Improving linguistic fluency for writing: effects of explicitness and focus of instruction.

Abstract

In an explorative classroom experiment the effects of several instructional conditions for writing were compared. Studies on writing suggest that linguistic fluency is an important factor in writer's abilities to manipulate sentence structures in order to produce comprehensible text. L1 writing theories indicate that working memory limitations play an important role in formulation. Therefore, improving linguistic fluency presumably frees working memory space and allows the writer to devote more attention to meaning-related problems. An important point of debate in language-learning theories is the role of explicit knowledge about linguistic structure. Some believe that explicit rule knowledge has an important role in acquiring fluency, while others maintain that explicit knowledge has no real influence on skill development, and that fluency develops on the basis of the implicit knowledge of linguistic structures. In recent L2 theories a focus solely on meaning appears insufficient for mastery of linguistic structures. Meaning-oriented language production should, in this view, be complemented by a focus on form(s). Four learning conditions for improving linguistic fluency were discriminated according to the dimensions “focus of instruction” (forms vs. meaning) and “explicitness of instruction” (implicit vs. explicit). Students of elementary grades 5 and 6 (including both first- and advanced second-language learners of Dutch) received four lessons involving the linguistic operations for adding information to sentences in meaningful contexts and avoiding unnecessary (repetition of) information. Results of the experiment show significant positive effects of all four conditions on two post-test formulation tasks in comparison to a control group.