L2 learners’ acquisition of simple vs. complex linguistic features across explicit vs. implicit instructional approaches: The mediating role of beliefs
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online November, 2022
L2 learners’ acquisition of simple vs. complex linguistic features across explicit vs. implicit instructional approaches: The mediating role of beliefs
A large number of studies have explored grammar instruction through implicit and explicit instructional conditions. The general conclusion drawn from these studies points to the superiority of explicit instruction; however, the claim has been attenuated by a number of reservations raised regarding its generalizability across types of grammatical structures and learners of different characteristics. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the comparative effectiveness of these two types of instructional conditions in acquiring explicit and implicit knowledge of complex and simple linguistic features by participants holding different epistemic beliefs. The results demonstrated a relative advantage for explicit instruction. However, the results also showed that the effectiveness of explicit/implicit instructional conditions varied for the participants. Additionally, the findings provided evidence against the assumption that complex structures are best learned through implicit instructional conditions and simple structures are best taught explicitly. The hypothesis that learners with more sophisticated epistemic beliefs outperform those with more naive epistemic beliefs in learning complex grammatical structures was not borne out by the analyses. Conclusions and suggestions for further research are provided.
AkakuraM. (2012). Evaluating the effectiveness of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 16, 9–37.
2.
AndrewsK.L.Z. (2007). The effects of implicit and explicit instruction on simple and complex grammatical structures for adult English language learners. TESL-EJ, 11, 1–15.
3.
AndringaS.J. (2005). Form-focused instruction and the development of second language proficiency. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
4.
AndringaS.de GlopperC.M.HacquebordH. (2011). Effect of explicit and implicit instruction on free written response task performance. Language Learning, 61, 868–903.
5.
Baxter MagoldaM.B. (2004). Evolution of a constructivist conceptualization of epistemological reflection. Educational Psychologist, 39, 31–42.
6.
BellP.D. (2006). Can factors related to self-regulated learning and epistemological beliefs predict learning achievement in undergraduate asynchronous web-based courses? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA.
7.
BråtenI.FergusonL.E. (2014). Investigating cognitive capacity, personality, and epistemic beliefs in relation to science achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 36, 124–130.
8.
BråtenI.StrømsøH. I. (2010). When law students read multiple documents about global warming: Examining the role of topic-specific beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing. Instructional Science, 38, 635–657.
9.
ChinnC.A.RinehartR.W. (2016). Epistemic cognition and philosophy. In GreeneJ.SandovalW.A.BråtenI. (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 425–453). New York: Routledge.
10.
de GraaffR. (1997). The Experanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language acquisition, 19, 249–276.
11.
de GraaffR.HousenA. (2009). Investigating the effects and effectiveness of L2 instruction. In LongM.H.DoughtyC.J. (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 726–775). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
12.
DeKeyserR. (1994). Implicit and explicit learning of L2 grammar: A pilot study. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 188–194.
13.
DeKeyserR. (2005). What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55, 1–25.
14.
DornyeiZ. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
DoughtyC. (1991) Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study on SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 431–469.
16.
ElbyA.MacranderC.HammerD. (2016). Epistemic cognition in science: Uncovering old roots to turn over new leaves. In GreeneJ.A.SandovalW.A.BråtenI. (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 113–127). New York: Routledge.
17.
EllisN. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 72, 164–194.
18.
EllisN.C.CollinsL. (2009). Input and second language acquisition: The roles of frequency, form and function. Introduction to the special issue. Modern Language Journal, 93, 329–335.
19.
EllisR. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. 2nd edition.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
HammerD.ElbyA. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In HoferB.K.PintrichP.R. (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 169–190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
HoferB.K. (2016). Epistemic cognition as a psychological construct: advancements and challenges. In GreeneJ.A.SandovalW.A.BråtenI. (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 19–38). New York: Routledge.
22.
HoferB.K.BendixenL.D. (2012), Personal epistemology: Theory, research, and future directions. In HarrisK., (Ed.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 225–254). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23.
HoferB.K.PintrichP.R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.
24.
HoferB.K.SinatraG.M. (2010). Epistemology, metacognition, and self-regulation: Musings on an emerging field. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 113–120.
25.
HousenA.PierrardM.Van DaeleS. (2005). Rule complexity and the efficacy of explicit grammar instruction. In HousenA.PierrardM. (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 235–269). Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
26.
HulstijnJ.H. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 129–140.
27.
JeanG.SimardD. (2013). Deductive versus inductive grammar instruction: Investigating possible relationships between gains, preferences and learning styles. System, 41, 1023–1042.
28.
KarimiM.N. (2014a). EFL students’ grammar achievement in a hypermedia context: Exploring the role of internet-specific personal epistemology. System, 42, 1–11.
29.
KarimiM.N. (2014b). Disciplinary variations in English domain-specific personal epistemology: Insights from disciplines differing along Biglan’s dimensions of academic domains classification. System, 44, 89–100.
30.
KingP.M.KitchenerK.S. (Eds.) (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
31.
KlapperJ.ReesJ. (2003). Reviewing the case for explicit grammar instruction in the university foreign language learning context. Language Teaching Research, 7(3), 285–314.
32.
KrashenS. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
KrashenS. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Pergamon.
34.
