Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Explicit vs. implicit instruction.
Статті в журналах з теми "Explicit vs. implicit instruction"
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Explicit vs. implicit instruction".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
Almeida, Tiago, Ana Cristina Silva, and João Rosa. "Invented spelling intervention programmes: Comparing explicit and implicit instructions." Análise Psicológica 39, no. 2 (November 30, 2021): 229–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.14417/ap.1848.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study aims to compare the effectiveness of two invented spelling intervention programs, one with explicit instruction of graph-phonetics matches and another based on questioning and reflection on the graph-phonetic correspondences (implicit instructions). Ninety pre-school children, whose invented spellings use conventional letters unconventionally to represent sounds, were allocated to three groups, two experimental and one control. All groups were equivalent in age, intelligence, letter knowledge, and phonological awareness. We manipulated the type of instructions (implicit vs. explicit) between the pre- and post-tests in two experimental groups where children participated in an intervention programme of invented spelling. Children who participated in the implicit intervention programme showed a significant improvement in the number of correct letters mobilized in their spelling and phonemic awareness compared with children of control and explicit instruction group. Children from explicit instruction group showed significant more improvements than the children from the control group. These results suggest that questioning and reflection applied to invented spelling programmes seems to enhance a more significant knowledge about the relations between the oral and written code.
2
Gardaoui, Nasser, and Bouhadiba Farouk. "The Effects of Two Grammar Teaching Options on Learning Complex Grammatical Structures." SMART MOVES JOURNAL IJELLH 3, no. 1 (May 17, 2017): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.24113/ijellh.v3i1.325.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract This study compared the relative effectiveness of two instructional options -explicit instruction (EI) in conjunction with input enhancement (IE) vs. IE alone- on students’ learning of tense and grammatical aspect in the Algerian EFL situation. The treatment conditions were implemented with thirty-eight young adult EFL learners in two intact classes at the university level. The first group received instruction through input enhancement only, while the second group was exposed to explicit instruction prior to input enhancement. All participants had to participate in a pretest and a posttest. The tests consisted of three tasks: (1) a grammaticality judgment task and (2) a written gap-filling task, and (3) a picture description task. The results ‘descriptive results indicated that the EI + IE group outperformed the IE group while the statistical analysis (Anova) revealed that the instructional effect did not amount to statistically significant learning gains. These limited findings imply that, pedagogically, combining implicit and explicit instructional treatments is a better choice for teachers than focussing on implicit and less intrusive techniques in grammar classes.
3
LICHTMAN, KAREN. "Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners?" Journal of Child Language 43, no. 3 (February 26, 2016): 707–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0305000915000598.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractChildren are thought to learn second languages (L2s) using primarily implicit mechanisms, in contrast to adults, who primarily rely on explicit language learning. This difference is usually attributed to cognitive maturation, but adults also receive more explicit instruction than children, which may influence their learning strategies. This study crosses instruction condition with age, teaching forty children aged 5;3 to 7;11 and forty adults an artificial mini-language under implicit or explicit training conditions. Participants produced novel sentences and judged sentence grammaticality equally well in either condition, but both children and adults in the explicit training condition developed greater awareness of the mini-language's structures – and greater awareness was associated with better performance for both age groups. Results show that explicit instruction affects children and adults in the same way, supporting the hypothesis that age differences in implicit vs. explicit L2 learning are not exclusively caused by maturation, but also influenced by instruction.
4
Glaser, Karen. "The Neglected Combination: A Case for Explicit-Inductive Instruction in Teaching Pragmatics in ESL." TESL Canada Journal 30, no. 7 (February 20, 2014): 150. http://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i7.1158.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
A substantial part of interlanguage pragmatics (ILP) research has contrasted ex- plicit and implicit teaching designs, generally finding that explicit approaches— those featuring metapragmatic rule provision—are more effective than their implicit counterparts, which are characterized by the absence of metapragmatic information. A second dichotomy used to characterize instructional designs, that of deductive vs. inductive approaches, has received somewhat less attention. Con- cerned with the sequencing of the instruction rather than the criterion of whether or not to provide rules, this concerns the question of whether to choose (deductive) rules or (inductive) language use as the starting point of the instruction. Although the two dichotomies are interrelated, they are often unjustifiably merged, with the labels deductive and explicit, on the one hand, and inductive and implicit, on the other, being used interchangeably. This article illustrates the reasons for this oversimplification and argues that the resulting focus on the contrast of explicit-deductive and implicit-inductive designs has led to overlooking a third possible constellation: the explicit-inductive framework. Adopting a classroom perspective, the article further attempts to point out the advantages that this neglected combination can have for the teaching and learning of pragmatics in ESL.
5
Lacabex, Esther Gomez, and Francisco Gallardo-del-Puerto. "Explicit phonetic instruction vs. implicit attention to native exposure: phonological awareness of English schwa in CLIL." International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 58, no. 4 (November 26, 2020): 419–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0079.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractThe present study aims at determining whether instruction in the form of explicit phonetic training and of implicit exposure to native input impacted Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) students’ phonological awareness of the occurrence of English schwa in unstressed syllables of content words (bacon). Four intact CLIL groups were administered a perception task immediately before and after an intervention period of one month in which two groups underwent explicit instruction on the incidence of reduced vowels versus full vowels in English disyllabic words while another group was exposed to native input in their CLIL sessions. A fourth CLIL group with neither explicit intervention nor native teacher input served as control group. All four groups tended to judge both schwas and full vowels as correct in the pre-test, indicating that they were not knowledgeable of the general pattern of vowel reduction occurrence in unstressed syllables in English prior to intervention. In the post-test, the three experimental groups significantly improved their ability to identify full vowels as incorrect, the groups receiving explicit instruction exhibiting higher gains than the group which was implicitly exposed to native input.
