WEKO3
アイテム
Differential Effects of Focus on Form vs. Focus on Forms
https://iuj.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/851
https://iuj.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/85131cbf0dc-9e5c-4101-807d-5c5f2b2d3115
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
2011_3_iuj2_66 (2.5 MB)
|
|
| Item type | 会議発表論文 / Conference Paper(1) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 1999-03-01 | |||||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||||
| タイトル | Differential Effects of Focus on Form vs. Focus on Forms | |||||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||||
| タイトル | Differential Effects of Focus on Form vs. Focus on Forms | |||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||
| 言語 | ||||||||||||
| 言語 | eng | |||||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||||
| 主題 | focus on form | |||||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||||
| 主題 | tasks | |||||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||||
| 主題 | pattern practice | |||||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||||
| 主題 | cognition | |||||||||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794 | |||||||||||
| 資源タイプ | conference paper | |||||||||||
| 著者 |
小柳, かおる
× 小柳, かおる
× Koyanagi, Kaoru
|
|||||||||||
| 抄録 | ||||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||||||||
| 内容記述 | This study investigates the effects of focus-on-form tasks on SLA. Previous studies have used tasks in isolation, but which task is effective in which phase of instruction has not been investigated; thus, this study aims to examine how tasks should be graded and sequenced in a psycholinguistically relevant way. One group that received no instruction (Control Group) was compared with three experimental groups: the Input Group (explicit instruction + input processing tasks); the Output Group (explicit instruction + input processing tasks + output processing tasks); and the Drill Group (modelling of dialogues + pattern practice). Overall, beneficial effects of focus-on-form tasks were found, compared to the Drill Group and the Control Group; however, no difference was found between the two task groups. It turned out that the teacher-directed output processing tasks were not substantially different from prerecorded input processing taks. Concerning differential effects of instruction, the Drill Group exhibited an immediate impact to a certain extent in the grammaticality judgement test, whereas only the two task groups maintained the immediate gains two months later. In analyzing oral and written production, both the Input and the Output Groups exhibited short-term as well as long-term effects, whereas the Drill Group exhibited positive effects in written production only. Hence, audiolingual lessons ("focus on forms"), which are memory-based item learning, failed to promote oral fluency. This study suggests that instruction needs to integrate form and meaning from noticing to automatization. | |||||||||||
| 書誌情報 |
en : Proceedings of the conference on second language research in Japan 発行日 1999-03-01 |
|||||||||||
