)represented a short-term advantage which proved expensive in the longer run since it wasassociated with an interlanguage system which became less permeable. Once again, thesuggestion is that unless there is direct involvement of the underlying language system incommunication, it need not develop, even though communicative effectiveness does change.Theoretically-based concernsIn addition to these empirically motivated concerns over the usefulness of communicationstrategies, there are somc more theoretically-based worries. First of all, there are what mightbe termed logical criticisms of the viewpoint. For example, it is difficult to imagine exactlyhow such strategies can leave a trace. It is likely that interesting operations will occur whenachievement strategies are used to cope with communicative problems whose solution willrequire some adaptation of the underlying systcm. But in such cases thc need to solveunforeseen problems will ensure that thc lion’s share of cognitive resources will be directcdto conveying meanings. As a result, it is not easy to see how memory of what exactly hasworked can be effectively retaincd for the next occasion when the strategy may be useful,sincc this outcome would require the spare capacity to fumble towards such a solution andsimultaneously to monitor its nature and its effect. It seems unlikely that the conflicting callson limitcd resources will allow this with any dependability.VanPattcn (1 990) makes a similarpoint in relation to comprehension, where he demonstrates that syntactic and semanticproccssing seem to conflict as far as attentional resources are concerned, and that attentionspan is too limited to allow both to be emphasized simultaneously. One can only assume thatspeaking, as part of the interaction, will pose significantly greater problems for learning.More generally, for the use of communication strategies to work to foster progresssystematically, it would be necessary to show not simply that they leave a trace, but also thatthe use of such strategies has some cumulative building potential. For if SLA research hasdemonstrated anything, it is that dcvclopmental sequenccs have considerable importance.It would be necessary, therefore, to show that the progressive improvisations which solvecommunication problems build upon one another, and are not isolated chance manipulationsof language elements in one restricted area, but have system-developing potential, and push