6
Vasheghani Farahani, Mehrdad, Omid Rezaei, and Milad Masoomzadeh. "Teaching implicit vs explicit reading comprehension skills and translation performance of Iranian undergraduate students." Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 11, no. 4 (October 14, 2019): 844–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-12-2018-0262.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose This paper reports on a quasi-experimental research performed in the field of reading comprehension and translation quality. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the comparative effect of explicit vs implicit reading comprehension skills on translation quality of Iranian translation students at BA level. Design/methodology/approach The design of this research was quasi-experimental in nature. This design was preferred in this study, as it was impossible to assign random sampling to the subjects and apply a true experimental design. The research in hand was also a comparative group design research in a sense that it was supposed to compare two reading comprehension methods (explicit vs implicit) with different treatments. Findings In light of this research, some conclusions can be drawn. It can be concluded that there is a positive and direct relationship between reading comprehension and translation, as the first step of translation is to understand the content of the source text (Reid, 1993). Research limitations/implications The reading comprehension ability of translation students should be enhanced in their undergraduate classes so that they can better understand the source text and produce a more fluent translation. In order to teach reading comprehension skills, both implicit and explicit techniques can be applied; however, it is better if the subjects receive explicit instruction, as this technique may have more positive results. Originality/value Various researchers have explored explicit and implicit instructions on such areas as reading, speaking and listening (see, e.g. Jalilifar and Alipour, 2007; Vahid Dastjerdi and Shirzad, 2010; Negahi and Nouri, 2014; Khanbeiki and Abdolmanafi-Rokni, 2015; Khoii et al., 2015; Mostafavi and Vahdany 2016; Rahimi and Riasati, 2017). Although the results of these studies have shown the positive impacts of both explicit and implicit teaching, explicit has more positive impacts. However, the review of the literature shows that explicit and implicit reading comprehension skills have not been investigated in relation to teaching translation and their possible impacts on translation quality.
7
김정은. "Timing of form-focused instruction and development of implicit vs. explicit knowledge." English Teaching 69, no. 2 (June 2014): 123–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.15858/engtea.69.2.201406.123.
Повний текст джерела
8
Moeen, Ali Akbar, Daryoush Nejadansari, and Azizolla Dabaghi. "The impact of implicit vs explicit grammar teaching through scaffolding on Iranian learners’ speaking achievement; focusing on fluency, accuracy, and complexity." Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 11, no. 4 (October 14, 2019): 800–813. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-01-2019-0021.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of teaching grammar through implicit and explicit approach by applying scaffolding technique on learners’ speaking abilities including: accuracy, fluency and complexity. Design/methodology/approach To this end, 90 BA students of architecture in Yazd Azad University were selected and homogenized through Oxford Placement Test. They were assigned to three groups each including 30 participants, and took an IELTS speaking as pre-test to ensure that they had the same speaking ability prior to the begging of the experiment. In the course of the study, the first experimental group (EG1) received implicit instruction through scaffolding, and the second experimental group (EG2) was taught through explicit instruction. In contrast, control group did not receive any kind of grammar teaching. After the completion of the treatment, all groups took speaking post-test. Findings The results of the study showed that while both explicit and implicit teaching of grammar through scaffolding had a significant impact on learners’ speaking fluency, implicit teaching in comparison with explicit teaching was more significantly effective on learners’ speaking fluency. Similarly, both implicit and explicit teaching of grammar through scaffolding had significant impact on learners’ speaking accuracy and complexity, but explicit teaching compared to implicit teaching was more significantly effective. Practical implications The results of the study are mainly beneficial to teachers in the way that they can teach grammar in a more efficient way, and consequently improve learners’ speaking. In addition, curriculum developers and second language learners will benefit from the results of this research. Originality/value There has always been a controversy over an effective way to teach speaking skill in EFL classes over the last decades. In this regard, one of the most controversial approaches to teaching speaking arose from the dichotomy of teaching grammar through implicit or explicit teaching of rules. This paper has originality in that it delves into this controversial issue at length and in details.
9
Rostamy, Mahmoud, and Kaivan Parhoodeh. "The effect of instruction on learning refusals in EFL learners." Journal of English Language and Literature 3, no. 1 (February 28, 2015): 226–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.17722/jell.v3i1.43.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The major aim of learning a second or foreign language is communication. In order to be a competent communicator, we must get familiar with the ingredients of speech and language. Speech acts are one of the principal elements and functional units of communication. In this realm, refusals play a key role. Due to their inherently face threatening nature, refusals are of an especially sensitive nature, and a pragmatic breakdown in this act may easily lead to unintended offence or breakdowns in communication. Refusals are also of interest due to their typically complex constructions. They are often negotiated over several terms and involve some degree of indirectness. While there are a great number of studies which examine certain speech acts, the amount of research on refusals is much more limited. The aim of this study is to investigate whether either of the instruction types, explicit vs. implicit, proves more efficient in improving pragmatic performance of Iranian EFL learners. For this reason, 45 male, military intermediate EFL learners all between19-25 years of age in a military language institute, in Tehran, Iran, were selected to participate in the study. A pretest/posttest design was adopted in this study. Having formed the three groups under investigation, (explicit, implicit and explicit-implicit) I measured all subjects’ pragmatic performance of L2 refusals through Discourse Completion Tests, DCTs. All groups were exposed to conversations from 'spectrum' English books which embody refusals. The findings proved the efficiency of explicit instruction over implicit one in increasing Iranian EFL learners' pragmatic performance.
10
Levis, John M. "Pronunciation research in recent dissertations." Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 5, no. 2 (September 17, 2019): 181–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jslp.19008.edi.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract This editorial looks at L2 pronunciation dissertations from 2017 and 2018 to see what topics were of interest in research, to examine trends, and to suggest ideas for the future. The largest group of dissertations reflect interest in instruction and instructional interventions. These interventions look at a wide variety of features, types of instruction (e.g., implicit vs. explicit), different L1-L2 combinations, and the importance of materials in teacher training. The next most common topic was perception, followed by prosody (including stress, intonation, tone and fluency) and acquisition. English and Spanish were the most frequently studied L2s, indicating a need for L2 pronunciation in less commonly researched languages.
11
Jalali, Hanan, and Mohammad Rahimi. "Incongruence Between Learning Style and Written Corrective Feedback Type: Mediating Effect of Implicit Theory of Learning Style." Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 25, no. 2 (October 20, 2022): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2022.32478.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Implicit theory (Dweck, 2000) suggests that learners’ theories about the malleability of their individual traits (learning style, here) determine the extent to which they can stretch their learning style (Gregersen & MacIntyre, 2014; Young, 2010) and benefit from the instruction that mismatches their preferred styles. The present study aimed at investigating the extent to which Iranian EFL learners with inductive vs. deductive learning styles would benefit from the written corrective feedback (WCF) that does not match their learning styles (i.e., implicit vs. explicit WCF). The study also examined if their success (or lack of) in style stretching and improving their written accuracy is due to the implicit theory (entity vs. incremental) they hold about their learning style. The result showed that students with an incremental theory significantly improved their written accuracy more than those with an entity theory. Also, the findings revealed that inductive learners were more successful in adapting to the mismatched WCF (explicit) and made greater improvement in their written accuracy than deductive students who received implicit WCF.
