This study examined the effectiveness of explicit instruction on second language (L2) learners’ implicit and explicit knowledge of English. Explicit instruction on the generic and non-generic use of English articles was delivered by CALL activities. Four tasks assessed acquisition: elicited imitation, oral production, grammaticality judgement, and metalinguistic knowledge tasks. A pretest and two posttests were conducted immediately and six weeks after the treatment. Durable effects for explicit instruction were found on measures of implicit knowledge and on ungrammatically supplied items on measures of explicit knowledge. This study’s findings contribute towards our understanding of the efficacy of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit knowledge at relatively advanced stages of L2 acquisition.
AkakuraM. (2009). Effect of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit second language knowledge: An empirical study on English article acquisition. Unpublished doctoral thesis, The University of Auckland, New Zealand. [Electronic Version.] Digital Dissertations.
2.
BatstoneR.EllisR. (2009). Principled grammar teaching. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 37, 194–204.
3.
BitchenerJ.KnochU. (2009). The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 63, 204–11.
4.
BrenderA.S. (2002). The effectiveness of teaching articles to (-Art) ESL students in writing classes using consciousness-raising methods. Unpublished EdD, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
5.
ButlerY.G. (2002). Second language learners' theories on the use of English articles: An analysis of the metalinguistic knowledge used by Japanese students in acquiring the English article system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 451–80.
6.
BygateM. (1999). Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners' language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research, 3, 185–214.
7.
CorderS.P. (1967). The significance of learner's errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 5, 161–69.
8.
DeKeyserR.M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In WilliamsC.D.J. (Ed.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
DeKeyserR.M. (2005). What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55, 1–25.
10.
DulayH.BurtM.KrashenS. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
DuPasquierP. (1988). The great escape. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
12.
EllisN. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 164–94.
13.
EllisR. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition: Learning in the classroom. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
14.
EllisR. (2002). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 223–36.
15.
EllisR. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–72.
16.
EllisR. (2008). Explicit knowledge and second language learning and pedagogy. In CenozJ.HornbergerN.H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Volume 6: Knowledge about language (pp. 143–153). 2nd edition.New York: Springer.
17.
EllisR. (2009). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. In EllisR.LoewenS.ElderC.ErlamR.PhilpJ.ReindersH. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 31–64). Bristol/Buffalo, NY/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
18.
EllisR.LoewenS.ElderC.ErlamR.PhilpJ.ReindersH. (2009). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol/Buffalo, NY/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
19.
EllisR.SheenY.MurakamiM.TakashimaH. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 36, 353–71.
20.
ErlamR. (2006). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit knowledge: An empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics, 27, 464–91.
21.
FelixU. (2003). Pedagogy on the line: Identifying and closing the missing links. In FelixU. (Ed.), Language learning online: Towards best practice. Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers, 147–71.
22.
GassS.M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
HanY.EllisR. (1998). Implicit knowledge, explicit knowledge, and general language proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 2, 1–23.
24.
HinkelE.FotosS. (2002). New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
HulstijnJ. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 129–40.
26.
HuongN.T. (2005). Vietnamese learners mastering English articles. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
27.
JacobssonB. (1998). Notes on genericity and article usage in English. Studia Neophilologica, 69, 139–53.
28.
KrashenS.D. (2003). Current issues and controversies: Does grammar teaching work? What about ‘comprehensible output’? In KrashenS.D. (Ed.), Explorations in language acquisition and use: The Taipei lectures (pp. 30–67). Portsmouth: Heinemann.
29.
MacaroE.MastermanL. (2006). Does intensive explicit grammar instruction make all the difference?Language Teaching Research, 10, 297–327.
30.
MackeyA. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557–87.
31.
MasterP. (1994). The effect of systematic instruction on learning the English article system. In OdlinT. (Ed.), Perspectives on pedagogical grammar (pp. 229–52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
MasterP. (1997). The English article system: Acquisition, function, and pedagogy. System, 25, 215–32.
33.
MayerM. (1969). Frog, where are you?New York: The Dial Press.
34.
MayerM. (1974). Frog goes to dinner. New York: The Dial Press.
35.
MuranoiH. (2000). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 50, 617–73.
36.
NassajiH.FotosS. (2004). Current developments in research on the teaching of grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 126–45.
37.
NorrisJ.M.OrtegaL. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
38.
NorrisJ.M.OrtegaL. (2003). Defining and measuring SLA. In DoughtyC.LongM.H. (Eds.), The handbook of SLA (pp. 716–61). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
39.
OrtegaL. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109–48.
40.
ParadowskiM.B. (2007). Foreign-language grammar instruction via the mother tongue. In BoersF.DarquennesJ.TemmermanR. (Eds.) Multilingualism and applied comparative linguistics, Vol. 1: Comparative considerations in second and foreign language instruction (pp. 151–67). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
41.
ParrottM. (2000). Grammar for English language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
RoversM. (2002). An investigation into the effects of two instructional treatments on the development of ESL learners' explicit and implicit knowledge of articles. Unpublished Masters Dissertation, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
43.
SchmidtR. (2001). Attention. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
ShimamuneS.JitsumoriM. (1999). Effects of grammar instruction and fluency training on the learning of the and a by native speakers of Japanese. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 16, 3–16.
45.
ShiozawaT.SimmonsT. (1995). Do improved examination scores indicate acquired skills? A study in teaching the use of articles in journal writing through a continuous testing regimen. Journal of International Studies, 14, 133–49.
46.
SkehanP.FosterP. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93–120.
47.
Stepp-GreanyJ. (2002). Student perceptions on language learning in a technological environment: Implications for the new millennium. Language Learning and Technology, 6, 165–80.
48.
TashimaY. (2004). Teaching English articles by the binary system. Unpublished Master’s Dissertation, Portland State University, OR.
49.
VanPattenB. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
