Buradasınız

THE ACQUISITION OF ENGLISH RELATIVE CLAUSES BY IRANIAN EFL LEARNERS: THE IMPACT OF PROCESSING INSTRUCTION & MEANINGFUL OUTPUT-BASED INSTRUCTION

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Abstract (2. Language): 
Studies on the learning of grammatical points have suggested the effective role of types of instruction. The current study aims at investigating the impact of Processing Instruction (PI), an input-based approach to grammar instruction introduced by Van Patten (1996), and Meaningful Output–based Instruction (MOBI), on the Acquisition of English Relative Clauses. The participants consisted of 60 intermediate Iranian EFL learners in two Treatment groups of (PI) and (MOBI) and one Control group(C). The researchers used a quasi-experimental design with a pretest- treatment-posttest sequence. As for the assessment, a Grammaticality Judgment Test (GJT) was employed, focusing on the sentence level. Experimental groups received the same input and material for the instruction but received meaningful oral and written input or output-based exercises. The relative effects of the two approaches (PI and MOBI) on the linguistic development, i.e. acquisition of relative clauses, of learners were analyzed. Having compared the results of group one and two, PI and MOBI, the researchers found that there is a statistically significant difference between the pretest & posttest of Experimental groups. Processing Instruction had more influence on the correct selection of grammatical sentences in comparison with Meaningful Output-based Instruction. Therefore, we can draw the conclusion that PI can facilitate the acquisition process of English relative clauses. In addition, comparing the results of Control group with that of Experimental groups also confirms the previous findings; besides, the participants of Control group could not outperform those of Experimental groups. However, the experimental groups could do better than the control group.
210-215

REFERENCES

References: 

Allen, L. Q. (2000). Form-meaning connections and the French causative: An experiment in processing
instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 69-84.
Benati, A. (2001). A comparative study of the effects of processing instruction and out-put based instruction on
the acquisition of the Italian future tense. Language Teaching Research, Volume: 5, Issue: 2.
Collentine, J. (1998). Processing instruction and the subjunctive. Hispania, 81, 576587.
DeKeyser, R., & Sokalski, K. (1996). The differential role of comprehension and production practice. Language
Learning, 46, 613- 642.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: OUP.
Ellis, R. (1999). Input-based approaches to teaching grammar. A review of classroom- oriented research. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 64-80.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: OUP.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (1), 83-107.
Erlam, R. (2003). Evaluating the relative effectiveness of structured-input and output-based instruction in
foreign language learning: Results from an experimental study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25,
559-582.
Lee, J. G., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communicative language teaching happen. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nagata, N. (1998a). Input vs. output practice in educational software for second language acquisition.
Language Learning & Technology, 1 (2), 23-40.
Nagata, N. (1998b). The relative effectiveness of production and comprehension practice in second language
acquisition. Computer Assisted Language learning, 11(2), 153-177.
Salaberry, M. R. (1997). The role of input and output practice in second language acquisition. Canadian Modern
Language Journal, 53, 422-451.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In
J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: OUP.
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755-803.
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in second language
acquisition, 15, 225-243.
VanPatten , B., & Wong, W. (2004).Processing instruction and the French causative : Another replication. In B.
VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 97-118). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com