12
French, Margaret A., Susanne M. Morton, Charalambos C. Charalambous, and Darcy S. Reisman. "A locomotor learning paradigm using distorted visual feedback elicits strategic learning." Journal of Neurophysiology 120, no. 4 (October 1, 2018): 1923–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00252.2018.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Distorted visual feedback (DVF) during locomotion has been suggested to result in the development of a new walking pattern in healthy individuals through implicit learning processes. Recent work in upper extremity visuomotor rotation paradigms suggest that these paradigms involve implicit and explicit learning. Additionally, in upper extremity visuomotor paradigms, the verbal cues provided appear to impact how a behavior is learned and when this learned behavior is used. Here, in two experiments in neurologically intact individuals, we tested how verbal instruction impacts learning a new locomotor pattern on a treadmill through DVF, the transfer of that pattern to overground walking, and what types of learning occur (i.e., implicit vs. explicit learning). In experiment 1, we found that the instructions provided impacted the amount learned through DVF, but not the size of the aftereffects or the amount of the pattern transferred to overground walking. Additionally, the aftereffects observed were significantly different from the baseline walking pattern, but smaller than the behavior changes observed during learning, which is uncharacteristic of implicit sensorimotor adaptation. Thus, experiment 2 aimed to determine the cause of these discrepancies. In this experiment, when VF was not provided, individuals continued using the learned walking pattern when instructed to do so and returned toward their baseline pattern when instructed to do so. Based on these results, we conclude that DVF during locomotion results in a large portion of explicit learning and a small portion of implicit learning. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The results of this study suggest that distorted visual feedback during locomotor learning involves the development of an explicit strategy with only a small component of implicit learning. This is important because previous studies using distorted visual feedback have suggested that locomotor learning relies primarily on implicit learning. This paradigm, therefore, provides a new way to examine a different form of learning in locomotion.
13
Jihoon, Kim, and Kim Jeong-ryeol. "A Meta-analysis of Explicit vs. Implicit Focus-on-Form English Instructional Effects." Korean Journal of Teacher Education 35, no. 2 (April 30, 2019): 73–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.14333/kjte.2019.35.2.73.
Повний текст джерела
14
Griggs, Richard A., and James R. Cox. "Permission Schemas and the Selection Task." Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A 46, no. 4 (November 1993): 637–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14640749308401031.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Cheng and Holyoak's abstract permission schema version of Wason's selection task and the standard abstract version of the task were examined in two experiments, each a factorial design with type of problem (permission vs. standard), presence or absence of a checking context, explicit or implicit negatives on the not-p and not-q cards, and presence or absence of a rule clarification statement as factors. The original permission problem violation-type instruction was employed in Experiment 1, and Margolis's not-p and not-q violation instruction (Griggs & Jackson, 1990) was used in Experiment 2. Subjects were 640 university undergraduates, with each subject solving only one problem. The major findings for permission tasks were: (1) facilitation for the abstract permission version was replicated but found to be dependent upon the presence of explicit negatives on the not-p and not-q cards; and (2) this facilitation was enhanced by the Margolis not-p and not-q instruction. Per Girotto, Mazzocco, and Cherubini (1992), these findings and the observed error patterns are consistent with pragmatic schema theory. The major findings for the standard version of the task were: (1) none of the factors significantly impacted proportion correct [performance was poor, ≤10% correct in 15 of 16 conditions] and (2) the number of not-p & not-q incorrect selections was increased significantly for the not-p and not-q instruction. These results are discussed in terms of Manktelow and Over's argument that the standard abstract task and the permission schema version are actually different problems.
15
Ghaedrahmat, Mehdi, Parviz Alavinia, and Reza Biria. "The effect of explicit vs. implicit instruction on mastering the speech act of thanking among Iranian male and female EFL learners." Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning 9, no. 2 (December 1, 2016): 401–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2016.9.2.7.
Повний текст джерела
16
Rastelli, Stefano. "Neurolinguistics and second language teaching: A view from the crossroads." Second Language Research 34, no. 1 (December 15, 2016): 103–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0267658316681377.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The topic of this article is the link between research on the neurocognition of the teaching–acquisition interface and research on second language teaching. This recent scientific enterprise investigates whether and how different aspects of second language instruction may change both the anatomy and the functioning of an adult learner’s brain even in a short period of time. In this article, I analyse how neurolinguists have operationalized three aspects specifically related to second language teaching: (1) learners’ proficiency; (2) the between-groups experimental design; (3) the implicit vs. explicit teaching dichotomy. I suggest that the degree of replicability of such neurolinguistics studies can be increased by adopting non-circular operational definitions. Such definitions should not be based on psycholinguistic or neurolinguistic metrics, but on standards that are commonly discussed in the literature on instructed second language acquisition, second language teaching, and assessment. Finally, I suggest that for future research neurolinguists should consider the advantages of welcoming on board more developmental linguists and teachers.
17
Burtscher, Michael J., Eva-Maria Jordi Ritz, and Michaela Kolbe. "Differences in talking-to-the-room behaviour between novice and expert teams during simulated paediatric resuscitation: a quasi-experimental study." BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning 4, no. 4 (January 29, 2018): 165–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2017-000268.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
BackgroundTeam coordination represents an important factor for clinical performance. Research in this area suggests that not only behaviour frequencies but also patterns of team coordination constitute a central aspect of teamwork. However, little is known about potential differences in coordination patterns between novice teams (ie, teams of inexperienced members) and expert teams (ie, teams of experienced members). The current study addresses this gap by investigating the use of talking-to-the-room—an important implicit coordination behaviour—in novice teams versus expert teams.AimTo illustrate differences in coordination behaviour between novice and expert teams. This will provide important knowledge for simulation-based training.MethodsThe study was conducted in the context of two resuscitation training courses (introductory course and refresher course) for staff members at a children’s hospital. Volunteers from both courses participated in the study. They were randomly assigned to 16 teams each consisting of one physician and two nurses. The study used a quasi-experimental design with two conditions (novice vs expert). Participants of the introductory course were assigned to the novice condition (eight teams), and participants of the refresher course were assigned to the expert condition (eight teams). All teams completed the same standardised paediatric resuscitation scenario. They were videotaped during the simulation, and team coordination behaviour was coded using Co-ACT.ResultsLag-sequential analysis of 1902 distinct coordination acts revealed that novice teams and expert teams differed significantly in their coordination behaviour. Expert teams were characterised by patterns in which implicit coordination behaviour (ie, talking to the room) was followed by further implicit coordination behaviour and not followed by explicit coordination behaviour (ie, instructions), whereas the reverse was found for novice teams.ConclusionThe current study highlights role of coordination patterns for understanding teamwork in healthcare and provides important insights for team training.
