implicit instruction

Although there is controversy surrounding the place of grammar in foreign language teaching, it remains of great importance for learners. This explanatory mixed methods study aimed to investigate Iranian EFL learners’ perceptions of the teaching effectiveness of three computer-assisted grammar teaching methods, which mainly differ in the degree of explicitness. The participants in the quantitative phase of the study were 70 Iranian EFL learners chosen from Payam Noor University of Tabriz. Besides, 15 participants were randomly selected for the qualitative phase of the study. The participants were divided into three groups of grammar teaching, including Traditional Explicit Instruction (TEI), Implicit Input Enhancement (IIE), and Guided Discovery Method (GDM). The data was collected through the Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) questionnaire and a semi-structured interview. The results of descriptive statistics showed that the participants in all three instructional groups generally had positive perceptions of computerized grammar teaching approaches. Despite opposing views, the qualitative data analysis also confirmed the effectiveness of the methods. This study concludes with some important implications for EFL teachers, learners, and educational administrators to improve the quality of education.

This quantitative research explores the implicit and explicit instruction of reading strategies and its connection through the application of metacognitive strategies by Iranian EFL students. To this purpose, 100 Iranian university freshmen, aged 20-35, studying at the Marwdasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, were selected as participants through a convenient sampling method, from a pool of 117 students. Then, the Key English Test (KET) was used to check their homogeneity. The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) was also used as a pre-test and post-test to specify the kind and occurrence sequence of learning strategies applied by the participants before and after the treatment. So, the participants were allotted to two experimental groups and received implicit and explicit instruction of reading strategies respectively. The results obtained from statistical data analysis showed that affective strategies were the very frequently-applied strategies, while memory strategies were the least frequently-applied strategies in the explicit group. It was also found that in the implicit group, cognitive strategies were the most frequently-applied strategies, while social strategies were the least frequently-applied strategies. These results have pedagogical implications for EFL teachers to use appropriate approaches in teaching reading strategies, that will ultimately help the students to develop more awareness and competence in reading comprehension.

The distinction between implicit and explicit grammatical knowledge and their distinct roles and contributions to the second language acquisition has been the recent subject of debate among second language acquisition researchers (Ellis, 2004).. To bridge this gap, whereas the first question of this study aimed at appraising the explicit vs. implicit grammar instruction among EFL leaners, further investigation was accomplished to illuminate the relationship between EFL learners’ explicit/implicit grammar knowledge and their general language proficiency. To this end, 40 EFL leaners participated in the first phase of the study. While the participants in the first experimental group received explicit interventional program (Ellis & Worthington, 1994), the second experimental group benefitted from enhanced input instruction (Sharwoodsmith, 1981). The results indicated the superiority of the explicit instruction in developing explicit grammar knowledge among the EFL participants. For the sake of the second phase of the study, a sample population of 140 EFL learners was asked to complete Timed and Untimed Grammatical Judgment Test and the sample TOEFL language proficiency test. A set of correlation coefficients was run and the results revealed that there was no significant correlation between the EFL participants’ implicit knowledge and their language proficiency, while the findings confirmed a statistically significant relationship between EFL learners’ explicit grammar knowledge and the subcomponents of their general language proficiency. The findings have some pedagogical implications for EFL teachers, practitioners, and also material developers.

The present study examined the effect of different vocabulary instruction methods on EFL learners’ vocabulary learning and retention. Elementary and advanced EFL learners (N = 120), selected through convenience sampling, were randomly assigned to three conditions (i.e., six groups for the two levels). The learners in the explicit group received vocabulary awareness-raising and pushed output activities. The implicit group was exposed to input flooding, while the modified-implicit group received the pushed output activity and input flooding. The vocabulary learning of the participants was measured using teacher-developed vocabulary tests. The results indicated that learners receiving explicit as well as modified-implicit activities outperformed those exposed to implicit instruction on vocabulary tests. This implies that awareness-raising as well as pushed output activities help learners notice, learn vocabulary better, and retain them longer. Several implications for teachers, materials developers, and syllabus designers on including pushed output activities with more involvement, and areas for further research are discussed.

Research on the effect of implicit and explicit instruction on developing learners’ explicit knowledge by the use of measures of explicit knowledge abounds in the literature. However, measuring learners’ implicit knowledge employing fine-grained measures has rarely been the concern of researchers in the field. Therefore, the present study is an attempt to scrutinize the effectiveness of implicit and explicit instruction through administering a Word Monitoring Task (WMT), as a more valid psycholinguistic measure of implicit knowledge. The necessary data were collected from 47 pre-intermediate participants in three different groups, i.e., (1) the implicit group received textually enhanced texts of verb complementation, (2) the explicit group was presented with metalinguistic explanations and examples of the target feature, and (3) the control group was deprived of any instruction. The results of the mixed between-within subjects ANOVA revealed that although both implicit and explicit instructions facilitated the development of the implicit knowledge of the target feature, the learners in the explicit group outperformed their counterparts in the implicit and the control groups in both the immediate and delayed post-tests. Moreover, the results indicated more durable effects of implicit instruction compared with those of explicit instruction. Overall, the findings provided evidence for the superiority of explicit instruction and the long-term effect of implicit instruction in developing relevant knowledge of verb complementation. The findings of the study can benefit both teachers and learners in developing teaching/learning strategies to improve and facilitate the grasp of both explicit and implicit knowledge.

Discourse markers improve both the quality and comprehension of a written text. This study aimed at investigating the effect of explicit and implicit instruction of formal meta-discourse markers on writ- ing skills. The quantitative data were collected from 90 upper-intermediate students at Shiraz Univer- sity Language Center. Two experimental groups went through an instruction, while the control group did not receive any instruction on formal meta-discourse markers. A pretest-posttest method of as- sessment was employed. After an eight-session treatment, a posttest was administered to compare the participants‟ performances. The results revealed that the instruction of formal meta-discourse markers had a positive effect on the learners‟ writing skills. Moreover, the results showed that learners who received explicit instruction of meta-discourse markers could perform better in writing than learners who received implicit instruction. The findings can have pedagogical implications for EFL educators and materials developers to enhance learners‟ writing skill. Furthermore, the findings provide impor- tant insight into the impact of teaching discourse markers and raising learners‟ awareness through ex- plicit instruction in order to make pupils produce more cohesive and coherent written texts. Besides, it sheds light on the effect of different types of instruction on learning metadiscourse markers and its application in writing skills.

Meta-discourse markers are an inevitable part of oral proficiency which improve both the quality and comprehension of learners’ speech. While studies of oral meta-discourse have been conducted since the 1980s in a European or US context, they have remained relatively untouched in Iran. Therefore, this study aimed to seek the impact of both explicit and implicit teaching of formal meta-discourse markers on EFL learners’ oral proficiency. To this end, the quantitative data were collected from ninety upper-intermediate students at Shiraz University Language Center. Two groups went through an instruction for an eight-session treatment. However the experimental group ‘B’ (N=45) were instructed the formal meta-discourse markers implicitly, the target formal meta-discourse markers were taught to the experimental group ‘A’ (N=45) explicitly. To compare the participants’ performances, an SOPI (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) posttest was administered. The results revealed that the instruction of meta-discourse markers had a positive effect on the learners’ oral outcome. Moreover, the findings showed that learners who received explicit method of teaching formal meta-discourse markers could perform better in speaking than learners who received implicit instruction. The findings can have pedagogical implications for EFL educators and materials developers to enhance learners’ oral proficiency. The findings also provide important insight into the effect of teaching discourse markers and raising learners’ awareness through explicit instruction to make pupils produce more cohesive and coherent speech.