Book contents
- Language Aptitude Theory and Practice
- The Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series
- Language Aptitude Theory and Practice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Editors and Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- 1 Language Aptitude Research
- Part I Revisiting and Refining Aptitude Tests
- Part II Aptitude Testing of Diverse Groups
- Part III Innovative Perspectives and Paradigms
- Part IV Aptitude–Treatment Interaction (ATI)
- 14 The Role of Language Aptitude and Timing of Form-Focused Instruction in TBLT
- 15 Implicit (Not Explicit) Learning Aptitude Predicts the Acquisition of Difficult (Not Easy) Structure
- 16 Implicit Statistical Learning and Second Language Outcomes
- Part V Final Commentaries
- Index
- References
14 - The Role of Language Aptitude and Timing of Form-Focused Instruction in TBLT
from Part IV - Aptitude–Treatment Interaction (ATI)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 May 2023
Book contents
- Language Aptitude Theory and Practice
- The Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series
- Language Aptitude Theory and Practice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Editors and Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- 1 Language Aptitude Research
- Part I Revisiting and Refining Aptitude Tests
- Part II Aptitude Testing of Diverse Groups
- Part III Innovative Perspectives and Paradigms
- Part IV Aptitude–Treatment Interaction (ATI)
- 14 The Role of Language Aptitude and Timing of Form-Focused Instruction in TBLT
- 15 Implicit (Not Explicit) Learning Aptitude Predicts the Acquisition of Difficult (Not Easy) Structure
- 16 Implicit Statistical Learning and Second Language Outcomes
- Part V Final Commentaries
- Index
- References
Summary
Aptitude–treatment interaction research seeks to determine whether learners extract more benefit from a specific type of instruction in accordance with their language aptitude. Against this backdrop, the present quasi-experimental study addressed the moderating role of language aptitude whilst considering the timing of form-focused instruction within a task cycle and learners’ levels of proficiency. Eight intact groups (N = 159) of French L2 university-level students (4 B1- and 4 B2-level groups) completed a ranking task and a decision task during their regular class time. Results from multiple regression analyses showed that: (a) language analytic ability, measured by LLAMA F, significantly predicted variance for the lower-level proficiency learners who received explicit instruction before or during the tasks; (b) implicit/procedural learning, measured by LLAMA D, significantly predicted variance for the higher-level proficiency learners who received explicit instruction during the task; and (c) no significant interactions were observed for the post-task and the control group.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Language Aptitude Theory and Practice , pp. 357 - 380Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Artieda, G., & Muñoz, C. (2016). The LLAMA tests and the underlying structure of language aptitude at two levels of foreign language proficiency. Learning and Individual Differences, 50 , 42–48. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.06.023Google Scholar
Bokander, L., & Bylund, E. (2020). Probing the internal validity of the LLAMA language aptitude tests. Language Learning, 70, 11–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12368Google Scholar
CAN-8 Virtual Lab [Computer software]. (2018). Toronto, ON: Sounds Virtual Inc. www.can8.com/Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1965). The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training. In Glaser, R. (ed.), Training, Research, and Education. New York, NY: Wiley, pp. 87–136.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M. (1959). Modern Language Aptitude Test: MLAT; Manual. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2018). Reflections on Task-Based Language Teaching. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2020). Task-Based Language Teaching: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2005). Language aptitude and its relationship to instructional effectiveness in second language acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 9(2), 147–171.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2006). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit knowledge: An empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 464–491. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml001Google Scholar
Forsberg, F., & Bartning, I. (2010). Can linguistic features discriminate between the communicative CEFR‐levels? A pilot study of written L2 French. EUROSLA Monographs Series, 1, 133–158.Google Scholar
Granena, G. (2013). Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning and the LLAMA language aptitude test. In Granena, G. & Long, M. (eds.), Sensitive Periods, Language Aptitude, and Ultimate L2 Attainment. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins, pp. 105–129.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, X. (2013). The construct validity of grammaticality judgement tests as measures of implicit and explicit knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000041Google Scholar
Hwu, F., & Sun, S. (2012). The aptitude–treatment interaction effects on the learning of grammar rules. System, 40, 505–521.Google Scholar
Hwu, F., Wei, P., & Sun, S. (2014). Aptitude–treatment interaction effects on explicit rule learning: A latent growth curve analysis. Language Teaching Research, 18, 294–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813510381Google Scholar