KrashenS. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. In EllisN. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of language (pp. 45–77). London: Academic Press.
35.
KuhnD.CheneyR.WeinstockM. (2000). The development of epistemological understanding. Cognitive Development, 15, 309–328.
36.
LeeM.H.JohansonR.E.TsaiC.C. (2008). Exploring Taiwanese high school students’ conceptions of and approaches to learning science through a structural equation modeling analysis. Science Education, 92, 191–220.
37.
LeeW.W.S.ChanC.K.K. (2018). Relationships among epistemic beliefs, perception of learning environment, study approaches and academic performance: A longitudinal exploration with 3P model. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27, 267–276.
38.
LiangJ.C.TsaiC.C. (2008). Internet self-efficacy and preferences toward constructivist internet-based learning environments: A study of pre-school teachers in Taiwan. Educational Technology and Society, 11, 226–237.
39.
MacaroE.MastermanL. (2006). Does intensive explicit grammar instruction make all the difference?Language Teaching Research, 10, 297–327.
40.
MadjarN.WeinstockM.KaplanA. (2016). Epistemic beliefs and achievement goal orientations: Relations between constructs versus personal profiles. The Journal of Educational Research, 110, 32–49.
41.
MasonL.BoscoloP.TornatoraM.C.RonconiL. (2013). Besides knowledge: A cross-sectional study on the relations between epistemic beliefs, achievement goals, self-beliefs, and achievement in science. Instructional Science, 41, 49–79.
42.
MasonL.GavaM.BoldrinA. (2008). On warm conceptual change: The interplay of text, epistemological beliefs, and topic interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 291–309.
43.
MuisK.R.FrancoG.M. (2009). Epistemic beliefs: setting the standards for self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 306–318.
44.
PaesaniK. (2005). Literary texts and grammar instruction: Revisiting the inductive presentation. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 15–23.
45.
PerryW.B. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
46.
RadwanA.A. (2005). The effectiveness of explicit attention to form in language learning. System, 33, 69–87.
47.
ReberA.S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219–235.
48.
ReberA.S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
49.
RichterT.SchmidS. (2010). Epistemological beliefs and epistemic strategies in self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 47–65.
50.
RobinsonP. (1995). Attention, memory and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283–331.
51.
RobinsonP. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 27–77.
52.
RobinsonP. (1997). Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247.
53.
RobinsonP.MackeyA.GassS.M.SchmidtR. (2012). Attention and awareness in second language acquisition. In GassS.MackeyA. (Eds.). The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 247–266). New York: Routledge
54.
RutherfordW. (1987). Second language grammar: Learning and teaching. New York: Longman.
55.
SchommerM. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498–504.
56.
SchommerM.CrouseA.RhodesN. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: Believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 435–443.
57.
Schommer-AikinsM. (2002). An evolving theoretical framework for an epistemological belief system. In HoferB.K.PintrichP.R. (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 103–118). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
58.
Schommer-AikinsM.DuellO.K. (2013). Domain specific and general epistemological beliefs. Their effects on mathematics. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 31, 317–330.
59.
SchrawG.BendixenL.D.DunkleM.E. (2002). Development and validation of the Epistemological Beliefs Inventory (EBI). In HoferB.K.PintrichP.R. (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261–275). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60.
SchulzR.A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA–Colombia. Modern Language Journal, 85, 244–258.
61.
ScottV. (1989). An empirical study of explicit and implicit teaching strategies in French. Modern Language Journal, 72, 14–22.
62.
SpadaN.TomitaY. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 1–46.
63.
SuzukiY.DeKeyserR. (2017). The interface of explicit and implicit knowledge in a second language: Insights from individual differences in cognitive aptitudes. Language Learning, 67, 747–790.
64.
Tammenga-HelmantelM.ArendsE.CanrinusE. (2014). The effectiveness of deductive, inductive, implicit and incidental grammatical instruction in Dutch second language classrooms. System, 45, 198–210.
65.
Tammenga-HelmantelM.BazhutkinaI.SteringaS.HummelI.SuhreC. (2016). Comparing inductive and deductive grammatical instruction in teaching German as a foreign language in Dutch classrooms. System, 63, 101–114.
66.
TodeT. (2007). Durability problems with explicit instruction in an EFL context: The learning of the English copula ‘be’ before and after the introduction of the auxiliary ‘be’. Language Teaching Research, 11, 11–30.
67.
TomlinsonC.A.JarvisJ. (2009). Differentiation: Making curriculum work for all students through responsive planning and instruction. In RenzulliJ.S.GubbinsE.J.McMillenK.S.EckertR.D.LittleC.A. (Eds.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 599–628). Storrs, CT: Creative Learning Press.
68.
TsaiC.C.HoH.N.J.LiangJ.C.LinH.M. (2011). Scientific epistemic beliefs, conceptions of learning science and self-efficacy of learning science among high school students. Learning and Instruction, 21, 757–769.
69.
VogelS.HerronC.ColeS.YorkH. (2011). Effectiveness of a guided inductive versus a deductive approach on the learning of grammar in the intermediate-level college French classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 44, 353–380.
70.
WinbergT.M.HofverbergA.LindforsM. (2018). Relationships between epistemic beliefs and achievement goals: developmental trends over grades 5–11. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 295–315.
