Processing instruction (PI) is a language teaching technique based upon the model of input processing developed by VanPatten (1993, 1996, 2002, 2004). The present study investigated the effects of PI as well as two other experimental conditions (traditional instruction and control) on the acquisition of the Spanish copulae ser and estar by 66 Chinese university students enrolled in a blended (partially presential and partially online) fourth-semester language course. The PI treatment condition included non-paradigmatic grammar explanations, processing strategies designed to help learners avoid commiting errors they may be predisposed to make, and structured input activities which eliminate redundant features of language that may make difficult the establishment of form-meaning connections. The traditional instruction (TI) treatment condition included paradigmatic explanations of grammar as well as production-based activities and exercises. Participants assigned to the control condition did not receive any instruction during the course of the study. The results of an experiment comparing the effects of each treatment condition on learners' scores on the Knowledge Test of Spanish Copulae, a measurement instrument designed for this study, found PI to be superior to TI at the immediate posttest level for tasks of interpretation and production. However, mean difference scores for the PI group were not significant when compared to those of the control group. Moreover, the learning gains exhibited by the PI group at immediate posttest were not durative, as they were not significant at the delayed posttest.

The importance of explicit grammar instruction has been debated during decades within the second language acquisition discourse community. Researchers’ views on the topic are controversial, and there is still no clear answer to be found. In terms of English teacher attitudes, previous research shows no indication of a gradually decreasing interest in explicit grammar instruction in L2 or FL classrooms. Despite this, the Swedish National Agency of Education does not mention explicit grammar instruction in their official documents regarding the subject of English. Hence, this paper aims to examine if the Swedish context has an impact on in-service English teachers’ attitudes towards explicit grammar instruction. To investigate their attitudes, along with their preferred approaches to explicit grammar instruction, semi-structured interviews were conducted with five English teachers at upper secondary school. The interviews were recorded, carefully analysed and partly transcribed. The results show that all of the interviewed English teachers were positive towards explicit grammar instruction and use it in their teaching. In terms of approaches to explicit grammar instruction, all of the five teachers explained that they highlight a certain grammatical rule when they notice that many of their students have a hard time with it. It is often after a writing assignment that the grammatical difficulties are revealed and will be brought up in class. The teachers tend to explain the rule by using the whiteboard, a relevant YouTube clip or a PowerPoint. An interesting finding was that all of the teachers referred to their own experience when explaining why they use a specific approach to explicit grammar instruction, whereas none of the teachers referred to research within the field. In addition, all of the interviewed teachers expressed that the official steering documents by the Swedish National Agency of Education should mention grammar instruction more explicitly. However, they were still positive towards the official documents, because of the fact that these focus on communication. The current paper provides an indication of how English teachers in Sweden prefer to work with explicit grammar instruction, along with suggestions for further research on the topic.

Grammar teaching has been controversial since the introduction of the Communicative Language Teaching perspective. In addition, the steering documents, namely the Swedish syllabi and the CEFR are quite general on what and how to teach grammar, thus allowing teachers’ interpretations about the importance given to grammar in EFL/ESL classrooms. The present study focuses on English teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and practices towards grammar in the final year of compulsory school and the first year of upper-secondary school in Sweden. The principal aim is to find out why the English teachers propose grammar or not and how they enact grammar teaching. The research is empirical. The data consist of teachers’ interviews, and they were analysed using content analysis. The results have shown that teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and practices are mainly related to students’ levels and objectives even if they have different views on grammar. Then, teachers have shown great adaptability in their grammar teaching practices both in the diversity of means and methods. Furthermore, even though there are slight differences between the final year of compulsory school and the first year of upper-secondary school in the steering documents, grammar teaching is enacted differently for each level. Besides, on both levels, grammar teaching is linked to communicative skills and included in a more general communicative task aimed for students’ learning in EFL/ESL classrooms.

The purpose of this study was to test the effect of one approach to writing pedagogy on second-language (L2) writing accuracy. This study used two groups of L2 writers who were learning English as a second language: a control group (n = 19) who were taught with traditional process writing methods and a treatment group (n = 28) who were taught with an innovative approach to L2 writing pedagogy. The methodology for the treatment group was designed to improve L2 writing accuracy by raising the linguistic awareness of the learners through error correction. Central to the instructional methodology were four essential characteristics of error correction including feedback that was manageable, meaningful, timely, and constant. Core components of the treatment included having students write a 10-minute composition each day, and having teachers provide students with coded feedback on their daily writing, help students to use a variety of resources to track their progress, and encourage students to apply what they learned in subsequent writing. Fourteen repeated measures tests using a mixed model ANOVA suggest that the treatment improved mechanical accuracy, lexical accuracy, and certain categories of grammatical accuracy. Though the treatment had a negligible effect on rhetorical competence and writing fluency, findings suggest a small to moderate effect favoring the control group in the development of writing complexity. These findings seem to contradict claims from researchers such as Truscott (2007) who have maintained that error correction is not helpful for improving the grammatical accuracy of L2 writing. The positive results of this study are largely attributed to the innovative methodology for teaching and learning L2 writing that emphasizes linguistic accuracy rather than restricting instruction and learning to other dimensions of writing such as rhetorical competence. The limitations and pedagogical implications of this study are also examined.