18
Cordewener, Kim A. H., Anna M. T. Bosman, and Ludo Verhoeven. "Implicit and explicit instruction." Written Language and Literacy 18, no. 1 (February 12, 2015): 121–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/wll.18.1.06cor.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study examined the influence of implicit and explicit instruction for the acquisition of two types of Dutch spelling rules: a morphological and a phonological rule. A sample of 193 first grade, low- and high skilled spellers was assigned to an implicit-instruction, explicit-instruction, or control-group condition. The results showed that for both rules, students in the explicit condition made more progress than students in the control condition. For the morphological rule, students in the explicit condition had higher posttest scores on pseudo-words than students in the implicit condition. The effects of the three conditions were the same for low- and high-skilled spellers. Both low- and high-skilled spellers in the implicit and explicit condition did not fully generalize their knowledge of both rules to new and pseudo-words.
19
Koceva, Vesna. "TYPES OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION." Knowledge International Journal 34, no. 6 (October 4, 2019): 1645–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij34061645k.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This paper briefly presents a theoretical research conducted by revising an extensive relevant literature on this problematics, by separating, in our opinion, the most important definitions connected with explicit and implicit grammar instruction. The introduction gives a brief explanation of the difference between the implicit and explicit knowledge and learning. The paper further establishes the main differences between the implicit and explicit instruction by citing the positions of Ellis, Housen and Pierrard. A distinction is made between the indirect assistance or intervention i.e. indirect instruction which, in essence, is implicit as well as some implicit instruction. The paper continues with a discussion of Batstone's stance, who believes that the explicit and implicit instructions can only be defined in relation with the teacher or the creator of the teaching material, while the implicit and explicit learning refer to the student and there is no necessary relation between the two pairs of terms. The paper briefly mentions the claims of Norris and Ortega, Doughty and Robinson. The discussion continues with explanation of the types of explicit and implicit instruction, defining the terms reactive, proactive, direct, indirect, deductive, inductive, intensive and extensive grammar instruction. In the end, the paper briefly summarises the main definitions regarding explicit and implicit grammar instruction.
20
Plonsky, Luke, Emma Marsden, Dustin Crowther, Susan M. Gass, and Patti Spinner. "A methodological synthesis and meta-analysis of judgment tasks in second language research." Second Language Research 36, no. 4 (March 7, 2019): 583–621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0267658319828413.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Judgment tasks (JTs, often called acceptability or grammaticality judgment tasks) are found extensively throughout the history of second language (L2) research. Data from such instruments have been used to investigate a range of hypotheses and phenomena, from generativist theories to instructional effectiveness. Though popular and convenient, JTs have engendered considerable controversy, with concerns often centered on their construct validity in terms of the type of representations they elicit, such as implicit or explicit knowledge. A number of studies have also examined the impact of JT conditions such as timed vs. untimed, oral vs. written. This article presents a synthesis of the use of JTs and a meta-analysis of the effects of task conditions on learner performance. Following a comprehensive search, 385 JTs were found in 302 individual studies. Each report was coded for features related to study design as well as methodological, procedural, and psychometric properties of the JTs. These data were synthesized in order to understand how this type of instrument has been implemented and reported. In addition to observing a steady increase in the use of JTs over the last four decades, we also found many of the features of JTs, when reported, varied substantially across studies. In terms of the impact of JT design, whereas modality was not found to have a strong or stable effect on learner performance (median d = .14; interquartile range = 1.04), scores on untimed JTs tended to be substantially higher than when timed ( d = 1.35; interquartile range = 1.74). In examining these features and their links to findings, this article builds on a growing body of methodological syntheses of L2 research instrumentation and makes a number of empirically grounded recommendations for future studies involving JTs.
21
Ahmadian, Mohammad Javad. "Explicit and implicit instruction of refusal strategies: Does working memory capacity play a role?" Language Teaching Research 24, no. 2 (August 21, 2018): 163–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168818783215.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study investigated the differential effects of implicit and explicit instruction of refusal strategies in English and whether and how the impacts of instruction methods interact with learners’ working memory capacity (WMC). 78 learners of English were assigned to three groups (explicit, implicit, and control). Implicit instruction was operationalized through input enhancement and provision of recast. In the explicit instruction group, participants received description and exemplification of refusal strategies and were provided with explicit corrective feedback. Prior to the treatment, all participants took WMC test, Discourse Completion Test (DCT) and completed a pragmatics comprehension questionnaire (CQ). Results revealed that explicit instruction was more effective than implicit instruction for both production and comprehension of refusals and that both implicit and explicit groups maintained the improvement in the delayed post-test administered two months later. In addition, whilst WMC scores were positively and strongly correlated with gains in the immediate and delayed post-test for both DCT and CQ in the implicit group, no meaningful relationship was found for explicit and control groups. The unique feature of this research is demonstrating that explicit instruction of refusal strategies equalizes learning opportunities for all learners with differential levels of WMC.
22
Handayani, Trifita. "THE EFFECTS OF IMPLICIT VERSUS EXPLICIT INSTRUCTIONS TO TEACH REFUSAL STRATEGIES ON STUDENTS’ SOCIOPRAGMATIC AND PRAGMALINGUISTIC COMPETENCE." ENGLISH JOURNAL OF INDRAGIRI 4, no. 1 (January 16, 2020): 195–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.32520/eji.v4i1.864.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract
The purposes of the study were to explain the effects of implicit instruction on student’s sociopragmatic competences, implicit instructions on students’ pragmalinguistic competences, explicit instructions on students’ sociopragmatic competences, explicit instructions on students’ pragmalinguistic competences, the differences between implicit and explicit instructions on students’ sociopragmatic competences, the differences between implicit and explicit instructions on student’s pragmalinguistic competences, and the interaction between instructions with the students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competences. The study used a quantitative research by using experimental factorial design 2x2. The data were taken from 80 second semester students at English Language Education Study Program at STAIN. The result of the study revealed that the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic was 80.000 while explicit 92.550. Meanwhile, the mean score of post-test in implicit instruction on students’ pragmalinguistic was 83.000 while explicit 95.5000. It could be concluded that explicit has better effect to teach refusal strategies than implicit instruction on students’ sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competence based on the difference between the means score on implicit and explicit.
