scholarly journals Exploring the Effects of input flood vs input enhancement on learners' use of Collocations in their writings

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (108) ◽  
pp. 522-542
Author(s):  
Abdelrahim Saadeldin Elhilaly ◽  
Tamer Aly Abdelhakim Abdalla
Keyword(s):  
Input Enhancement

scholarly journals Online comments as input enhancement

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 44-54
Author(s):  
Dukhayel Aldukhayel
Keyword(s):  
Listening Comprehension ◽  
Vocabulary Learning ◽  
Input Enhancement ◽  
Teaching Of Reading ◽  
Online Comments ◽  
Different Types ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Youtube Videos ◽  
Linguistic Input

Chapelle (2003) proposed three general types of input enhancement that help L2 learners “acquire features of the linguistic input that they are exposed to during the course reading or listening for meaning” (p. 40): input salience, input modification, and input elaboration. In 2010, Cárdenas-Claros and Gruba argued that Chapelle’s different types of input enhancement “can be and have been operationalized through help options” primarily utilized in the teaching of reading, listening, writing, grammar, and vocabulary such as glossed words, video/audio control features, captions, subtitles, and grammar explanations (p. 79). As understood from Cárdenas-Claros and Gruba’s classification of help options, input enhancement can only be accomplished through one process: salience, modification, or elaboration. In this article, we argue that YouTube comments have the potential to be (1) a help option that facilitate both listening comprehension of the videos and vocabulary learning and that (2) input enhancement accomplished by comments can be achieved by a combination of different types of input enhancement. Put another way, the aural input of a YouTube video can be salient, modified, and elaborated, thanks to the various types of comments YouTube videos often receive.

Enhancing Listening Comprehension Through Kinesthetic Rhythm Training

RELC Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 003368822094130
Author(s):  
Bradford J Lee
Keyword(s):  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Listening Comprehension ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Explicit Instruction ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Japanese University ◽  
Input Enhancement ◽  
Pronunciation Instruction ◽  
Based Instruction ◽  
Traditional Grammar

Research has suggested that the type and frequency of learning strategies employed by successful listeners is greater than their less successful counterparts. Based on evidence that metacognitive strategies (e.g. listening-for-gist; inferring meaning) are more effective than cognitive ones (e.g. word-for-word translation), this study sought to measure the effect that rhymical training had on the listening comprehension acuity of 313 Japanese university students. The theoretical basis was that rhythmical priming assists learners parse the input based on prosody and identify salient words by stress. Small but significant increases were observed among students who were rhythmically trained, compared to a comparison group that received explicit instruction but no rhythm training, and a “true” control group that received no treatment. These results extend the feasibility of input enhancement, rhythmic priming, and perception-based instruction beyond the traditional grammar and pronunciation instruction domains.

Input Enhancement in Instructed SLA

1993 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Sharwood Smith
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Learner ◽  
Modular Systems ◽  
Input Enhancement ◽  
Instructed Sla ◽  
Processing Mechanisms

The concept of input to the language learner is examined with reference to some current theorizing about language processing and the idea of modular systems of knowledge. The question of what this can tell us about the actions taken by teachers and textbook writers is addressed specifically with regard to manipulating, or “enhancing,” the input ideally so that it will affect learner knowledge and thereby learner behavior. The logic of the argumentation is that, in exposing the learner to the second language, we are engaging a whole battery of different processing mechanisms. Input enhancement research and the conclusions drawn from it have to be set within the context of a modular view of language and language learning.

Input Enhancement and L2 Question Formation

1991 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 416-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. WHITE ◽  
N. SPADA ◽  
P. M. LIGHTBOWN ◽  
L. RANTA
Keyword(s):  
Input Enhancement ◽  
Question Formation

OUTPUT, INPUT ENHANCEMENT, AND THE NOTICING HYPOTHESIS

2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinichi Izumi
Keyword(s):  
Positive Impact ◽  
Visual Input ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Learning Gains ◽  
Input Enhancement ◽  
Target Form ◽  
Subsequent Discussion ◽  
Form Features ◽  
Esl Learners

This study investigates the potentially facilitative effects of internal and external attention-drawing devices—output and visual input enhancement—on the acquisition of English relativization by adult English as a second language (ESL) learners. Specifically, the study addresses: (a) whether the act of producing output promotes noticing of formal elements in the target language (TL) input and affects subsequent learning of the form; and (b) whether such output- induced noticing and learning, if any, would be the same as that effected by visual input enhancement designed to draw learners' attention to problematic form features in the input. These questions were examined in a controlled experimental study in which the requirements of output and exposure to enhanced input were systematically varied. A computer-assisted reconstruction and reading task was used as the vehicle of presentation of the target input materials. The major findings are: (a) Those engaged in output-input activities outperformed those exposed to the same input for the sole purpose of comprehension in learning gains; (b) those who received visual input enhancement failed to show measurable gains in learning, despite the documented positive impact of enhancement on the noticing of the target form items in the input; and (c) in view of the above, no support was found for the hypothesis that the effect of input enhancement was comparable to that of output. The subsequent discussion centers on reexamining the construct of noticing and argues for the need to consider levels and types of processing in order to account for how sensory detection can lead to learning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document