Outline

1.  Introduction

1-1  Purpose of study

1-2  Significance of this study

2.  English language teaching in Japan

2-1  Teaching grammar in junior high school (Course of study)

2-2  What activity is used during English classes.

3  Research Questions

              1,   What is good approach for grammar acquisition?

              2,   How teachers should use each activity for grammar acquisition?

4  Findings (Major findings; Suggestions)

              4-1  Input enhancement

              4-2  Input flooding

              4-3  Output-Prompting

5  Conclusion

              5-1  Summary of this research paper

              5-2  What intake-reading potentially has

6  Reference

Synthesis paper #1

Input and output can be keys of activities in EFL classes. The definition of them are followings: “Input is the raw language data (Carroll, 2001) that learners hear or read and entails a specific communicative intent.”  “Output is the language that L2 learners produce, and it can be both written and oral.”  (Alessandro,B 2017) Research indicates that there are some kinds of effective approaches to grammar acquisition on EFL with input and output.

                The first approach is textual input enhancement as an introduction of new grammar.  It is so important to introduce new grammar in the first class of each unit.  Textual input enhancement with explicit grammar instruction is one of the ways to introduce new grammar.  Input enhancement is brought by bolding, italicization, using different colors and underlining. Research in (Naemeh,N&Jayakaran,M 2012) indicates that there was a significant difference between textural enhancement and no treatment in input of simple past tense for EFL learners. In addition, there are also significant difference between only textural enhancement and explicit grammar instruction after the textural input activity. And both short- and long-term activity are useful. Thus, textural enhancement can be a good pre activity of grammar instruction in EFL classes.  

Related to input enhancement, input flooding is one way of input approach is second one.  Input flooding is to enrich students input with a lot of texts like flood.  Research in the article (Maryam, S 2019) argued that both input enhancement and input flooding possibly affect learners writing activity with target grammar.  Thus, it is important to combine them effectively as an input providing activity.

                 The third approach is output prompting.  Output-Prompting, in contrast to input providing, is promote students to use English more and more.  The research in the article, (Khorshid,M, Parviz,A&Javad,G 2018) shows that Output-Prompting strategies is more effective than input prompting strategies in leaning target forms both in the short and long terms. Especially, text-based guided output tasks can be helpful because it allows us to focus on target grammar.             

    In conclusion, there are three kinds of approach about input and output tasks. And it has its own characteristics to use effectively. Teachers should use them according to several purposes.

Annotated Bibliography#5

Reference: Natalie, K.(2014).Enriching Students’ Linguistic Repertories Through Text-Based Guided Output Tasks.The catesol journal, 25 .(1).p95-105

Summary:

 The theme of this article is Text-Based Guided Output Tasks as the learning opportunities on L2 learning.  Especially, to use the tasks in linguistics situations is focused. TBGT activities can be created by the teachers work with any type of reading texts. However, it should be done before the explicit grammar instruction of target structures. TBGT is particularly useful among beyond-the-beginning level EFL learners because they have a developed communicative repertory that is essential for understanding of function.  This is a focus on form activity.  Thus it allows us to focus on target grammar and avoid making mistake in free production and transition activities.  Teaches can control not only the target grammar but also vocabulary completely with TBGT activity. Of course, it is important to design activities following several features.  The author argued that this type of tasks is based on learner discovery of relevant input forms in response.

Reflection:

This article is useful because the author mentions the way to design TBGT activities and what is TBGT.  In the first part, the author clearly summarizes TBGT with plenty of articles.  And  in the second part, he shows the way to use TBGT activity and its futures more specifically.

Assessment:                 

This article is relevant to my research.  TBGT is one way to promote not only input and but also output for learners.  I can connect the sources I collected to practice English classes.

Annotated Bibliography #4

Reference

Maryam, S. (2019). Input Flooding, Input Enhancement and Writing Performance: Effects and Percepts. International Journal of Instruction,12. (4), pp281-296.

