Differentiating Grammar Instruction for Diverse Grammatical Features
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
An intense debate concerning the efficacy of grammar instruction has precluded intensive examination of varied grammar-focused pedagogical techniques. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to holistically examine different types of grammar-based instruction (explicit vs. implicit) and different types of morphosyntactic features. For this quasi-experimental study, three beginner English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes were selected from a small university in South Korea (N = 102). Group 1 (n = 32) was provided with explicit emphasis of semantic concepts (images); Group 2 (n = 29) was provided with implicit emphasis of grammatical form (sentence examples); and Group 3 (n = 41) was provided with explicit emphasis of grammatical form (sentence examples and explanation). Results suggest that the complexity of form/meaning relationships must be matched to learner proficiency levels when designing explicit instruction. Less proficient learners may benefit from conscious investigation of more simplistic features, such as the lexical plural, which have a one-to-one relationship between form and meaning. Implicit enhancement of curricula may be effective for features more cognitively complex than the learner’s proficiency level. Implicit curricula allow learners to form general hypotheses about grammatical features which are cognitively less burdensome.
Abstract
An intense debate concerning the efficacy of grammar instruction has precluded intensive examination of varied grammar-focused pedagogical techniques. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to holistically examine different types of grammar-based instruction (explicit vs. implicit) and different types of morphosyntactic features. For this quasi-experimental study, three beginner English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes were selected from a small university in South Korea (N = 102). Group 1 (n = 32) was provided with explicit emphasis of semantic concepts (images); Group 2 (n = 29) was provided with implicit emphasis of grammatical form (sentence examples); and Group 3 (n = 41) was provided with explicit emphasis of grammatical form (sentence examples and explanation). Results suggest that the complexity of form/meaning relationships must be matched to learner proficiency levels when designing explicit instruction. Less proficient learners may benefit from conscious investigation of more simplistic features, such as the lexical plural, which have a one-to-one relationship between form and meaning. Implicit enhancement of curricula may be effective for features more cognitively complex than the learner’s proficiency level. Implicit curricula allow learners to form general hypotheses about grammatical features which are cognitively less burdensome.
참고문헌 (22)
- Bitchener, J., "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), pp.191~205 (2005)
- Brown, R., "A first language" (1973), Harvard University Press
- Chomsky, N., "The logical structure of linguistic theory" (1975), Plenum
- Chomsky, N., "Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht" (1981), Foris
- Chomsky, N., "Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use" (1986), Praeger
- DeKeyser, R. M., "What makes learning second‐language grammar difficult? A review of issues", Language Learning, 55(S1), pp.1~25 (2005)
- Dulay, H. C., "Natural sequences in child language acquisition", Language Learning, 24(1), pp.37~53 (1974)
- Dulay, H. C., "Developmental Psycholinguistics (Monograph Series on Language and Linguistics)", pp.209~233 (1975), Georgetown University Press
- Ferris, D. R., "The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime…?)", Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), pp.49~62 (2004)
- Izumi, S., "Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, pp.541~577 (2002)
- Keenan, E., "Noun phrase accessibility and Universal Grammar", Linguistic Inquiry, 8, pp.63~99 (1977)
- Krashen, S. D., "The natural approach" (1983), Alemany Press
- Long, M. H., "Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition", pp.15~41 (1998), Cambridge University Press
- Norris, J.M., "Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis", Language Learning, 50(3), pp.417~528 (2000)
- Pienemann, M., "Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory" (2005), John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Willy A. Renandya, "Essential Factors Affecting EFL Learning Outcomes", 영어교육, 68(4), pp.23~41 (2013), 한국영어교육학회
- Spada, N., "Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature : A meta-analysis", Language Learning, 60(2), pp.263~308 (2010)[DOI]
- Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46(2), pp.327~369 (1996)
- Truscott, J., "The case for"the case against grammar correction in L2writing classes" : A response to Ferris", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), pp.111~122 (1999)
- Van Beuningen, C. G., "Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing", Language Learning, 62(1), pp.1~41 (2012)
- Williams, J., "Focus on form in communicative language teaching : Research findings and the classroom teacher", TESOL Journal, 4(4), pp.12~16 (1995)
- Williams, J., "Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition", pp.139~155 (1998), Cambridge University Press