Kachinske, I., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). The interaction between timing of explicit grammar explanation and individual differences in second language acquisition. Journal of Second Language Studies, 2(2), 197–232. https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.19003.kacGoogle Scholar
Kim, J., & Nam, H. (2017). Measures of implicit knowledge revisited: Processing modes, time pressure, and modality. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(3), 431–457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000510Google Scholar
Li, S. (2013). The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 634–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12030.xGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2015). The associations between language aptitude and second language grammar acquisition: A meta-analytic review of five decades of research. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 385–408.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2016). The construct validity of language aptitude. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 801–842. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500042XGoogle Scholar
Li, S., Ellis, R., & Zhu, Y. (2016). Task-based versus task-supported language instruction: An experimental study. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 205–229.Google Scholar
Li, S., Ellis, R., & Zhu, Y. (2019). The associations between cognitive ability and L2 development under five different instructional conditions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40(3), 693–722. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000796Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2015). Second Language Acquisition and Task-Based Language Teaching. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. (eds.), Tasks and Language Learning: Integrating Theory and Practice. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 123–167.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2005). LLAMA Language Aptitude Tests [Measurement instruments]. Swansea, UK: Lognostics. www.lognostics.co.uk/tools/llama/Google Scholar
Michaud, G. (2020). À quel moment enseigner la forme dans le cadre d’un enseignement basé sur la tâche? [Doctoral dissertation, Université de Montréal]. Papyrus. http://hdl.handle.net/1866/23557Google Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analysis review. Language Learning, 51(1), 157–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.2001.tb00017.xGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. (1990). Prescription, intuition et usage : le subjonctif français et la variabilié inhérente [Prescription, intuition and use: The French subjunctive and inherent variability]. Langage et société, 54 , 5–33. https://doi.org/10.3406/lsoc.1990.2499Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 301–322.Google Scholar
Shintani, N. (2017). The effects of the timing of isolated FFI on the explicit knowledge and written accuracy of learners with different prior knowledge of the linguistic target. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(1), 129–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000127Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2015). Foreign language aptitude and its relationship with grammar: A critical overview. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 367–384.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2016). Foreign language aptitude, acquisitional sequences, and psycholinguistic processes. In Granena, G., Jackson, D. O., & Yilmaz, Y. (eds.), Cognitive Individual Differences in Second Language Processing and Acquisition. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins, pp. 17–40.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2019). Language aptitude implicates language and cognitive skills. In Wen, Z., Skehan, P., Biedroń, A., Li, S., & Sparks, R. (eds), Language Aptitude: Advancing Theory, Testing, Research and Practice. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 56–77.Google Scholar
Spada, N. (2011). Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research. Language Teaching, 44(2), 225–236.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Y. (2021). Probing the construct validity of LLAMA_D as a measure of implicit learning aptitude: Incidental instructions, confidence ratings, and reaction time measure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1(14), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000704Google Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E. (2007). How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 171–195.Google Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (2016). Task-based language teaching. In Hall, G. (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching. New York, NY: Rougledge, pp. 238–251.Google Scholar
Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2007). Doing Task-Based Teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yalçın, Ş., & Spada, N. (2016). Language aptitude and grammatical difficulty: An EFL classroom-based study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(2), 239–263.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Y., & Granena, G. (2016). The role of cognitive aptitudes for explicit language learning in the relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(1), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672891400090XGoogle Scholar
Zhang, R. (2015). Measuring university-level L2 learners’ implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 457–486. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263114000370Google Scholar