The Effects of Processing Instruction and Traditional Instruction on the Acquisition of the Present Perfect Tense in the Italian Language
Keywords:
processing instruction, foreign language, grammar, grammar teaching.Abstract
This paper presents the results of a parallel classroom experiment investigating the effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on the acquisition of the Present Perfect Tense in the Italian language. The subjects involved in the present studies were Macedonian student-age learners of Italian residing in their own country. The participants were divided into two groups. The first group received processing instruction and the second group was exposed to traditional instruction. One interpretation and one production measures were used in a post-test design (immediate effect only). The results showed that processing instruction had positive effects on the processing and acquisition of the target feature. The processing instruction group performed better than the traditional instruction group in the interpretation task and in the production task.
References
B. VanPatten. “How juries get hung: Problems with the evidence for a focus on form”. Language Learning, vol. 38, pp. 243-260, 1988.
B. VanPatten. “Processing instruction: An update”. Language Learning, vol. 52, pp. 755-803, 2002.
B. VanPatten. Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1996.
B. VanPatten & T. Cadierno. ”Explicit instruction and input processing”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 15, pp. 225-243, 1993.
R. M. DeKeyser & K. Sokalski. “The differential role of comprehension and production practice”. Language Learning, vol. 46, pp. 613-642, 1996.
J.G. Collentine. “Processing instruction and the subjunctive”. Hispania, vol. 81, pp. 576-587, 1998.
N. Nagata. “Input vs. output practice in educational software for second language acquisition”. Language Learning and Technology, vol. 1, pp. 23-40, 1998a.
N. Nagata. “The relative effectiveness of production and comprehension practice in second language acquisition”. Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 11(2), pp.153-177, 1998b.
L. Q. Allen. “Form-meaning connections and the French causative: An experiment in processing instruction”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 22, pp. 69-84, 2000.
A. Farley. “The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction”. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 143-168, 2004a.
A. Farley. “Processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: is explicit information needed?”. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.227-239, 2004b.
A. Benati. “A Comparative study of the effects of processing instruction and output-based instruction on the acquisition of the Italian future tense”. Language Teaching Research, vol. 5 (2), pp. 95-127, 2001.
A. Benati. “The effects of structured input and explicit information on the acquisition of Italian future tense”. In VanPatten, B. (Еd.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 207-255, 2004a.
A. Benati. “The effects of processing instruction and its components on the acquisition of gender agreement in Italian”. Language Awareness, vol. 13, pp. 67-80, 2004b.
A. Benati. “The effects of processing instruction, traditional instruction and meaning-output instruction on the acquisition of the English past simple tense”. Language Teaching Research, vol. 9 (1), pp. 67-113, 2005.
A. Cheng. “The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of ser and estar”. Hispania, vol. 85, pp. 308–323, 2002.
E. Marsden. “Exploring input processing in the classroom: an experimental comparison of processing instruction and enriched input”. Language Learning, vol. 56, pp. 507-566, 2006.
K. Morgan-Short & H. W. Bowden. “Processing instruction and meaningful output-based instruction: Effects on second language development”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 28 (1), pp. 31-65, 2006.
P. Toth. “Processing instruction and a role for output in second language acquisition”. Language Learning, vol. 56 (2), pp. 319-385, 2006.
J. F.Lee & A. Benati. Delivering Processing Instruction in Classrooms and Virtual Contexts: Research and Practice. London: Equinox, 2007.
B. VanPatten. Processing instruction: Theory, research and commentary. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004.
B. VanPatten & S. Oikennon. “Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 18, pp. 495-510, 1996.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms.
