Implicit or Explicit Instruction?
It’s about one month now since I started
teaching German and one question I am always pondering on is how to present
German grammar: explicitly explaining grammatical rules or engage students in
exercises to facilitate the acquisition of language structures implicitly?
Chen (2011) undertook an interesting
experiment that could serve as a rough guideline for language teachers. But let’s
have a look on the differences between implicit and explicit learning first: Implicit
learning is learning without intention or awareness, usually adopted by
children learning their L1. It leads to implicit knowledge, a form of knowledge
that one possesses but is unable to verbalize. Explicit learning on the other
hand is learning with intention that often occurs in adults. It leads to
explicit knowledge, a form of knowledge that one is aware of when using it. For
the L2 learner, implicit knowledge is the ability to use L2, and explicit
knowledge the ability to explain grammatical rules.
Chen investigated the effects of implicit
and explicit instruction on native English speakers’ acquisition of Chinese as
a second language. The author predicted, that there is no difference in the acquisition of if grammar patterns in L1 are similar to grammar pattern in L2; however, if grammar pattern are different, there is a significant difference between implicit and explit instruction.
36 college students at the beginner level were randomly assigned to a group with implicit instruction and a group with explicit instruction. Both groups were taught negation with "不" (which has the same word order in English) and time adverbs (e.g. 每天) (which has a different word order in English). After two training sessions, both groups completed a grammaticality judgment task.
The statistical analysis shows no significant difference between the two groups in the acqusition of negation markers. However, the explicit group performed significantly better than the explicit group in the acqusition of time adverbs. This sresult uggests that explicit instructions are not necessary when a positive transfer occurs, that is when L1 and L2 grammar patterns are similar. However, explicit instruction is necessary to facilitate acquisition of structures that are different from one’s L1.
Chen showed the success of implicit instruction with a multiple choice test after short-term instruction. It would be interesting to implement an experiment with instructions over a longer period, and instead of a grammaticality judgment task, administer a task that tests for active production (like speaking or writing).
36 college students at the beginner level were randomly assigned to a group with implicit instruction and a group with explicit instruction. Both groups were taught negation with "不" (which has the same word order in English) and time adverbs (e.g. 每天) (which has a different word order in English). After two training sessions, both groups completed a grammaticality judgment task.
The statistical analysis shows no significant difference between the two groups in the acqusition of negation markers. However, the explicit group performed significantly better than the explicit group in the acqusition of time adverbs. This sresult uggests that explicit instructions are not necessary when a positive transfer occurs, that is when L1 and L2 grammar patterns are similar. However, explicit instruction is necessary to facilitate acquisition of structures that are different from one’s L1.
Chen showed the success of implicit instruction with a multiple choice test after short-term instruction. It would be interesting to implement an experiment with instructions over a longer period, and instead of a grammaticality judgment task, administer a task that tests for active production (like speaking or writing).
Chen, C., (2011). Implicit/Explicit
Instruction Effects and Cross-linguistic Influence in the Second Language
Acquisition of Chinese. Taiwan Journal of
Chinese as a Second Language, 3(2), 77-96.
I think there are more levels between 100% similar and 100% different when it comes to grammatical pattern between two languages. According to Prator(1967), there are six difficulty hierarchies in grammatical learning, including:
ReplyDelete1.Transfer:means there are no differences between L1 and L2.
2.Coalescence: means two items in L1 become coalesced into essentially one item in L2.
3.Underdifferentiation :means an item in L1 is absent in L2.
4.Reinterpretation: means an item in L1 has a new shape or distribution in L2.
5.Overdifferentiation: means a new item entirely, bearing any similarity to L1 item.
6.Split: means one item in L1 split into two or more items in L2.
I am curious about which level was Chen talking about when she said similarity needs no explicit instruction. Because even though level one(Transfer) is the easiest level to learn, I think language learners will come across more difficulties when they are learning items from level three(Reinterpretation).
Because in Reinterpretation, learners are familiar with the item they use in L1, but in L2, the same item although similar but may different in some ways. How would Chen call it? A similarity or difference?
What would Chen's suggestion be for language teachers when it comes to subtle differences between L1 and L2? Should teachers use explicit or implicit instruction?
The difference level according to Prator (1967) would be Reinterpretation (an item in L1 has a new shape or distribution in L2).
ReplyDeleteChen says, that only explicit knowledge has been tested by the gramaticality judgment task, but not implicit knowledge. This means that if you want to learn for a multiple choice grammar test, the teacher should use explicit instruction.