Cover not available
Part of
Doing SLA Research with Implications for the Classroom: Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability
Edited by Robert M. DeKeyser and Goretti Prieto Botana
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 52] 2019
► pp. 83–106

Chapter 5
The roles of explicit instruction and guided practice in the proceduralization of a complex grammatical structure

| Kobe Gakuin University

This chapter reports a classroom-based experimental study focusing on the effects of providing metalinguistic explanation (ME) before asking learners to perform a practice activity involving story reconstruction on their acquisition of a grammatical structure. The task required learners to comprehend the oral narrative with the help of a written script and illustrations describing the story and then to reconstruct the story while referring to the illustrations and a list of keywords. Three instructional conditions were compared: the ME+Task where the learners received ME and then completed a story reconstruction task, the Task Only, where learners just completed the task, and the ME Only where they just received the ME. This chapter also considers the relevance of the study to classroom practice. It will provide suggestions for teaching limited-proficiency learners a complex grammatical structure. The chapter concludes with a consideration of the ecological validity and pedagogical implications of this study.

Keywords: explicit instruction, skill-learning theory, presentation-practice-production (PPP), grammar acquisition, text reconstruction
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Empirical study
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Design
    • Target structure
    • Treatment materials
      • Metalinguistic explanation (ME) sheets
      • Story reconstruction tasks
    • Treatment procedures
    • Testing materials
      • Error correction (EC) test
      • Story reconstruction (SR) tests
    • Coding and scoring
    • Statistical analyses
  • Results
    • Comparative results for the error correction (EC) tests
    • The results for the story reconstruction (SR) tests
  • Discussion
  • Pedagogical implications
  • Ecological validity of the current study
  • Setting
  • Instructional treatment
  • Measurement
  • Comparability of studies
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 7 March 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.52.05shi
References
Adams, R., & Newton, J.
(2009) TBLT in Asia: Constraints and opportunities. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 19, 1–17.Google Scholar
Brown, H. D.
(2007) Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D.
(1999) The grammar book. New York, NY: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M.
(1998) Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspective on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2007) Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Skill Acquisition Theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Doughty, C.
(1991) Second language instruction does make a difference. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(04), 431–469. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C., & Varela, E.
(1998) Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114–138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N.
(1994) Introduction: Implicit and explicit language learning – An overview. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of language (pp. 1–31). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gilabert, R.
(2007) Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. IRAL– International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 215–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Izumi, S., Bigelow, M., Fujiwara, M., & Fearnow, S.
(1999) Testing the output hypothesis: Effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 421–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S.
(1982) Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Li, S., Ellis, R., & Zhu, Y.
(2016) Task-based versus task-supported language instruction: An experimental study. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 205–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M.
(2007) Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han & E. Park (Eds.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27–44). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R.
(1993) Grammar and task-based methodology. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 123–167). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Hama, M.
(2014) The effects of task complexity and input frequency on the acquisition of the past counterfactual construction through recasts. Language Learning, 64(3), 615–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P.
(1997) Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 223–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samuda, V.
(2001) Guiding relationships betweem form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning teaching, and testing (pp. 119–140). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K.
(2004) Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shintani, N.
(2016) The role of input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Shintani, N., Ellis, R., & Suzuki, W.
(2014) Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(2009) Formal intervention and the development of proficiency: The role of explicit formation. In A. Benati (Ed.), Issues in second language proficiency (pp. 169–187). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Oikkenon, S.
(1996) Explanation versus structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(4), 495–510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Harris, Justin & Paul Leeming
2022. Speaking proficiency development in EFL classrooms: measuring the differential effect of TBLT and PPP teaching approaches. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0 DOI logo
Lee, Andrew H.
2021. The effects of proactive form-focused instruction and individual differences on second language acquisition. Language Teaching Research ► pp. 136216882110510 ff. DOI logo
Lloyd, Jackie S. & Andrew H. Lee
2023. The effects of various combinations of form-focused instruction techniques on the acquisition of English articles by second language learners of English. Language Teaching Research DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.