A Comparative Study of the Impact of Explicit Instruction, Input Enhancement, and Guided Discovery on Iranian EFL Learners’ Passive Voice Production: A Computer-Assisted Language Learning Approach

Rafiei Sakhaei, Sepideh; Behnam, Biook; Seifoori, Zohreh

doi:10.22049/jalda.2024.28567.1539

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

¹ Ph.D. Candidate in TEFL, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

² Associate Professor of TEFL, Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

³ Associate Professor of TEFL, Department of English, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22049/jalda.2024.28567.1539

Abstract

It is commonly agreed that grammar is so important that it should not be ignored. The English passive voice can be a challenging aspect of grammar learning for Iranian EFL learners. The aim of this study was to comparatively and empirically investigate the effect of the Input Enhancement Technique (IET), Guided Discovery Approach (GDA), and Explicit Instruction Method (EIM) on Iranian EFL learners’ passive voice production. It sought to determine the individual effectiveness of these methods and identify the most efficient one. To this end, 70 Iranian EFL learners from the Payam Nour University of Tabriz were chosen and divided into three groups, including GDA (N = 22), IET (N = 25), and EIM (N = 23). The research data were obtained based on three validated, researcher-designed computerized activities. Pretest and posttest were used to elicit information on the learners’ production of passive voice. The results of the data analysis revealed that both IET and GDA had significant effects on the production of passive voice. However, EIM did not significantly influence the production of passive voice. Meanwhile, GDA was found to be the most efficient teaching technique compared with the other methods. This study has some important implications for teachers, students, and syllabus designers.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Grammatical development in L2

Article Title [Persian]

بررسی تطبیقی تاثیر آموزش صریح، درونداد ارتقا یافته و روش اکتشافی هدایت شده در تولید افعال مجهول بین زبان آموزان ایرانی: رویکرد یادگیری زبان به کمک رایانه

Authors [Persian]

سپیده رفیعی سخایی ¹
دکتر بیوک بهنام ²
دکتر زهره سیفوری ³

¹ دانشجوی دکتری آموزش زبان انگلیسی، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران

² دانشیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی، گروه زبان انگلیسی، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران

³ دانشیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی، گروه زبان انگلیسی، واحدعلوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

Abstract [Persian]

امروزه همگان پذیرفته اند که دستور زبان آنقدر مهم است که نباید نادیده انگاشته شود. افعال مجهول انگلیسی میتواند به عنوان یک بخش گرامری دشوار برای زبانآموزان ایرانی به حساب آید. این مطالعه با هدف بررسی تطبیقی و تجربی تاثیر آموزش صریح، تکنیک درونداد ارتقا یافته و رویکرد اکتشفافی هدایت‌ شده بر تولید افعال مجهول بین زبان‌آموزان ایرانی انجام شد و به دنبال تعیین اثربخشی فردی این روشها و شناسایی کارآمدترین آنها بود. بدین منظور 70 نفر از دانشجویان دانشگاه پیام نور تبریز انتخاب و به سه گروه IET (N = 25)، GDA (N = 22) و EIM (N = 23) تقسیم شدند. داده های تحقیق بر اساس سه فعالیت کامپیوتری طراحی شده توسط محقق به دست آمد. پیش آزمون و پس آزمون برای استخراج اطلاعات در مورد تولید افعال مجهول در سه گروه استفاده شد. نتایج تجزیه و تحلیل داده ها نشان داد که هر دو روش آموزشی درونداد ارتقا یافته و رویکرد اکتشفافی هدایت شده تأثیر معناداری بر تولید افعال مجهول داشتند. با این حال، آموزش صریح تاثیر معناداری بر تولید افعال مجهول نداشت. در این میان، رویکرد اکتشفافی هدایت ‌شده به عنوان کارآمدترین تکنیک تدریس در مقایسه با سایر روش ها شناخته شد. این مطالعه پیامدهای مهمی برای معلمان، دانش آموزان و طراحان برنامه درسی دارد.

Keywords [Persian]

یادگیری زبان به کمک رایانه
آموزش صریح
رویکرد اکتشفافی هدایت‌ شده
درونداد ارتقا یافته
تولید افعال مجهول

References

Abadikhah, S., & Shahriyarpour, A. (2012). The role of output, input enhancement and collaborative output in the acquisition of English passive forms. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4), 667. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.4.667-676

Abdollahi-Guilani, M., & Tan, K. H. (2016). English passive and the function of shodan in Persian. Asian Social Science, 12(9), 162-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v12n9p162

Abdulfatai, S. L. (2018). Effect of problem solving and guided discovery methods on office technology and management (OTM) students’ academic performance in shorthand in polytechnics in Kwara and Oyo States (Doctoral dissertation) Kwara State University. https://www.proquest.com

Alcaraz, C., & Isabel, M. (2018). Benefits of guided discovery grammar instruction in the EFL classroom. Psychology, 103(1), 1-18.