No description available.

The aim of this study is to explore how six primary school teachers experience teaching grammar to non-Swedish speaking pupils and how their experiences correspond to theories and previous research on language development and second language acquisition. The method used was semi-structured qualitative interviews combined with mind maps. The result shows that the teachers had revised their view on grammar and adapted their teaching to the immigrant pupils, and in various ways followed the Swedish Education Agency’s recommendations on measure to take to facilitate second language learning, including using genre pedagogy.

Notre recherche s’inscrit à la fois dans le domaine des Recherches sur l’acquisition des langues et celui de la Didactique des langues étrangères, et poursuit un double objectif. D’abord, nous avons décrit les influences translinguistiques, issues de l’espagnol L1 comme de l’anglais L2, dans le processus d’acquisition de certaines structures liées au groupe verbal en français L3, à savoir la construction des verbes avec des compléments nominaux, la sélection des prépositions introduisant éventuellement ces compléments et l’acquisition des pronoms compléments. Pour cela, nous avons pris en compte les apports théoriques des recherches sur l’acquisition plurilingue mais également des études ayant dégagé des itinéraires de développement pour le français. Nous nous sommes basée sur des productions écrites réalisées par des étudiants, débutants en français, de première année de la filière de Traduction/Interprétation de la Universidad de Concepción au Chili.Le deuxième objectif de notre recherche correspond à une démarche de transposition didactique de résultats empiriques dans le but de mieux accompagner l’apprentissage du français dans notre contexte de formation. Nos propositions didactiques concernent aussi bien la sélection et le séquençage des contenus grammaticaux, la démarche méthodologique d’enseignement de la grammaire, et la correction/évaluation de la compétence grammaticale des apprenants. In fine, notre objectif didactique est de contribuer à la formation d’apprenants plurilingues conscients des processus à l’œuvre dans leur acquisition, et de les accompagner dans un usage réflexif de leurs connaissances linguistiques, notamment grammaticales. / Our research is related both to Second Language Acquisition Research and to Foreign Language Didactics, and has a twofold objective.First, we described crosslinguistic influences, from Spanish L1 and English L2, in the acquisition processes of some structures related to the verb construction in French L3, i.e. the verb construction with noun phrases, the selection of prepositions that potentially introduce these complements, and the acquisition of complement pronouns. To carry out this identification of syntactic transfers, we consider theoretical contributions from both multilingual acquisition research and studies that define developmental stages in French acquisition. Our study is based on written productions taken from first-year students, beginners in French, of the Translation/Interpretation university program at Universidad de Concepción in Chile.The second objective of our research consists of a didactic transposition of empirical results in order to better support the learning of French in our training context. Our teaching proposals deal with the selection and sequencing of grammatical contents, the methodological approach of grammar instruction, and the correction/evaluation of learners’ grammatical competence. In the end, our didactic purpose is to contribute to multilingual learners training and self-conscience of their acquisition processes, to support them with the reflexive use of their linguistic knowledge, in particular their grammatical knowledge.

