Instructed Second Language Acquisition Research and Its Relevance for L2 Teacher Education
Abstract
Two areas of second language acquisition (SLA) research are distinguished as ‘naturalistic’ and ‘instructed’ SLA. The former refers to learning a second language (L2) through exposure to and interaction with native speakers of the language in much the same way that children acquire their first language. The latter refers to learners whose experience with the L2 is through learning it in a classroom setting. This article focuses on instructed SLA and addresses two specific questions: 1) Does type of instruction make a difference in L2 learning? 2) Are particular types of corrective feedback more effective for L2 learning than others? Theoretical and empirical work relevant to both questions is reviewed and implications for L2 teaching are discussed.References
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 Learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543-574.
Blaxton, T. A. (1989). Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer-appropriate processing framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 657–668.
Crookes, G. & Gass, S. (Eds) (1993). Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters.
Dilans, G. (2010). Corrective feedback and L2 vocabulary development: Prompts and recasts in the adult ESL classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 66, 787–815.
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.256-310). Oxford: Blackwell.
DeKeyser, R. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195-221.
DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction and second language acquisition (pp. 339-360). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368.
Ellis, R. H. Basturkmen, & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51 (2), 281–318.
Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (Ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp. 401-435). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Harley, B. (1998). The role of focus-on-form tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In C.
Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 156-174). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Genesee, F. (2004). What do we know about bilingual education for majority language students? In T. K. Bhatia and
W. Ritchie (Eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism (pp. 547-576). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 62(8), 387–98.
Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1984). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. & Seliger, H. W. (1975). The essential contributions of formal instruction in adult second language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 173-183.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, P.M., Halter, R., White, J.L., & Horst, M. (2002). Comprehension-based learning: The limits of “do it yourself”. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 427-464.
Lochtman, K. (2002). Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 271–283.
Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisitionAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379, 259-278.
Long, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition 413-454.(pp. 413-454). New York: Academic Press.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
Lyster, R. & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269-300.
Lyster, (1994). The effect of funcitonal-analytic teaching on aspects of French immersion students’sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 263-287.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40.
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265-302.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37 - 66.
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed). Conversational interaction and second language acquisition (pp. 407-452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
Pica, T. and Doughty, C. (1985). The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 223-49.
Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). Corrective feedback makes a difference: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher (pp. 119-140). In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks second language learning, teaching and testing. London: Longman.
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–633.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301-322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Simard, D., & Jean, G. (2011). An exploration of L2 teachers’ use of pedagogical interventions devised to draw L2 learners’ attention to form. Language Learning, 61(3), 759–785.
Spada, N. (2011). Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research. Language Teaching, 44, 225-236.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30,73-87.
Spada, N., Jessop, L., Suzuki, W., Tomita, Y. & Valeo (2014). Isolated and integrated form- focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge. Language Teaching
Research,1-21. doi: 10.1177/1362168813519883
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 1-46.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or Integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42, 181-207.
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and pre-emption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181204.
Trahey, M. (1996). Positive evidence in second language acquisition: Some long term effects. Second Language Research, 12, 111139.
Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 235– 263.
Blaxton, T. A. (1989). Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer-appropriate processing framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 657–668.
Crookes, G. & Gass, S. (Eds) (1993). Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters.
Dilans, G. (2010). Corrective feedback and L2 vocabulary development: Prompts and recasts in the adult ESL classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 66, 787–815.
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.256-310). Oxford: Blackwell.
DeKeyser, R. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195-221.
DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction and second language acquisition (pp. 339-360). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368.
Ellis, R. H. Basturkmen, & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51 (2), 281–318.
Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (Ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp. 401-435). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Harley, B. (1998). The role of focus-on-form tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In C.
Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 156-174). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Genesee, F. (2004). What do we know about bilingual education for majority language students? In T. K. Bhatia and
W. Ritchie (Eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism (pp. 547-576). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 62(8), 387–98.
Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1984). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. & Seliger, H. W. (1975). The essential contributions of formal instruction in adult second language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 173-183.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, P.M., Halter, R., White, J.L., & Horst, M. (2002). Comprehension-based learning: The limits of “do it yourself”. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 427-464.
Lochtman, K. (2002). Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 271–283.
Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisitionAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379, 259-278.
Long, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition 413-454.(pp. 413-454). New York: Academic Press.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
Lyster, R. & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269-300.
Lyster, (1994). The effect of funcitonal-analytic teaching on aspects of French immersion students’sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 263-287.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40.
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265-302.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37 - 66.
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed). Conversational interaction and second language acquisition (pp. 407-452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
Pica, T. and Doughty, C. (1985). The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 223-49.
Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). Corrective feedback makes a difference: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins..
Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher (pp. 119-140). In M. Bygate, P. Skehan & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks second language learning, teaching and testing. London: Longman.
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–633.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301-322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Simard, D., & Jean, G. (2011). An exploration of L2 teachers’ use of pedagogical interventions devised to draw L2 learners’ attention to form. Language Learning, 61(3), 759–785.
Spada, N. (2011). Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research. Language Teaching, 44, 225-236.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30,73-87.
Spada, N., Jessop, L., Suzuki, W., Tomita, Y. & Valeo (2014). Isolated and integrated form- focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge. Language Teaching
Research,1-21. doi: 10.1177/1362168813519883
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 1-46.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or Integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42, 181-207.
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and pre-emption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181204.
Trahey, M. (1996). Positive evidence in second language acquisition: Some long term effects. Second Language Research, 12, 111139.
Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 235– 263.
Downloads
Published
2014-05-01
Issue
Section
Essays
License
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in an institutional repository or on their website) prior and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
4. Please note that while every opportunity will be taken to ensure author participation in the editing process, due to time constraints final copyediting changes may be made before publication to ensure APA adherence throughout all submissions.