23
Goossens, Greet. "Effecten van Expliciete en Impliciete Instructiewijzen op Taalleren." Thema's en trends in de sociolinguistiek 4 70 (January 1, 2003): 65–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ttwia.70.07goo.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this investigation, we wanted to find out what the short-term and long-term effects are of explicit and implicit instruction on language learning with 11/12-year-old LI and L2 learners, characteristics, and whether those effects are different for lexical and syntactic language items. The main conclusions we can draw from this investigation are the following: 11/12-year-old language learners appear to be capable of adequately acquiring explicit information about language in their language acquisition process. But there is the added condition that this explicit instruction should be imbedded in a communicative context. Also after one year, explicit instruction in a communicative context stul scores the best results, but the effect of explicit instruction only is significantly reduced in the long term. When we construct a combination of explicit and implicit instruction, it appears that explicit instruction foHowed by implicit instruction leads to better results than the reverse order; however, the combined input does not produce significantly better results than the teaching conditions with only explicit or only implicit instruction. The teaching effect for first language learners is generally a lot better than that for second language learners. Only for implicit instruction do first language learners proportionally score lower. Explicit instruction appears to be especially effective for introducing lexical language items. For syntactic language items, the results are much less outspoken.
24
Cho, Hyunjin, and Jungmin Ko. "Explicit and Implicit Instruction in Collocation." Asia-pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology 6, no. 2 (February 29, 2016): 395–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/ajmahs.2016.02.43.
Повний текст джерела
25
Wallaert, Matthew, Andrew Ward, and Traci Mann. "Explicit Control of Implicit Responses." Social Psychology 41, no. 3 (January 2010): 152–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000022.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Research has begun to reveal the malleability of implicit prejudice. One measure of this construct, the race Implicit Association Test (IAT), represents a widely-used tool to assess individuals’ positive and negative associations with different racial groups. In two studies, we demonstrate the capacity of salient pressures to alter implicit racial responses. In Study 1, an enhancement of promoting pressures through an explicit instruction to stereotype was sufficient to increase pro-White bias on the IAT. In Study 2, an enhancement of inhibiting pressures through a simple instruction to avoid stereotyping was sufficient to reduce pro-White bias. Taken together, the studies suggest that implicit prejudice is amenable to voluntary control through the use of simple, direct means.
26
Alkhawaldeh, Ahmad. "A Research Investigation of Contextualized Grammar Instruction from the Perspective of English Language Lecturers and Students at Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University." International Journal of English Linguistics 10, no. 5 (July 14, 2020): 162. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v10n5p162.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study investigated implicit versus explicit EFL grammar instruction by surveying the beliefs of university lecturers and students at the College of Languages and Translation at Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University/KSA regarding this significant issue. Many university lecturers who responded to the questionnaire instrument in the present study supported contextualized (implicit) grammar instruction. Likewise, open-ended questionnaire responses provided by a number of university students, at the above college, revealed that several students favored contextualized grammar instruction while explicit/conscious grammar instruction was the choice of a few of them. Meanwhile, a few students favored a combination of implicit and explicit grammar instruction. In light of the above findings, the author recommends the adoption of contextualized grammar instruction with appropriate attention be given to explicit grammar instruction.
27
Hojjat, Majid, and Zuwati Hasim. "THE EFFECT OF EXPLICIT FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION ON THE IMPLICIT KNOWLEDGE OF MALAYSIAN ENGLISH AS SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS." Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS) 7, no. 2 (June 30, 2022): 61–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp61-80.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Background and Purpose: Explicit form-focused instruction has significantly contributed to second language learners’ explicit knowledge. However, the effect of explicit form-focus instruction (FFI) on second language learners’ implicit knowledge of grammatical forms has been argued by scholars. This study examined the effectiveness of explicit FFI on implicit knowledge of ESL learners.
Methodology: This quasi-experimental research was conducted at a selected international school in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. The collected data were analysed through the application of ANCOVA and Scheffe’s test.
Findings: The findings showed that when explicit FFI was implemented in the form of metalinguistic information and metalinguistic explanation of the target form, the implicit knowledge of students would not increase. This suggested that the role of explicit FFI as the most effective and reliable tool to enhance implicit knowledge of learners should be doubted.
Contributions: The theoretical implication of this study indicates that explicit FFI does not contribute to development of the second language implicit knowledge. Pedagogically, this study’s findings could be beneficial either for teachers looking for an effective method of teaching or for researchers to utilise it in their studies.
Keywords: Form-focused instruction (FFI), explicit FFI, implicit knowledge, explicit knowledge
Cite as: Hojjat, M., & Hasim, Z. (2022). The effect of explicit form-focused instruction on the implicit knowledge of Malaysian English as second language learners. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 7(2), 61-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp61-80
28
Baleghizadeh, Sasan, and Ali Derakhshesh. "Measuring the Effectiveness of Explicit and Implicit Instruction through Explicit and Implicit Measures." Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics 20, no. 1 (April 1, 2017): 81–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.29252/ijal.20.1.81.
Повний текст джерела
29
Ariana, Nasim, Masoumeh Ahmadi Shirazi, and Seyed Mohammad Mousavi Nadoushani. "An Explicit/Implicit Lead to Producing Requests: Eliciting Learners’ Awareness or Soliciting Metapragmatic Knowledge." International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 6, no. 1 (November 19, 2016): 115. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.1p.115.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study attempted to investigate the extent to which two types of pragmatic instruction -explicit versus implicit- affect learners’ knowledge in terms of their awareness and production of request strategies. Thirty students with the same level of proficiency were divided into two groups (explicit and implicit). They were exposed to listening excerpts taken from the book Tactics for Listening, with the focus on request making strategies. While the explicit group was equipped with direct awareness-raising tasks and written metapragmatic explanations on the use of appropriate requests, the implicit group was provided with a set of implicit awareness-raising tasks. Outcomes of the study demonstrate that pragmatic instruction of requesting improved learners’ awareness of both groups. Also an improvement of learners’ production of requests did take place in both groups after the interventional period. However, the explicit group outperformed the implicit one as far as production of request making was concerned.Keywords: Pragmatic competence, Speech acts, Requests, Explicit/Implicit pragmatic instruction
30
Maliszewski, Norbert, Klaudyna Jankowska, and Hubert Suszek. "Implicit vs. explicit power motive." Problemy Zarzadzania 12, no. 1 (March 31, 2014): 50–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.7172/1644-9584.45.4.