The Chinese ba-construction is a frequently used, language-specific construction that is difficult for most learners who study Chinese as a second language. The purpose of this study is to test the effectiveness of a Chinese second language pedagogical model on the ba-construction among college-level English-speaking learners of Chinese. For the ba-construction, namely “Subject + ba + ba-NP + ba-VP (Verb + Complement),” the investigator proposed an L2 instructional model that emphasizes both syntactic and semantic relationships between the ba-NP and the ba-VP. Based on this model and on cognitive theories of second language acquisition, the investigator designed a series of grammar instruction sessions that combined meaningful input, communicative tasks and form-focused instruction on four frequently used types of the ba-construction and one less frequently used type. The instruction sessions were administered weekly to the participants for a total of four weeks. Fourteen participants at two proficiency levels, namely novice and intermediate, were recruited for the study. Quantitative data were obtained from a pre-test, a post-test and a delayed post-test in the form of four measurement tasks: Grammaticality Judgement, Cloze, Translation and Contextualized Sentence Production with Keywords. Using a split-plot statistical model (with the time factor crossed and the proficiency level factor non-assignable), non-parametric alternative tests and a semi-structured interview, the investigator addressed the following three research questions: 1) Is the pedagogical model effectively strong in explaining the ba-construction and facilitating L2 learners’ comprehension and production? 2) Are the instruction sessions beneficial to L2 learners’ understanding of different form–meaning mappings of the ba-construction? 3) Do the effects of the pedagogical model and the instruction vary for L2 learners at different proficiency levels? Data analyses revealed a significant main time effect on participants’ overall performance and performance on each measurement task; the main group effect was not significant except for the Cloze task; no interaction effects were found in either the comprehension or production tasks. While participants acquired the ba-constructions in comprehension significantly better than in production, different trends in acquisition patterns were also found between their performances in these two language skills. After receiving instruction, participants performed significantly better in comprehension tasks and could maintain that level of performance in the delayed post-test; their performance on production tasks became better right after the instruction sessions, but deteriorated significantly afterwards. The participants’ improvement on ba-constructions with directional complements (Type 3) and resultative complements (Type 4), as well as the less commonly used type, was significant in general; in comprehension tasks, participants’ improvement on Type 5 was significantly higher than that for the Type 1 ba-constructions expressing relocation/displacement. Data collected from the semi-structured interviews indicated participants’ favorable evaluation and need for integrated L2 instruction that included elements of pedagogical grammar, especially on language-specific constructions. These results point to the importance of L2 grammar instruction in drawing L2 learners’ attention to form and to the association between form and meaning; instruction plays an indispensable role in communicative L2 classes and serves as a necessary reinforcement to the frequent exposure to meaningful L2 input. For Chinese ba-constructions, instruction that focuses on declarative knowledge is beneficial across proficiency levels.

文法教學與錯誤訂正一直是課堂上的重要元素，因此了解老師與學生對於文法教學與錯誤訂正的信念有助於教學。本研究旨在探討台灣國民中學英語老師與學生對於文法教學與錯誤訂正的信念差異，並了解不同背景變項對於老師與學生信念的影響。研究工具採自編問卷，針對大台北地區141位國民中學英語老師與214位國民中學學生進行抽樣及問卷施測。資料分析採用SPSS 18.0版本，並將所得的資料以次數分配、百分比、平均數、獨立樣本t檢定及單因子變異數分析進行資料分析。本研究的主要結論如下： 一、老師與學生都相信文法教學與錯誤訂正很重要，但是溝通能力更重要。 二、老師與學生都表示最喜歡團體口語練習，其次是團體書寫練習、個人書寫練習，最後才是個人口語練習。 三、學生比老師更重視文法教學和錯誤訂正，而老師比學生更重視文法練習。 四、學生比老師更肯定同儕訂正，並相信錯誤訂正對當事人與同儕都有益。 五、學生認為口語錯誤和書寫錯誤都需要即時訂正，而老師認為只有書寫錯誤一定要訂正，但口語錯誤只要不影響溝通便不需訂正。 六、老師的性別、年資、學歷與主修科系會影響其文法教學與錯誤訂正的信念。 七、學生的性別、年級、生活經驗與學習經歷會影響其文法教學與錯誤訂正的信念。 根據上述研究結論，本研究針對國民中學英語教師、教育行政主管機關及後續研究提出具體建議。 關鍵字：教師信念、學生信念、文法教學、錯誤訂正 / Grammar instruction and error correction have always been important elements in class. Understanding students’ and teachers’ beliefs in grammar instruction and error correction is helpful to teaching. The purpose of the study is to investigate (1) similarities and differences between Taiwanese junior high school students’ and teachers’ beliefs in grammar instruction and error correction, (2) background factors that may cause differences in teachers’ beliefs in grammar instruction and error correction, and (3) background factors that may cause differences in students’ beliefs in grammar instruction and error correction. Self-designed questionnaires were distributed to 141 English teachers and 214 students in junior high schools in Great Taipei Area. Number distribution, percentage, average, independent-samples t-test, and one-way ANOVA were adopted to analyze the data collected by the questionnaires. A summary of the results is as follows: 1. Both students and teachers believed that while grammar instruction and error correction are essential, communication is more important. 2. Both students and teachers reported their preference for grammar practicing in the same sequential order of group oral practices, group writing practices, individual writing practices, and individual oral practices. 3. Students valued grammar instruction and error correction more than teachers, while teachers valued grammar practices more than students. 4. Students valued peer correction more than teachers and believed error correction is beneficial to those who make errors and their classmates. 5. Students believed both spoken and written errors need immediate correction. Teachers believed that correcting written errors is necessary, but that there is no need to correct the spoken errors as long as they do not obstruct communication. 6. Teachers’ genders, seniorities, degrees of formal schooling, and their majors were influential to their beliefs in grammar instruction and error correction. 7. Students’ genders, grades, personal experiences, and learning experiences were influential to their beliefs in grammar instruction and error correction. Based on the findings, suggestions are provided for junior high school English teachers, educational institutions and researchers of related topics. Keywords: teachers’ beliefs, students’ beliefs, grammar instruction, error correction