Summary

                 The theme of this article is input flooding, input enhancement and writing performance.  First, the author mentions review of literature about writing in ESL and input and output enhancement or input and output flooding.  The research questions are about significant expected improvement of Iranian elementary EFL learners’s writing performance by input enhancement of present simple and continuous tenses and by input flooding.  And, what is the difference between input flooding and input enhancement. The participants were elementary EFL learners studying English in a language school in Tehran, Iran. Then, divide them into 3 groups. The 1st group present simple and continuous tenses in texts were enhance voa understanding, boldfacing, italicization, capitalization, colour coding and using different fonts. The 2nd group received flooded material via increasing the frequency of tenses.  The 3rd group, control group, with the same texts but without no auxiliary.  The result show that there is no significant difference between input flooding and input enhancement but there is a significant difference to a control group. Thus, teachings should handle both input-flooded and inpuy enhance materials in their classroom.

Assessment

                 This article is useful because I got another idea that is input flooding.  There is enough literature information about it and the date of experiment in this article.  Especially, this paper focuses on writing.  This is also new points of view.

Reflection                 

This article is related to my research.  In this article, it is mentioned that how the learners’ effect shown as output as writing skills.  This is more useful for research the effect of pedagogical methods. However, I have to take care of the difference of attitude between Japanese students and Irish students because Japanese students tend to have negative image for writing activity.

Annotated Bibliography#3

Reference

Naemeh, N& Jayakaran, M. (2012). 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), pp.92-102. doi:10.5539/elt.v6n1p92

Summary

                 The theme of this paper is the impact of textural input enhancement and explicit rule presentation.  First, the authors mention literature review of Focus on Form (FonF)vs. Focus on Forms and textural input enhancement.  The research questions are about the effect of textural input enhancement on intake simple past tense and textural input enhancement+ explicit rule presentation.  In addition, they research whether there is difference between male or female in their intake of simple past tense or not.  The participants of their research were 111 elementary learners in Azad university in Iran who take General English. And divide them into three groups. 1st group is a control group with no special treatment. The 2nd group is a textural input enhancement group.  The 3rd one is textural input enhancement + explicit rule presentation of simple past tense. The result shows that the 3rd group is the best.  Combination of explicit instruction and textural enhancement will be the key of EFL learners.  However, effect of gender is not significant.

Assessment

                 This article is useful because it clearly shows the important points of requirement of grammar for EFL learners.  The experiment proves the usefulness of TIE + explicit rule presentation.  The difference on gender is new point of view for my research.

Reflection      

            This paper is related to my research.  This paper shows the important points of intake grammar for EFL learners.  However, I have to take care about the difference between simplepast principle and other grammar.  It is easy to do.  So, I have to think about more complex grammar such as past perfect.

Annotated Bibliography #2

Reference

Khorshid, M, Parviz, A, & Javad, G. (2018). Input Providing vs. Output-Prompting Negotiation Strategies in Learning Grammar among Young EFL Learners. International Journal of Instruction,11(2), pp. 497-512.

Summary

The theme of this article is Input providing vs. Output-Prompting Negotiation strategies as the title of this.  They show research questions following these two. First question is about significant differences between input-providing and out put prompting.  Second one is about the differences of effect between short and long terms study.  In their experiments, 64 learners with elementary level of English as a Second language ware the participants.  Their first language is Turkish.  They divided them into 3 groups. 1st group did input providing strategies.  2nd group received out put prompting Strategies.  The 3rd group is for a control group.  As a result, the finding revealed that output-prompting was more effective in learning target forms both short and long terms.

Assessment

                 This article is useful for my research because it shows which is better input or output in long and short terms.  Especially, it shows very clear result of huge amount of date of research.  I can use it for my research as the source of plenty of evidence.

Reflection

                 This article related to my research.  In the front parts, the authors mention about what is input providing negotiation strategies and output-prompting negotiation strategies.   And the participants of this experiment in this article is English learner for the second language.  So, I can adapt to Japanese students in some way.  However, I have to take care that they are elementary level English learners.  I have to think about more difficult target grammar if I research JHS.

