Language Input in EFL Classroom

Mostafa Younesi, Iran

Mostafa Younesi has taught English for more than 14 years in Mashad,Iran. His current interests include researching on English language education and designing EGP courses for students. E-mail: M_ Yoonesi@yahoo.co.uk

Menu

Abstract
Introduction
Importance of input in language learning
Fundamental conditions for useful inputs
Conclusion
Suggestion for further research
References

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the most important conditions that EFL teachers should follow to make their inputs effective in classrooms. In other word; this study tries to remind the reality that language input as one of important factors in EFL classroom should be configured under some necessary conditions.

Introduction

During the history of language education many sophisticated studies have been done to determine the role of input in the process of language learning and teaching ( Krashen 1985, Dorneyi 2012, Ellis 2004) . The trace of input can be tracked in some theories such as connectionism, emergentisim, usage-based and Vygotsky ZPD ( Zone of Proximal Development). These theories cast doubt on the Chomsky’s innate hypothesis theory which assumed that children have innate language learning capacities that enable them to acquire language despite the impoverished input and shed light on the determinative effect of input in language learning. They viewed the acquisition of linguistic system as the result of interaction between the child and his/ her own care takers. Eventually, language input and communicative interaction play important roles in these views. However, to be effective enough in learning situations, language inputs should meet some qualitative and quantitative conditions especially in situations where students learn a language as a second or foreign language. This study brings these conditions light.

Importance of input in language learning

Krashen Input hypothesis (1985) was one of the important theories that highlighted the determinative role of input in the process of language learning. According to this theory when a person wants to say or write sth (output) his brain searches for an input that matches the meaning he wants to express and imitates the sentence. The process of imitation is not like the repetition of a sentence but it is an unconscious process which involves not only imitating one sentence at a time but also imitating many sentences at the same time to build the original sentence by the process of transformation. In other words the base of language output is within language input and input trumps output in language learning. Regardless to the extent of validity of this theory, what is asserted in this theory, beside many other theories, is that our brain needs input. According to (Szynalski, 2012) the amount of input is accounted as the only difference between a learner and native speaker. However, besides the primitive conditions such as comprehensibility, fluency and accuracy for a helpful input, there should be other necessary conditions that should be followed for an input to have its own determinative effect in language learning.