No decorrer dos últimos anos, um dos questionamentos da pesquisa em aquisição de segunda língua (doravante L2) diz respeito ao papel das instruções explícita e implícita de formas gramaticais. A maneira através da qual os conhecimentos implícito e explícito são construídos de modo mais eficiente é, ainda, fonte de discordância na literatura. Alguns pesquisadores afirmam que o conhecimento implícito não deriva do aprendizado explícito e, tampouco, pode ser adquirido através da instrução explícita; outros, por sua vez, argumentam que o conhecimento implícito da L2 pode ser adquirido ou facilitado pelo conhecimento explícito. O presente trabalho teve sua origem no interesse pela investigação do efeito das instruções explícita e implícita na aquisição de uma L2, e na observação das diferenças entre os aprendizados implícito e explícito. Acima de tudo, este estudo deriva da percepção de que a maioria de gramáticas e livros didáticos normalmente introduz estruturas gramaticais - em particular, o uso de locuções verbais, que são aqui analisadas - de maneira isolada, sem recorrerem a uma descrição de seu uso por falantes proficientes da L2, e dando prioridade à memorização de listas de verbos. Assim, seis grupos de alunos (três de nível de proficiência básico e três de nível de proficiência intermediário-avançado) do curso de Letras de uma universidade pública foram avaliados em seu conhecimento e capacidade de uso de locuções verbais em inglês, por meio de pré- e pós-testes, compostos de questões de múltipla escolha (tarefas de compreensão) e de exercícios de produção (tarefa de produção). Entre a aplicação do pré- e do pós-teste, foi feita instrução explícita a dois grupos experimentais (um básico e um intermediário-avançado) e implícita a outros dois grupos experimentais (um básico e um intermediário-avançado). Os grupos de controle (um básico e um intermediário-avançado) não receberam instrução. Os resultados dos testes serviram como fonte de análise dos papéis dos dois tipos de instrução mencionados, e mostraram que tanto a instrução explícita quanto a instrução implícita influenciaram positivamente no desempenho dos participantes nos Pós-testes, principalmente quanto aos verbos que podem ser combinados tanto com gerúndios e com infinitivos. Tal resultado pode ser atribuído ao fato de tais verbos representarem uma dificuldade maior para os aprendizes. / During the last years, one of the questions in second language (for this study, L2) acquisition research concerns the role of explicit and implicit grammar instruction in L2 acquisition. However, the way in which implicit and explicit knowledge is most effectively built up is still a source of disagreement in the specialized literature. Some claim that implicit knowledge does not derive from explicit learning nor can it be acquired through explicit instruction; others, in turn, argue that implicit L2 knowledge can be acquired through or facilitated by explicit knowledge. The present work originated in these studies and discussions about the effect of explicit and implicit instruction in the acquisition of a second language, and in the observation of the differences between implicit and explicit learning. Most importantly, this study derives from the perception that the majority of text and grammar books normally introduce grammar structures - in particular, the use of infinitive and gerund complements, which is analyzed here - in an isolated form, without recurring to an explanation of its descriptive use by proficient speakers of the language, giving priority to the memorization of lists of verbs. Therefore, six groups of students from the Languages course (three of basic level, and three of advanced level of proficiency) of a Federal University were assessed in terms of knowledge and skills - concerning the use of infinitives and gerunds through pre- and post-tests, composed of multiple-choice questions (a comprehension task) and production exercises (a production task). Between the applications of the pre- and post-tests, two groups (one basic and one upper-intermediate) were provided with implicit instruction; another two (also of basic and upper-intermediate level) were given explicit instruction. The two remaining groups constituted control groups (also basic and upper-intermediate), and were not given any kind of instruction. The results of the tests provided sources for analysis of the roles of implicit and explicit instruction, and showed that both kinds of instruction resulted in an improvement of most of students' performances, mainly concerning the group of verbs followed by infinitives and gerunds. The greater difficulty faced by the subjects in dealing with these verbs could possibly explain this fact.