Повний текст джерела
31
Kemper, M. J., L. Verhoeven, and A. M. T. Bosman. "Implicit and explicit instruction of spelling rules." Learning and Individual Differences 22, no. 6 (December 2012): 639–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.06.008.
Повний текст джерела
32
Cunningham, Anne Elizabeth. "Explicit versus implicit instruction in phonemic awareness." Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 50, no. 3 (December 1990): 429–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(90)90079-n.
Повний текст джерела
33
Godfroid, Aline. "THE EFFECTS OF IMPLICIT INSTRUCTION ON IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38, no. 2 (November 20, 2015): 177–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263115000388.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study extends the evidence for implicit second language (L2) learning, which comes largely from (semi-)artificial language research, to German. Upper-intermediate L2 German learners were flooded with spoken exemplars of a difficult morphological structure, namely strong, vowel-changing verbs. Toward the end of exposure, the mandatory vowel change was omitted, yielding ungrammatical verb forms (compare Leung & Williams, 2012). Two pre- and posttests—word monitoring and controlled oral production—gauged the development of learners’ implicit and explicit knowledge, respectively.Interviews revealed 33 out of 38 L2 learners remained unaware of the ungrammatical verbs in the input flood; however, they showed significant sensitivity during listening as evidenced by a reaction time slowdown on ungrammatical trials. The unaware learners also improved significantly from pretest to posttest on the word-monitoring task, but not the oral production measure, unless the verbs’ salience in the input flood had resonated with them. Thus, implicit instruction affected implicit knowledge primarily, although prior knowledge and memory could potentially account for interactions between implicit processing, implicit knowledge, and explicit knowledge.
34
Drake, Shiloh, Isabel Preligera, and Melissa M. Baese-Berk. "Implicit learning versus explicit instruction in morphophonological learning." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 151, no. 4 (April 2022): A275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/10.0011319.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study uses an artificial grammar learning task to probe the learning of abstract morphophonological structure. Two sets of nonce words were created, one with plural forms using concatenative morphology (similar to English) and the other using non-concatenative morphology (similar to Arabic). Both sets had multiple phonologically conditioned allomorphs. Half of the participants were provided with instruction and feedback, and half were not. These results show that even minimal instruction and feedback leads to learning abstract morphological structure through the use of nonce words. While instruction and feedback at this level may not make non-concatenative morphology more straightforward to English speakers, their subconscious understanding of the morphophonological system is improved and leads to higher quality guesses on the derivations of the nonce words than on previous work with implicit learning of non-concatenative morphology alone (e.g., Drake, 2018). Feedback provides negative input for a second-language learner to narrow possibilities when following an otherwise abstract morphophonological pattern, particularly in a morphophonological system unlike that employed by their primary language.
35
S. Zaabalawi, Rafe. "Mastering Prepositions in English: Explicit versus Implicit Instruction." Arab World English Journal 12, no. 3 (September 15, 2021): 411–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no3.29.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Prepositions form a hurdle for several EFL learners, Arabs in particular. One major catalyst is that the preposition systems in English and Arabic rarely correspond to one another. Most scholars who researched this area concentrated on the problem itself, rather than finding a successful remedy that can empower these students to masterfully handle such a thorny area. This study is novel inasmuch as it concerns itself with finding means of facilitating this language area for Arab learners. It reveals the effectiveness of using translation to teach English prepositions to these learners. The research question of this study is: do students who have received explicit tuition and adequate practice on the use of English prepositions in translated texts naturally perform better using such grammatical items in subsequently translated texts than those who have not been instructed on such exemplars in similar language contexts? Sixty students at the Gulf University for Science and Technology in Kuwait participated in the field experiment. The study paradigm had a pre-test/post-test protocol. While the pre-test included four fill-in-the-gap exercises, the post-test contained three Arabic passages which participants were required to translate into English. The findings showed that teaching prepositions explicitly in translated texts is a viable technique for EFL learners’ mastery of such grammatical items. This has implications for EFL specialists and syllabus designers.
36
Van Dessel, Pieter, Jan De Houwer, Anne Gast, and Colin Tucker Smith. "Instruction-Based Approach-Avoidance Effects." Experimental Psychology 62, no. 3 (May 7, 2015): 161–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000282.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Prior research suggests that repeatedly approaching or avoiding a certain stimulus changes the liking of this stimulus. We investigated whether these effects of approach and avoidance training occur also when participants do not perform these actions but are merely instructed about the stimulus-action contingencies. Stimulus evaluations were registered using both implicit (Implicit Association Test and evaluative priming) and explicit measures (valence ratings). Instruction-based approach-avoidance effects were observed for relatively neutral fictitious social groups (i.e., Niffites and Luupites), but not for clearly valenced well-known social groups (i.e., Blacks and Whites). We conclude that instructions to approach or avoid stimuli can provide sufficient bases for establishing both implicit and explicit evaluations of novel stimuli and discuss several possible reasons for why similar instruction-based approach-avoidance effects were not found for valenced well-known stimuli.
37
Daloglu, Aysegul. "EFL Students’ Beliefs about How They Learn Grammar Best." English Language Teaching 13, no. 10 (September 29, 2020): 158. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n10p158.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Learner beliefs about how they learn a language best play a vital role in the instructional process and the role of grammar instruction has been a much-debated topic in the research and practice of EFL instruction. This study explores learner beliefs about how they best learn grammar focusing on four construct pairs: meaning-focused versus form-focused instruction, focus on form versus focus on forms, explicit versus implicit instruction, and inductive versus deductive grammar instruction. Data were collected through a survey from 927 preparatory year and undergraduate students at an English-medium university in an English as a foreign language (EFL) setting. Results showed that regardless of year of study, students showed a preference for having grammar included as part of their lessons and course books, and although focus on form was reported to be the least preferred method of instruction, when given a choice between implicit versus explicit grammar instruction, all groups preferred explicit instruction.
