Volume 2, Issue 2, March 2014, Page: 115-120
The Role of Input Enhancement on Using Conjunctions in Iranian EFL Learners' Written Performance
Farnaz Sahebkheir, Department of English Language Teaching, Islamic Azad University, Ahar Branch, Ahar, Iran
Hanieh Davatgari Asl, Department of English Language Teaching, Islamic Azad University, Ahar Branch, Ahar, Iran
Received: Mar. 6, 2014;       Published: Mar. 30, 2014
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijll.20140202.19      View  2795      Downloads  155
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to examine the impact of the input enhancement of three types of conjunctions on Iranian EFL learners to produce coherent and well-organized texts. Experimental group received an enhanced version of a model essay in which three kinds of conjunctions were bolded and underlined. Students were supposed to read these enhanced models and write summaries. Control group had the same materials without typographical modifications (i.e. there were no changes made to the text). The treatment was an eight session program. The researcher uses the mean number of conjunctions per T-unit for measuring the cohesive ties density both in the pre-test and post-test. In the post-test both groups wrote about the same topic. The results show that the experimental group outperformed the control group
Keywords
Conjunctions, Input Enhancement, Summarizing, Writing Skill
To cite this article
Farnaz Sahebkheir, Hanieh Davatgari Asl, The Role of Input Enhancement on Using Conjunctions in Iranian EFL Learners' Written Performance, International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014, pp. 115-120. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20140202.19
Reference
[1]
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), 667-676.
[2]
Bakori, H. (2009). Input Enhancement and Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Retrieved January 15, 2013from http://www.fllt2013.org/private_folder/Proceeding/391.pdf.
[3]
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
[4]
Halliday, M. A. K. & Hassan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
[5]
Harmer, J., Acevedo, A., & Lethaby, C. (2006). Just Right. Pre-intermediate Student's Book. London: Marshall Cavendish.
[6]
Hughes, A. (2003).Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[7]
Izumi, S. (2002). Output, Input Enhancement, and the Noticing Hypothesis: an Experimental Study of ESL Relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 541-577.
[8]
Izumi, S., & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does Output Promote Noticing and Second Language Acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239-278.
[9]
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. J. (1995). Does Textual Enhancement Promote Noticing? A Think-aloud Protocol Analysis. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and Awareness in Foreign Language Learning (pp. 183–216). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
[10]
Khoii, R. & Tabrizi, A.( 2011). The Impact of Input Enhancement through Multimedia on the Improvement of Writing Ability. ICT Language Learning, 4(1). Retrieved January 15, 2014 from http:// www.pixel-online.net/.../ILT22-174-SP khoii & Tabrizi htm.
[11]
Krashen, S. (1982). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
[12]
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1995). On the Teaching and Learning of Grammar: Challenging the Myths. In Eckman, F., Highland, D., Lee, P., Mileham, J., & Weber, R. (Eds.). Second Language Acquisition: Theory and Pedagogy. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
[13]
Lee, S. K. (2007). Effects of Textual Enhancement and Topic Familiarity on Korean EFL Students’ Reading Comprehension and Learning of Passive Form. Language Learning, 57, 87–118.
[14]
Leow, R., Egi, T., Nuevo, A., & Tsai, Y. (2003). The Roles of Textual Enhancement and Type of Linguistic Item in Adult L2 Learners’ Comprehension and Intake. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1–16.
[15]
Long, M. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on Form: Theory, Research and Practice. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[16]
Moaiyedi, B. V. (2013). The Effect of Textual Input Enhancement and Explicit Rule Presentation on the Performance of Iranian EFL Learners in Making Request. In The 1st National Conference on Emerging Horizons in ELT and Literature. Ahar: Islamic Azad University – Ahar Branch.
[17]
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L., (1989). Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demands on the Learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11(1), 63-90.
[18]
Radwan, A. A. (2005). The Effectiveness of Explicit Attention to Form in Language Learning. System, 33, 69-87.
[19]
Robinson, P. (1997). Generalizability and Automaticity of Second Language Learning under Implicit, Incidental, Enhanced, and Instructed Conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247.
[20]
Sang-Ki, L. & Hung-Tzu, H. (2008). Visual Input Enhancement and Grammar Learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 307-331.
[21]
Schmidt, R. (1994). Implicit Learning and the Cognitive Unconscious: Of Artificial And SLA. In Ellis, N. (Ed.). Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages. London: Academic Press.
[22]
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10 (1), 209- 231.
[23]
Sharwood Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the Second Language Acquisition Theory. Applied Linguistics, 2 (2), 159-168.
[24]
Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to Many Minds: On the Relevance of Different Types of Language Information for the L2 Learner. Second Language Research, 7 (2), 118-132.
[25]
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input Enhancement in Instructed SLA: Theoretical Bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–179.
[26]
Shehadeh, A. (2003). Learner Output, Hypothesis Testing, and Internalizing Linguistic Knowledge. System, 31, 155-171.
[27]
Shook, D. (1994). FL /L2 Reading, Grammatical Information, and the Input to Intake Phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 5 (2), 57-93.
[28]
Song, M. J. & Suh, B. R. (2008). The Effect of Output Task Types on Noticing and Learning of the English Past Counterfactual Conditional. System, 36, 295-312
[29]
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some Roles for Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA.: Newbury House.
[30]
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in Output and the Cognitive Processes They Generate: A Step Toward Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371–391.
[31]
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input Processing and Grammar Instruction: Theory and Research. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
[32]
White, J. (1998).Getting the Learners’ Attention: A Typographical Input Enhancement Study. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[33]
Wong, W. (2003). Textual Enhancement and Simplified Input: Effects on L2 Comprehension and Acquisition of Non-meaningful Grammatical Form. Applied Language Learning, 13, 17–45.
[34]
Willis, J. (1996). A Framework for Task-Based Learning. Harlow: Longman.
[35]
Zahedi, A. (2002). How to Prepare for the Toefl Essays. Tehran: Zabankadeh Publication.
Browse journals by subject