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017

Al-Hejin, B. (2004). Attention and awareness: Evidence from cognitive and second language acquisition research. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.7916/salt.v4i1.1600

Anderson, J. (2016). Why practice makes perfect sense: The past, present, and potential future of the PPP paradigm in language teacher education. English Language Teaching Education and Development (ELTED), 19(1), 14-22. http://www.elted.net/volume-19.html

Andrews, K. L. Z. (2007). The effects of implicit and explicit instruction on simple and complex grammatical structures for adult English language learners. TESL-EJ, 11(2), 1-15.

Bahari, A., & Gholami, J. (2022). A systematic review of current research on affordances and challenges of technology-assisted grammar learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(1), 125-148. http://callej.org/journal/23-1/Bahari-Gholami2022.pdf

Bahrani, T., & Nekoueizadeh, M. (2014). The role of input in second language acquisition. Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 1(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.24297/jal.v1i1.1986

Bakhshandeh, S., & Jafari, K. (2018). The effects of input enhancement and explicit instruction on developing Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ explicit knowledge of passive voice. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 3(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-018-0060-4

Basturkmen, H. (2018). Explicit Versus Implicit Grammar Instruction and Knowledge. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0060.pub2

Bruner, J. S. (1961). The Act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21-32.

Byrne, D. (1976). Teaching oral English (2^nd ed.). Longman.

Caprario, M. (2013). Guided discovery grammar instruction: A review of the literature with original teaching materials [Master’s thesis, SIT Graduate Institute,]. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/ipp_collection/689

Carless, D. (2009). Revisiting the TBLT versus P-P-P debate: Voices from Hong Kong. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(9), 49–66. http://hdl.handle.net/10722/201372

Castillo, K.S. (2008). Discovery learning vs traditional instruction in the secondary science classroom; The role of guided inquiry. SED 690, Position Paper. http://www.csun.edu/~ksc63842/Posistion_paper.pdf

Darakhani, L., & Rajabi, P. (2022). Guided discovery learning and personality traits: Focusing on speaking confidence. Journal of Language and Translation, 12(1), 223-233. https://doi.org/10.30495/TTLT.2022.689103

De Jong, T. (2021). The guided inquiry principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer & L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 394-402). Cambridge University Press.

Ebadijalal, M., & Moradkhani, S. (2023). Impacts of computer-assisted collaborative writing, collaborative prewriting, and individual writing on EFL learners’ performance and motivation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2023.2178463

Ellis, N. C. (1995). Consciousness in second language acquisition: A review of field studies and laboratory experiments. Language Awareness, 4(3), 123-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.1995.9959876

Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.

Evans, D. (1999). A Review of ‘PPP’. University of Birmingham. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/collegeartslaw/cels/essays/secondlanguage/evanssla.pdf

Hadian, B., Tavangar-rizi, M. & Amouzade, M. (2013). A functional analysis of the passive structure in Persian. International Journal of Linguistics, 5(4), 22-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v5i4.3681

Han, Z., Park, E. S., & Combs, C. (2008). Textual enhancement of input: Issues and possibilities. Applied linguistics, 29(4), 597-618. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn010

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Longman.

Henson, K. (1980). Discovery learning. Contemporary Education, 51(2), 101-103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532212459031

Hulstijn, J. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 349-381). Blackwell.

Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization. SSLA, 24, 541-577. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102004023

Kalanzadeh, G. A., Jafarigohar, M., Ghonsooly, B., & Soleimani, H. (2018). Mixed effects of input enhancement, explicit instruction, corrective feedback, and pushed output in an input-output mapping practice. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 9(1), 57-82.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. Brinto & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 256-270). National Geographic Learning.

Lim, M. H., & Aryadoust, V. (2022). A scientometric review of research trends in computer-assisted language learning (1977–2020). Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(9), 2675-2700. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1892768

Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. De Bot, R. B. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross- cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Benjamins.

Luquin, M. & Garciamayo, M. P. (2023). The impact of textual enhancement on the acquisition of third person possessive pronouns by child EFL learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0176

Lynch, L. M. (2005). Grammar teaching: Implicit or explicit? http://ezinearticles.com/?Grammar-Teaching:-Implicit-or-Explicit?&id=89342

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.