Fundamental conditions for useful inputs

1. The importance of attention. There were many controversial ideas about the role of attention and awareness in language learning. In the one hand, Krashen ( 1985) explicitly emphasized on implicit learning and put conscious learning in second position. In the other hand,Schmidt’s noticing hypothesis accentuated the importance of awareness and its determinative effect on the change input into intake. He summarized “There is no doubt that attended learning is far superior, and for all practical purposes, attention is necessary for all aspects of L2 language learning” ( Schmidt, cited in Dornyei, 2012). However, this necessity was specially emphasized for initial learning. In other words, according to noticing hypothesis attention is the perquisite and primitive condition for effective implicit learning . As Dornyei ( ibid) states: “ Once, however, the initial conscious registration of a construction has occurred, there is scope for its implicit learning on every subsequent occasion of use and this atomization process does not necessarily require the subsequent noticing of the particular target “( p. 165).
2. The co-operation of the explicit and implicit learning system: Dornyei ( 2012) explicitly admitted that the “ the key to L2 learning efficacy is the successful co-operation of the explicit and implicit learning system”( P. 171). He referred to the supportive rule of explicit learning for implicit learning as:
   1. Explicit registration of linguistic information allows implicit fine- tuning.
   2. Explicit practice creates implicit learning opportunities.
   3. Explicit knowledge channels implicit learning.
   4. Explicit role learning can provide material for implicit processing
   5. Explicit knowledge fills the gaps in implicit knowledge
   6. Explicit learning increases the overall level of accuracy in implicit knowledge.
The necessity of this co-operation is highlighted when one considerers the restrictions of implicit learning. To learn a foreign language implicitly, a person needs plenty time and gigantic numbers of native like inputs. Classroom environment can not prepare these conditions. Besides; the issue of age is the second restricting factor for using implicit learning in the classroom. According to Dekeyser and Juffs ( 2005) the learners’ chronological age has a direct relationship with the effectiveness of implicit learning. In other words, researches ( Paradis 2004, Ulmans 2005) indicated that late second language speakers process their memories declaratively rather than relying on their implicit linguistic knowledge ( as cited in Dornyei,2012). However, the effective role of implicit learning through language input in the process of the atomization of skills, the development of fluency and competency in using formulaic language and collocation that are not learnt explicitly can not be ignored. Therefore there should be co-operation between explicit and implicit learning within an educational environment.
3. The limited use of L1 in FL classrooms: The effect of first language on second or foreign language learning has been the main focus of many studies ( Nation 2003, Lameta-Tufuga 1994 Knight 1996) . Some researchers hesitated over the positive effect of the use of L1 on second or foreign language learning. For example Herdina and Jessner ( 2002) in their ‘ threshold phenomena’ relied on the positive effects of L1 on acquiring a L2 language just beyond an upper threshold . They accentuated that L1 has negative effects at low level of competence in a new language. Also, Mac Whinney’s entrenchment’ theory asserted that in learning L2 “ the repeated use of L1 leads to it’s ongoing entrenchment in different linguistic area with the strongest entrenchment effect occurring in pronunciation and the least entrenchment occurring in the area of lexicon. ” (cited in Dorneyei, 2012, p 262).Besides Kuhl ( 2005) in his native language neural commitment ( NLNC) states that infants commit neural networks to learn specific regularities of native language such as prosodic features in the aural stimulus ( ibid). These neural networks are dedicated to L1 code. Eventually L1- specific NLNC correlates negatively with L2 acquisition since it prevents learning of new patterns associated with an L2.
4. The use of input within a meaning- centered frame work. In spite of the Chomskey’s generative grammar ( 1950) that focused primarily on syntax and phonology and gave a secondary role to semantics , Dornyei ( 2012) stated that “ focus on form expresses a halfway position between a concern for situational meaning and linguistic features of the language code” ( p. 281). This reality asserts the importance of attention to meaning beside linguistic features. In fact, according to Doughty and Williams( 1998) “the main principle is that the learner’s engagement in seeking situational meaning is a perquisite before attention to linguistic form can be expected to be effective”. ( cited in Dornyei, 2012).
5. The importance of consistency and frequency and availability in language input. The importance of frequency and consistency in language input has been emphasized in constructivist theories (connectionism , emergentism and competition model) . For example according to connectionism the role of frequency of various elements in language input is in adjusting weights of connection among the nods which beside the activation level of the processing units are seen as analogous to learning. Also according to competition model consistency and availability of input have entire effects on the cue strength. According to this model, language development is the result of gradual interpretation and responses of children to the cues that correspond to adult patterns. Frequency is a determinative point in various strands under usage-based theory. They asserts that “the frequency of distribution of an item in the language input has considerable impact on the emergence of grammar” ( Dornyei, 2012). In other words, they believe that the emergence of syntactic constructions is the result of the automatization of frequently occurring sequences of the linguistic elements which happens within the grammaticalization process. Ellis (2004) founded the importance of frequency of input in the emergence of rules of language (from phonology, through syntax, to discourse) since he believed that they were structural regularities that emerged from the learner’s life time analysis of the distributional characteristics of the language input.
6. The importance of reinforcement of probabilistic learning in language input. The great role of probabilistic learning in language acquisition has been emphasized recently. It is believed that the knowledge of language is not a minimal set of categorical rules or constraints (what is linguistically possible). It is a set of gradient rules (what is linguistically likely) such as probabilities of use in grammar or probabilities of language errors. Bod, Hay and Jannedy (2003) believed that probabilities should be integrated into every aspects of linguistics since they are operative in acquisition, perception and production. Eventually, emphasis on the gradient rules of language is a necessary step in the process of language teaching and learning.
7. Input through interaction: In spite of Krashens’ emphasis on the versatile role of input, output has its own determinative role in the process of language learning. According to Long and Doughty ( 2003) “ output would seem to have a potentially significant role in development of syntax and morphology” ( p.227). in other words, By language production learners are moved from the use of primarily semantic , open ended and non deterministic use of language toward the impose of syntactic structure on their utterance. Moreover the significant role of output in providing feedback for language input, preparing automaticity that according to MacLaughlin, (1987) is the result of “consistent mapping of the same input to the same pattern of activation over many trail” (as cited in Long and Doughty 2003, p. 228) and facilitating the process of hypothesis testing which is done by learners when they use a conversation state that the use of input should be in accordance of output in the EFL situation. Eventually, input should be presented in the conversational format through negotiation of meaning since according to Long ( 1996) it facilitates acquisition because it connects input, internal learner capacities, particularly selective attention and output in the productive ways ( as cited in Long and Doughty 2003, p.234). In fact, according to interaction hypothesis negotiation of meaning serves as a priming device that brings together environmental contributions to acquisition, selective attention and the learner’s developing L2 processing capacity which represents the setting of the stage for learning.
8. The priority of error to corrective feedback. In an experimental work done by Tomasello and Herron ( 1989) two groups of students were presented by two different corrective strategies. One group was presented with grammatical roles, including exceptions to a rule followed by the practice of the rule and the second group was presented with a rule and was persuaded to make an overgeneralization errors followed by corrective feedback. The results accentuated the supremacy of second strategy. The effect of this corrective feedback is more if it happens during negotiation work since at least for vocabulary, morphology and language specific syntax it has a facilitative role.
9. The importance of authentic and elaborated input: One of the determinative factors for a helpful language input is its adjustment with learners’ language level, their needs, etc. However this reality should not treat the authenticity of language. This is why some researches give preference to elaborated language over simplified language. According to Chaudron ( 1987) there is a greater correlation between comprehension of an elaborated passage and independent reading measures than between comprehension of a simplified passage and independent measures of reading. By preparing greater amount of semantic details and using the environmental conditions, a person who elaborates his speeches make them more comprehensible. Eventually instead of endangering the authenticity of language by using somehow misleading strategies such as using display questions to simplify input, an elaborated language can enhance comprehensibility while it preserves its authenticity.

