Abstract
This study investigated the long-term effectiveness of explicit versus implicit instruction in a classroom setting. The participants were 114 Dutch secondary school students learning English as an L2; a control group received explicit and an intervention group received implicit instruction in a meaning-based context for two academic years. Instructional effects were measured via a timed writing task. The writing products of the two groups were compared in terms of holistic quality, writing complexity, accuracy and fluency. The results revealed that explicit and implicit instruction were equally effective in terms of promoting global writing proficiency, writing complexity and fluency. Regarding accuracy, interesting differences were found in the learners’ command of tense/aspect related verb phrases. The findings suggest that the benefit of explicit instruction lies in the use of correct verb forms, whereas the benefit of implicit instruction lies in the correct choice of tense/aspect in the communicative context.
Highlights
In the past two decades, the effectiveness of explicit/implicit instruction has been extensively researched in the field of instructed second language acquisition (ISLA)
The results show that explicit instruction displayed a clear advantage (d = 1.13) over implicit instruction (d = 0.54), with further confidence intervals qualifying the difference was valid
The participants’ leaving reports for primary education showed that their English proficiency was approximately at A1 to A2 level according to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) before entering secondary education, i.e. at the start of the current period of observation
Summary
In the past two decades, the effectiveness of explicit/implicit instruction has been extensively researched in the field of instructed second language acquisition (ISLA). Researchers have meta-analyzed the empirical evidence to seek conclusive answers to the efficacy debate. Following Norris and Ortega’s (2000) seminal work, more researchers have continued with meta-syntheses and updated the knowledge of ISLA research. Spada and Tomita (2010) and Goo and colleagues (Goo et al, 2015) suggest that explicit instruction is more effective than implicit instruction in promoting L2 development. As acknowledged by the reviewers, the existing. How to cite Ke, H., Luo, Y., Piggott, L. and Steinkrauss, R.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