Maftoon, P., & Sarem, S. N. (2015). A critical look at the presentation, practice, production (PPP) approach: Challenges and promises for ELT. BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, 3(4), 31-36. https://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/brain/article/view/1932

Mamatkulova, S. J. (2023). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(1), 2-8. http://thematicsjournals.in/index.php/tjelt

Mohamadian, Z., & Sabbagh Shabestari, S. (2017). The effect of implicit input enhancement on learning grammatical collocations. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances, 5(2), 81-90. https://doi.org/10.22049/JALDA.2018.26251.1066

Nahavandi, N., & Mukundan, J. (2013). The impact of textual input enhancement and explicit rule presentation on Iranian elementary EFL learners’ intake of simple past tense. English Language Teaching, 6(1), 92-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n1p92

Nassaji, H. & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. Routledge.

Nazari, N. (2013). The effect of implicit and explicit grammar instruction on learners’ achievements in receptive and productive modes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 156-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.051

Nazli, K., & Yahya, U. (2023). The role of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in language teachers’ professional development. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, 7(1), 01-11. https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2023(7-I)01

Nourdad, N., & Tim Aghayi, E. (2014). Focus on form in teaching passive voice of different tenses. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1400-1408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.558

Nwagbo, C. (1999). Effects of Guided-Discovery and Expository Teaching Methods on Attitude Towards Biology Students of Different Levels of Scientific Literacy. Journal of the Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 34, (2), 66-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.11.004

Pawlak, M., & Kruk, M. (2022). Individual differences in computer assisted language learning research. Taylor & Francis.

Pratiwil, A. Y., Rusilowati, A., & Nugroho, S. E. (2021). The use of online learning science materials in guided discovery to enhance student independence. Educational Management, In Press Articles, 1-11.

Qin, J. (2008). The effect of processing instruction and dictogloss tasks on acquisition of the English passive voice. Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 61-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807084494

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Rixon, S., & Smith, R. (2012). Survey review: The work of Brian Abbs and Ingrid Freebairn. ELT Journal, 66(3), 383-393. http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/elt-research

Safdari, M. (2019). Input flooding, input enhancement and writing performance: Effects and percepts. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 281-296. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12418a

Sakhaei, S. R., Behnam, B., & Seifoori, Z. (2023). A comparative study of the effect of explicit, implicit, and discovery learning methods on EFL learners’ comprehension of English passive voice. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies. https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2023.18472.2183

Saumell, V. (2012). Guided discovery for language instruction: A framework for implementation at all levels. Pearson.

Schmidt, R. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review, 11, 11-26.

Schmidt, R. (2012). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T. Suthiwan, & I. Walker (Eds.), Perspectives on individual characteristics and foreign language education (pp. 27–50). De Gruyter.

Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 165-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011943

Sheen, R. (2007). Processing instruction. ELT Journal, 61(2), 161-163. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm009

Simamora, R. E., Saragih, S., & Hasratuddin, A. (2019). Improving students’ Mathematical problem solving ability and self-efficacy through guided discovery learning in local culture context. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/3966

Sulistiani, N. E., & Agustini, R. (2022). Improvement of student’s creative thinking skills by guided inquiry-based student worksheet in acid-base materials. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia (JPKim), 14(3), 139-148. https://doi.org/10.24114/jpkim.v14i3.37396

Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar. Longman.

Tomlinson, B., Dat, B., Masuhara, H., & Rubdy, R. (2001). EFL courses for adults. ELT Journal, 55(1), 80-101. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/55.1.80

VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5-31). Erlbaum.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children, 23(3), 34-41.

Weng, X., & Chiu, T. K. (2023). Instructional design and learning outcomes of intelligent computer assisted language learning: Systematic review in the field. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence,4(100117), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100117

Westwood, P. (2008). What teachers need to know about teaching methods (1^st ed.). Aust Council for Research.

Willis, J. (1994). A Framework for task-based learning. Longman.

Wong, W. (2003). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning, 13(2), 17-45.

Yufrizal, H. (2017). Teachers and students' perceptions of communicative competence in English as a foreign language in Indonesia. Educational Research and Reviews, 12(17), 867-883. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2017.3243

Zahara, I. (2017). The effectiveness of using guided discovery in teaching reading comprehension. Edukasi: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran, 4(2), 66-73. https://doi.org/10.19109/ejpp.v4i2.1563

Zhang, J. (2009). Necessity of grammar teaching. International Education Studies, 2(2), 184-187. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v2n2p184

A Comparative Study of the Impact of Explicit Instruction, Input Enhancement, and Guided Discovery on Iranian EFL Learners’ Passive Voice Production: A Computer-Assisted Language Learning Approach

References

References

Volume 12, Issue 1April 2024Pages 129-153

Volume 12, Issue 1
April 2024
Pages 129-153