Conclusion

This study asserted that for language input to be effective enough in EFL classrooms some changes should happen. English language can be the language of interaction in the classroom. By elaborating English language, teachers can make English language more comprehensible for students. In fact, teachers can facilitate the process of language learning if they can create an educational environment where English language is used as a means of transforming information or communicating in the classroom. To achieve this purpose, teachers need to be more proficient in English language. Also the interference of students’ native language as a means of education or interaction in the classroom should be limited to necessary situations.

This study asserted that teachers should do their best to enrich the quality of some input components such as availability of educational materials, negotiation of meaning, etc. In other words they should be sensitive to many components of input that needed more attention. To make language input more beneficial in language classroom, teachers should concentrate more on those components.

Finally, this study highlighted that teachers should not focus very much on some components of language input such as immediate correction of the errors which wasn’t so necessary. It seems that English teachers should adjust the extent of focus on different parts of language input in classroom activities with the degree of their importance.

Suggestion for further research

This study tried to remind the importance of input and the necessary conditions for effective inputs in ESL situations. More studies should be done to analyze the real situation of language input for each criterion. Since language input is just one effective factor in the process of language learning, studies should be done to scrutinize the role of other effective factors such as language output. Also more analysis should be done to suggest practical strategies for improving the present situation of input in EFL classrooms.

References

Chaudron, C. (1986). Teachers’ priorities in correcting learners’ errors in French immersion classes. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 64-84). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Dekeyser, R.M and Larson- Hall, J. (2005). What does the critical period really mean? In J. Kroll and A.M.B.De Groot ( eds): Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press , 88-108.

Dornyei,z.( 2012): The Psychology of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford university

Doughty, C .J & Long, M.H. (eds) 2005 : The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.225-250

Ellis , R.( 2004) Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Herdina,P and Jessner, U ( 2002). A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism: Perspectives of Change in Psycholinguistics. Clevedon: Multilingual matters.

Knight, T. (1996). Learning vocabulary through shared speaking tasks .The Language Teacher. 20, 1: 24-29.

Krashen ,S.D.( 1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman.

Lameta-Tufuga, E. (1994). Using the Samoan Language for Academic Learning Tasks. Unpublished MA thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Nation, p. ( 2003). The Role of First Language in Foreign Language Learning. Asian EFL Journal.5,2:1-8

Rens Bod, Jennifer Hay, and Stefanie Jannedy (eds.), 2003. Probabilistic linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from www. Journal. cambridge.org.

Szynalski, p. ( 2012). Input- what it is and why you need it. Retrieved from www.Antimoon.com

Tomasello,M. and Herron,C. (1989) Feedback for Language transfer errors: the garden path techniques. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.11, 513-17.

Please check the How to be a Teacher Trainer course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Methodology & Language for Secondary Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Teaching Advanced Students course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the How the Motivate your Students course at Pilgrims website.