38
Tellis, Cari M. "Integrated Implicit-Explicit Learning Approach to Voice Therapy." Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders 24, no. 3 (November 2014): 111–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/vvd24.3.111.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article is intended to define, compare, and provide outcomes for an integrated implicit-explicit learning approach to voice therapy related to current motor learning theories. Clients from the Misericordia University voice clinic have undergone therapy using this integrated approach. The article will review previous literature on motor learning theories related to voice, define the protocol used in the integrated approach, and highlight the diagnostic, clinical outcomes exhibited by these clients. Steps for the therapy protocol will be highlighted. Results indicate that individuals participating in an integrated implicit-explicit learning approach to voice therapy report that initial instruction and target production take increased effort to learn; however once acquired, targets are easily generalized to more complex speaking (e.g., conversation) tasks. Implicit-only voice therapy approaches are effective in treating voice disorders. Limited published data, however, has compared traditional, implicit-only therapy to other methods of voice therapy. Another approach may be one that employs more explicit teaching of the mechanics of voice production. The integrated implicit-explicit learning approach discussed in this article combines explicit instruction with implicit facilitators, and initiates simple and complex tasks from the start of therapy.
39
DeKeyser, Robert, and Shaofeng Li. "EPILOGUE." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43, no. 3 (July 2021): 692–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263121000140.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractIn this commentary, we summarize the findings of the seven included studies that examined implicit language aptitude from various perspectives and highlight issues to be resolved in the validation of this new construct in second language research. We start by providing an overview of the contributions of the studies. We then identify the lack of convergent validity of the measures of implicit aptitude reported in the included studies and problematize the equally varied nature of the measurement of implicit knowledge—the outcome variable of aptitude research—and related concepts. In particular, by drawing on empirical evidence and theoretical claims, we attempt to clarify the relationships between implicit and explicit knowledge, implicit and explicit learning, and implicit and explicit instruction. Next, we draw attention to the interactions reported by the included studies between aptitude and outcome measures and between aptitude and instruction type, emphasizing the value and importance of interactional research. We conclude by making recommendations for future research.
40
Blochowiak, Joanna, Cristina Grisot, and Liesbeth Degand. "From implicit to explicit." Pragmatics and Cognition 29, no. 1 (December 31, 2022): 29–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.21001.blo.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract The presence of discourse relations can be marked explicitly with lexical items such as specialized and underspecified connectives or left implicit. It is now well established that the presence of specialized connective facilitates the processing of these relations. The question is to gauge how different degrees of explicitness affect the processing of discourse relations. This study investigates this question with respect to two relations, which are fundamental to our cognition and which are closely tied: causal relations and temporal relations. We carried out a self-paced reading experiment, in which we sought to compare the cost of inferring the presence of causal vs. temporal relations in the absence vs. presence of a connective indicating a given relation in French. For the explicit marking, two types of connectives were tested – one specialized for each relation (donc for causality and puis for temporality) and one underspecified (et in its temporal and causal readings). Overall, our results confirm the facilitator role of discourse connectives: we find that explicit discourse relations are processed faster than implicit ones. The specific (rather than underspecified) connective facilitates processing for temporal relations but not for causal relations; and temporal relations were read equally fast as causal relations.
41
Bueno-Alastuey, Mª Camino, and Gloria Luque Agulló. "Explicit instruction and implicit use of L2 learning strategies in higher secondary EFL course books." International Journal of English Studies 15, no. 2 (December 18, 2015): 17. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2015/2/218581.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
<p>Research has shown that teaching second language (L2) learning strategies explicitly promotes an increase in strategy use and in oral proficiency. Consequently, a checklist based on the six types of strategies from Oxford’s taxonomy (1990) was created to analyze strategic instruction in the most common textbooks used in the last year of Higher Secondary Education in Spain. The study considered whether there was explicit strategy instruction and its location (within the units [Internal] or in other sections [External]) in course books, and what specific strategies were explicitly taught for the two oral skills, listening and speaking. Results showed, first, that there was explicit internal and external instruction of L2 learning strategies both for listening and speaking, but not in all the books; second, that there was significantly more implicit use than explicit instruction, and less explicit instruction in the units of the textbooks than in specific extra sections in the textbook or in support material; and finally, that internal explicit instruction of strategies remains very limited; and thus, L2 learning strategy instruction, competence and use may not be sufficiently encouraged in those textbooks.</p>
42
Akakura, Motoko. "Evaluating the effectiveness of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit L2 knowledge." Language Teaching Research 16, no. 1 (December 12, 2011): 9–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168811423339.
Повний текст джерела
43
Ruiz Arriola, E., S. Szpigel, and V. S. Timóteo. "Implicit vs explicit renormalization and effective interactions." Physics Letters B 728 (January 2014): 596–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2013.12.038.
Повний текст джерела
44
Rahman, Ayuni Madarina Abdul, and Radzuwan Ab Rashid. "Explicit and Implicit Grammar Instructions in Higher Learning Institutions." English Language Teaching 10, no. 10 (September 10, 2017): 92. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n10p92.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Two universally accepted approaches to grammar instruction are explicit and implicit teaching of the grammar. Both approaches have their own strengths and limitations. Educators may face a dilemma whether to teach grammar explicitly or implicitly. This paper aims to provide insights into the educators’ beliefs towards grammar teaching in Malaysian Higher Learning Institutions, and the sources of the held beliefs. Data were generated through semi-structured interviews with five educators from several private colleges located in peninsular Malaysia. Data analysis reveals that a majority of the respondents preferred grammar to be taught explicitly in their ESL classrooms; nevertheless they viewed implicit instruction as necessary when conforming to students’ needs. The sources of the held beliefs are educators’ experience as well as the institutional requirement. This paper draws our attention to the role of educators as an eclectic teaching practitioner who are able to apply a suitable grammar instruction according to learners’ needs. It is hoped that this study will contribute to the growth of literature on grammar teaching and learning especially in Malaysian ESL classrooms.
