Effects of three types of practice after explicit explanation

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorBrown, James D.
dc.contributor.authorKondo-Brown, Kimi
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Hawaii at Manoa. Department of Second Language Studies.
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-09T21:41:57Z
dc.date.available2016-05-09T21:41:57Z
dc.date.issued2000
dc.description.abstract50 university students of beginning Japanese randomly assigned to one of four groups received different types of grammar instruction on specific lexical and sociolinguistic rules: explicit explanation (EE) only, EE plus mechanical output practice (MOP), EE plus structure-based communicative output practice (SOP), and EE plus structure-based communicative input practice (SIP). Results from sentence-level production and interpretation tests (a pretest, immediate, and delayed posttests) suggest that: (a) SIP plus EE is more effective than EE in improving both immediate and delayed performance on interpretation, and (b) MOP plus EE is more effective than EE in improving immediate, but not delayed, performance on interpretation. No other comparison proved statistically significant. This article suggests that, as for the ways learners process input, the conversion from input to intake may not require SIP, but the accommodation of intake into the learners’ long-term memory seems to help it.
dc.format.digitaloriginreformatted digital
dc.format.extent28 pages
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10125/40638
dc.languageeng
dc.relation.ispartofUniversity of Hawai'I Second Langauge Studies Paper 19(1)
dc.titleEffects of three types of practice after explicit explanation
dc.typeSecond Language Studies Paper
dc.type.dcmiText

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Kondo-Brown (2000)_WP19(1).pdf
Size:
400.95 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

SLS Papers (2000-present)