Chapter 5. Structured input vs. meaning output-based instruction on the acquisition of Italian passive constructions

The relative effects of isolated and combined structured input and structured output on the acquisition of the English causative forms

IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching ◽

10.1515/iral-2016-0038 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 57 (3) ◽

pp. 265-287 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Alessandro Benati ◽

Maria Batziou

Keyword(s):

Control Group ◽

Production Task ◽

Processing Instruction ◽

Structured Input ◽

Sentence Level ◽

Post Test ◽

Structured Output ◽

Causative Structure ◽

Based Instruction ◽

Output Only

AbstractThe present study explores the effects of structured input and structured output when delivered in isolation or in combination on the acquisition of the English causative. Research investigating the effects of processing instruction and meaning output-based instruction has provided some interesting and sometimes conflicting results. Additionally, there are a number of issues (e. g., measuring a combination of structured input and structured output, measuring discourse-level effects) that have not been fully and clearly addressed. To provide answers to the questions formulated in this study, two classroom experiments were carried out. In the first study, fifty-four Chinese university students (age 18–20) participated. The participants were randomly assigned to four groups: structured input only group (n=13); structured output only group (n=15); combined structured input and structured output group (n=16); control group (n=10). In the second study, thirty school-age Greek learners (age 10–12) participated. The participants were randomly assigned to three groups: structured input only group (n=10); structured output only group (n=10); combined structured input and structured output group (n=10).Only subjects who participated in all phases of each experiment and scored lower than 60 % in the pre-tests were included in the final data collection. Instruction lasted for three hours. The control group received no instruction on the causative structure. Interpretation and production tasks were used in a pre-test and post-test design. The design included a delayed post-test battery (3 weeks after instruction) for both experiments. In the first study, the assessment tasks included an interpretation and production task at sentence-level, and an interpretation task at discourse-level. In the second study, an additional discourse-level production task was adopted along with the interpretation discourse-level task. The results indicated that learners who received structured input both in isolation and in combination benefitted more than learners receiving structured output only. These two groups were able to retain instructional gains three weeks later in all assessment measures.

Download Full-text

EVALUATING THE RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF STRUCTURED-INPUT AND OUTPUT-BASED INSTRUCTION IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING

Studies in Second Language Acquisition ◽

10.1017/s027226310300024x ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 25 (4) ◽

pp. 559-582 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Rosemary Erlam

Keyword(s):

Foreign Language ◽

Language Learning ◽

Relative Effectiveness ◽

Foreign Language Learning ◽

Structured Input ◽

Oral Production ◽

Input And Output ◽

Language Measures ◽

Based Instruction ◽

And Control

This paper reErlamviews studies that have contrasted the effectiveness of structured-input instruction with output-based instruction. It then presents results from a study comparing the relative effects of structured-input and output-based instruction on students' ability to comprehend and produce direct object pronouns in second language French. Three classes of students (N = 70) were assigned to three groups: structured-input instruction, output-based instruction, and control. Students were assessed on listening comprehension, reading comprehension, written production, and oral production tasks. All but one of these language measures required a pressured response. Overall, the results showed greater gains for the output-based instruction group.

Download Full-text

The Effects of Various Kinds of Form-Focused Instruction on Learners' Ability to Comprehend and Produce Polite Requests in English

TESL Canada Journal ◽

10.18806/tesl.v26i1.389 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 26 (1) ◽

pp. 31 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Masahiro Takimoto

Keyword(s):

Treatment Group ◽

Group Performance ◽

Control Group ◽

Treatment Groups ◽

Structured Input ◽

Japanese Learners Of English ◽

Inductive Treatment ◽

Based Instruction ◽

Japanese Learners

This study involving 60 Japanese learners of English investigated the effects of various kinds of form-focused instruction on learners' ability to comprehend and produce polite requests in English. Each treatment group received one of the following: (a) deductive instruction; (b) inductive instruction with problem-solving tasks; or (c) inductive instruction with structured input tasks. These tasks all involved explicit input-based instruction and were intended to test for differences in deductive versus inductive treatments. Treatment group performance was compared with that of a control group on a range of input- and output-based pretests, posttests, and follow-up tests. The results indicate that the three treatment groups performed significantly better than the control group, suggesting that in this study explicit input-based instruction was effective both deductively and inductively for learners' comprehension and production of English polite requests. There was also some indication that inductive treatment may be superior in the longer term.

Download Full-text