45
Eymur, Guluzar. "The influence of the explicit nature of science instruction embedded in the Argument-Driven Inquiry method in chemistry laboratories on high school students’ conceptions about the nature of science." Chemistry Education Research and Practice 20, no. 1 (2019): 17–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c8rp00135a.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of the explicit nature of science instruction embedded in the Argument-Driven Inquiry method compared with an implicit inquiry method on eleventh-grade students’ conceptions of NOS. The study used a pre-/post-test control group design to investigate the influence of the explicit nature of science instruction embedded in the Argument-Driven Inquiry method on eleventh grade students’ understanding of NOS. The qualitative method was used to identify the students’ views of NOS. The study involved 45 students (grade 11) enrolled in a chemistry course at a public Anatolian high school in the northeast of Turkey. The explicit group included 24 students (10 girls and 14 boys) and the implicit group included 21 students (12 girls and 9 boys) with their ages ranging from 17 to 18 years. Both groups were instructed for two 45 minute sessions per week over the course of 9 weeks. However, the explicit group participated in laboratory activities designed by the ADI method with explicit NOS instruction, whereas the implicit group was taught by a structured inquiry (SI) instructional model. Students were interviewed using the VNOS-B interview schedule to evaluate the students’ understanding of NOS. In data analysis, we coded views as an informed view that had the accepted views, a transitional view that had partially accepted views or a naïve view that had unaccepted views of the seven characteristics of NOS based on the literature. The results of the study showed significant differences between the pre- to post-test scores for the explicit group in terms of NOS views. However, the post-instruction views of the implicit group were not different from their previous NOS views. We believe that the explicit nature of science instruction embedded in the ADI method has a noticeable potential in order to improve high school students’ views about NOS.
46
de Graaff, Rick. "THE EXPERANTO EXPERIMENT." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, no. 2 (June 1997): 249–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263197002064.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Theories on the role of consciousness and the enhancement of noticing (Schmidt, 1990, 1994; Sharwood Smith, 1993) predict a facilitative effect of explicit knowledge, as built up by explicit instruction, on the acquisition of implicit second language (L2) knowledge. This study investigates the interaction between the presence or absence of explicit instruction and the variables complexity and morphology/syntax in the acquisition of four L2 structures. Two groups of 27 university students, differing in the exposure to explicit instruction, followed a computer-controlled self-study course in an artificial language. Results from computer-controlled posttests confirm the general hypothesis that explicit instruction facilitates the acquisition of L2 grammar. However, no evidence could be reported for the hypotheses predicting a differential effect of explicit instruction depending on the variables complexity and morphology/syntax.
47
Marzuki, Dony. "Two Edges of Sword of Strategy-Based Instruction (SBI) and Implicit Task-Based Instruction (TBI) on EFL Oral Performance." VELES: Voices of English Language Education Society 6, no. 2 (October 30, 2022): 367–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.29408/veles.v6i2.6261.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This pilot study aimed to investigate the effects of two classroom instructions on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency of EFL learners’ speaking. The first one involved implicit task-based instruction with meaning-focused pedagogic tasks. The second instruction reduced learners’ practice time but complemented it with explicit strategy-based instruction (SBI) to raise their metacognitive awareness in planning, monitoring, and evaluating their speech. Participants in the explicit instruction group learned to practice three specific strategies, while the first group had only more practice opportunities. The study involved 16 English students from a third-tier university in Indonesia. Audio recordings of each participant’s oral presentations during the pre-test and the post-test were transcribed and coded for non-parametric analysis. The findings revealed that both instructions had a comparable impact on EFL learners' oral performance by improving complexity but not accuracy and fluency. There was also a possible trade-off effect found in participants’ performance. The study findings could provide a basis for EFL teachers to use either explicit strategy instruction or implicit instruction for their speaking class.
48
Indrarathne, Bimali, and Judit Kormos. "ATTENTIONAL PROCESSING OF INPUT IN EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT CONDITIONS." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 39, no. 3 (June 13, 2016): 401–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s027226311600019x.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this study we examined language learners’ attentional processing of a target syntactic construction in written L2 input in different input conditions, the change in learners’ knowledge of the targeted construction in these conditions, and the relationship between the change in knowledge and attentional processing. One hundred L2 learners of English in Sri Lanka were divided into four experimental groups and control group: input flood, input enhancement, a specific instruction to pay attention to the target grammatical construction in the input, and an explicit metalinguistic explanation of the target construction. Eye tracking was used to collect data on the attentional processing of 45 participants in the sample. The eye-tracking measures of learners who received a specific instruction to pay attention to the target structure and an explicit metalinguistic explanation indicated increased attentional processing. The learners in these groups also improved their knowledge of the target structure significantly. The results suggest that increased attentional processing is needed for development in L2 grammatical knowledge and that explicit instruction to pay attention to the input and metalinguistic explanation are successful in directing learners’ attentional resources toward novel grammatical constructions in the input.
49
Afsahi, Seyed Ehsan, and Ahmad Reza Lotfi. "The Effect of Explicit Instruction through Combined Input-Output Tasks on the Acquisition of Indirect Reported Speech in English." International Journal of English Linguistics 6, no. 7 (December 1, 2016): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v6n7p59.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
<p>Grammar is being rehabilitated (e.g., Doughty & Williams 1998a) and recognized for what it has always been (Thornbury, 1997, 1998, cited in Burgess & Etherington, 2002): an essential, inescapable component of language use and language learning. Few would dispute nowadays that teaching and learning with a focus on form is valuable, if not indispensable. What perhaps is still the subject of debate is the degree of explicitness such teaching and learning should display. The ultimate goal of any instruction is to make L2 learning implicit, like L1 (due to ease of access and automaticity of it). The current study examines the effect of explicit instruction on the participants’ acquisition of explicit and implicit grammatical knowledge in the case of indirect reported speech. The descriptive-survey method was used in this research. The results revealed that this type of instruction fosters both short- and long-term acquisition of explicit grammatical knowledge. However, the study could not foster the acquisition of implicit knowledge.</p>
50
Jeong, Howon, Sungho Cho, Minyoung Lee, and Endarman Sputra. "Race of Athlete-Spokesperson and Implicit and Explicit Responses to Advertising." Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal 42, no. 4 (May 15, 2014): 655–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.4.655.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this study we investigated racial vs. athletes from other countries, bias and differences in attitude of South Koreans toward advertisements featuring Korean vs. foreign athletes and White vs. Black athletes by implementing explicit and implicit measures. The results suggest that Koreans have: (a) implicit preferences for Korean athletes over foreign athletes, (b) implicit attitudes that are more favorable toward advertisements featuring Korean athletes than toward those featuring foreign athlete-spokespersons, (c) implicit preferences for White athletes over Black athletes, and (d) implicit attitudes that are more favorable toward advertisements featuring White athlete-spokespersons than toward those featuring Black athlete-spokespersons. The explicit measures revealed several contradictory results; therefore we have discussed implications for the discrepancy between implicit and explicit measurement methods and the usefulness of implicit measures in the context of racial bias research.