Annotated Bibliography #1

Reference:

Alessandro, B. (2017). The role of input and output tasks in grammar instruction: Theoretical, empirical and pedagogical considerations. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching ,7(3), 377-396. doi: 10.14746/ssllt.2017.7.3.2.

Summary:

In this paper, a review of the role of input, output and instruction in second language acquisition are the keys. Input is the raw language data that learners hear or read and entails a specific communicative intent. Output is the ability to express a meaning by retrieving a form or structure and the ability to string structures and forms together. For input, teachers should consider the use of tasks that enhance the grammatical features in the input, and on the other hand, provide learners with opportunities to focus on meaning. For output, teachers should consider grammar output tasks which are meaning-based. Output grammar tasks should therefore follow input grammar tasks and should be used to promote language production and the development of grammatical skills.

Assessment:

This article is useful because this article is clearly organized about the role of input, output and instruction of grammar. I can go back to this article as the basis of activities for grammar acquisition. This source is reliable because the references are shown with each specific information or outcome of research. The goal of this article is to find the best grammar instruction to acquire grammar.

Reflection:

This article is related to my research. Intake reading activity contain both input element and output element.  I want to use intake reading to help students to acquire grammar easily. So, I want to find out the effect of it.  This article helps to answer my research.  For the first step, I have to know about what intake reading is and what intake is.  I found what intake is.

Lesson19 A list of sources

1. Nahavandi, Naemeh; Mukundan, Jayakaran.(2013).The Impact of Textual Input Enhancement and Explicit Rule Presentation on Iranian Elementary EFL Learners’ Intake of Simple Past Tense.English Language Teaching, v6 n1 p92-102 .

クリックしてEJ1076890.pdfにアクセス

2. Mousavi, Khorshid; Alavinia, Parviz; Gholami, Javad(2018) .Input Providing vs. Output-Prompting Negotiation Strategies in Learning Grammar among Young EFL Learners.International Journal of Instruction, v11 n2 p497-512 .

クリックしてEJ1175016.pdfにアクセス

3.Benati, Alessandro(2017).The Role of Input and Output Tasks in Grammar Instruction: Theoretical, Empirical and Pedagogical Considerations.Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, v7 n3 p377-396 2017

クリックしてEJ1155604.pdfにアクセス

4.Safdari, Maryam(2019).Input Flooding, Input Enhancement and Writing Performance: Effects and Percepts. International Journal of Instruction, v12 n4 p281-296

クリックしてEJ1230054.pdfにアクセス

5.Koval, Natalie G.(2013-2014).Enriching Students’ Linguistic Repertoires through Text-Based Guided Output Tasks.CATESOL Journal, v25 n1 p95-105

クリックしてEJ1111884.pdfにアクセス

The reason I choose my research topic

I choose “intake reading”

When I was 8th grade, my English teacher (he is alumni of Gunman University, English major) did an activity named “intake reading”. Through this activity, I could memorize a lot of important sentences and realize that it is important to replace words from important sentences that I memorize in order to make a sentence. Then, I really could improve my English skills and my score of English tests like Eiken.  From this experience, I wanted to research this way to study English made me improved.

I am interested in how to do this activity. My English teacher gave me a handout. English sentences and corresponding Japanese translation ware written on the handout. They are based on target grammar for a unit. One student reads Japanese sentences and the other student answers English sentences. To motivate students, a teacher set a time limit and let us compete how many sentences I could answer accurately. This is the way my teacher did. In response to this, I want to research whether this is the most effective way for Japanese English learners.

Beside this view point, I want to research “intake” . Generally speaking, it is said that input-intake-output cycle is important for English learning.  Connect to my research theme, I want to know about how involved input is for effective acquisition. Which is the most important? Amount of input, quality of input or time for input. Moreover, I am interested in effect measurement.  How do teachers evaluate it? In the intake stage, teachers can not measure how they take it in his/her mind.  We have to evaluate the effete from what was outputted from student or not and how. I have to thinking from input-intake-output cycle and connect to intake reading.