Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:55:30.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigating explicit and implicit L2 knowledge and learning: Replications of Erlam (2005) and Roehr-Brackin and Tellier (2019)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 August 2020

Karen Roehr-Brackin
Karen Roehr-Brackin*
Affiliation:
University of Essex, UK
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper makes the case for close and approximate replications of Erlam (2005) and a conceptual replication of Roehr-Brackin and Tellier (2019). The two studies recommended for replication are informed by research on explicit and implicit knowledge, learning and teaching. They are ecologically valid classroom studies with either adolescent or child learners as participants and thus investigated as yet relatively under-represented populations in the field of instructed second language acquisition (SLA). Erlam (2005) identified a levelling effect of a particular method of explicit instruction, while Roehr-Brackin and Tellier (2019) showed that language-analytic ability has a role to play even in younger children's language learning. The researchers’ approaches duly reflect the need to take into account cognitive individual learner differences when working in intact classrooms. As the findings of each of the original studies have potentially profound implications for theory and practice in the field, replication is deemed both timely and desirable. In order to facilitate this endeavour, the key features of the original studies are summarised, and specific proposals on the methodological characteristics of suitable replication studies are put forward.

Type
Replication Research
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , April 2022 , pp. 271 - 283
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. (1959). The Modern Language Aptitude Test. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M. (2002a). Modern Language Aptitude Test – Elementary: MLAT-E. Rockville, MD: Second Language Testing Foundation.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M. (2002b). Modern Language Aptitude Test: MLAT-N. Bethesda, MD: Second Language Testing Foundation.Google Scholar
Collins, L., Trofimovich, P., White, J., Cardoso, W., & Horst, M. (2009). Some input on the easy/difficult grammar question: An empirical study. Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 336–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Graaff, R. (1997). The eXperanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 249–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313–348). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2005). What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55(S1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M., & Prieto Botana, G. (2015). The effectiveness of processing instruction in L2 grammar acquisition: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 290–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. J. (2019). Cognitive language aptitude. Language Learning, 69(S2), 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (Ed.) (1994). Implicit and explicit learning of languages. London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 305–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2015). Implicit AND explicit language learning: Their dynamic interface and complexity. In Rebuschat, P. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 3–23). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of L2 explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54(2), 227–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2006). Modelling learning difficulty and second language proficiency: The differential contributions of implicit and explicit knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 431–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erlam, R. (2005). Language aptitude and its relationship to instructional effectiveness in second language acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 9(2), 147–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M. (2015). Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In Rebuschat, P. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 443–482). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, B., & Hart, D. (1997). Language aptitude and second language proficiency in classroom learners of different starting ages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 379–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Housen, A., Pierrard, M., & Van Daele, S. (2005). Structure complexity and the efficacy of explicit grammar instruction. In Housen, A. & Pierrard, M. (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 235–269). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaekel, N., Schurig, M., Florian, M., & Ritter, M. (2017). From early starters to late finishers? A longitudinal study of early foreign language learning in school. Language Learning, 67(3), 631–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching, 44(2), 137–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2008). Weighing the benefits of studying a foreign language at a younger starting age in a minimal input situation. Second Language Research, 24(1), 35–63.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2016). The construct validity of language aptitude: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 801–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtman, K. (2013). Developmental comparisons of implicit and explicit language learning. Language Acquisition, 20(2), 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtman, K. (2016). Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners? Journal of Child Language, 43, 707–730.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861–883.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meara, P. (2005). LLAMA language aptitude tests: The manual. University of Wales Swansea.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In Healy, A. F. & Bourne, L. E. (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (Ed.) (2006). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2014). The association between aptitude components and language skills in young learners. In Pawlak, M. & Aronin, L. (Eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism: Studies in honour of David Singleton (pp. 51–68). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2001). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analytic review. Language Learning, 51(1), 157–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimsleur, P. (1966). The Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery. New York, NY: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Porte, G. K., & McManus, K. (2019). Doing replication research in applied linguistics. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.Google Scholar
Ranta, L. (2002). The role of learners’ language analytic ability in the communicative classroom. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 159–180). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rebuschat, P. (Ed.) (2015). Implicit and explicit learning of languages. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. (1997). Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47(1), 45–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez Silva, L. H., & Roehr-Brackin, K. (2016). Language learning aptitude and working memory as predictors of instructed adult L2 learners’ explicit and implicit L2 knowledge. Paper presented at the Cognitive Approaches to Language Pedagogy 2 conference, Basel, Switzerland, 10–11 June 2016.Google Scholar
Roehr, K. (2012). Aptitude treatment interaction (ATI) research. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 31–35). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roehr, K., & Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A. (2009). Metalinguistic knowledge: A stepping stone towards L2 proficiency? In Benati, A. (Ed.), Issues in second language proficiency (pp. 79–94). London, UK: Continuum.Google Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K. (2018). Metalinguistic awareness and second language acquisition. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K., & Tellier, A. (2019). The role of language-analytic ability in children's instructed second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 1111–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, V., Meara, P., Aspinall, R., Fallon, L., Goss, T., Keey, E., & Thomas, R. (2016). Testing aptitude: Investigating Meara's (2005) LLAMA tests. EuroSLA Yearbook, 16, 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35–78.Google Scholar
Sawyer, M., & Ranta, L. (2001). Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 319–353). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (2002). Theorising and updating aptitude. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle 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 (pp. 17–40). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 263–308.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Y., & DeKeyser, R. (2017). The interface of explicit and implicit knowledge in a second language: Insights from individual differences in cognitive aptitudes. Language Learning, 67(4), 747–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tellier, A. (2013). Developing a measure of metalinguistic awareness for children aged 8–11. In Roehr, K. & Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A. (Eds.), The metalinguistic dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 15–43). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Tellier, A., & Roehr-Brackin, K. (2013). Metalinguistic awareness in children with differing language learning experience. EuroSLA Yearbook, 13, 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tellier, A., & Roehr-Brackin, K. (2017). Raising children's metalinguistic awareness to enhance classroom second language learning. In García Mayo, M. d. P. (Ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights (pp. 22–48). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolentino, L. C., & Tokowicz, N. (2014). Cross-language similarity modulates effectiveness of second language grammar instruction. Language Learning, 64(2), 279–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomak, I. (2019). Contributions of type of instruction, individual differences in cognitive ability and age to the development of explicit and implicit knowledge of L2 English articles: A study with Russian learners of English (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis). University of Essex.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (Ed.). (2004). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wen, Z., Biedroń, A., & Skehan, P. (2017). Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Language Teaching, 50(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesche, M. B. (1981). Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems. In Diller, K. C. (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 119–154). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Williams, J. N. (2012). Working memory and SLA. In Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 427–441). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar