NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 4 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Haghani, Mastaneh; Rashtchi, Mojgan – Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 2023
The present quasi-experimental study investigated which component of processing instruction (PI) is responsible for its beneficial effects and whether EFL learners with different learning styles similarly benefit from PI components. In doing so, a sample of 67 first-year students took part in a study with a non-equivalent control group…
Descriptors: Second Language Learning, Second Language Instruction, Grammar, Teaching Methods
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Kam, Emily Fen; Liu, Yeu-Ting; Tseng, Wen-Ta – ReCALL, 2020
Captioned video is widely used to enhance second language (L2) learners' exposure to oral input beyond the classroom setting, and captioning has been found to provide an instantaneous, useful visual aid for parsing and understanding L2 oral discourse. Nevertheless, a meta-analysis has shown that captioning exerts a selective effect on L2 learners…
Descriptors: Video Technology, Second Language Learning, Second Language Instruction, Oral Language
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
PDF on ERIC Download full text
Hatami, Sarvenaz – Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 2018
Learning style matching is a neglected factor that may affect the complex process of second language (L2) incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. The purpose of the current study is to investigate whether there is any difference in L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading when learners' perceptual learning…
Descriptors: Cognitive Style, Second Language Learning, Second Language Instruction, Incidental Learning
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Margaret Lahey; And Others – Applied Psycholinguistics, 1992
Analyzed 104 language samples obtained from 42 different normal language learning children at 15, 19, and 35 months of age for the proportional use of 11 grammatical morphemes. Wide variability was found among the samples in the proportional use of each morpheme. (49 references) (JL)
Descriptors: Cognitive Style, Comparative Analysis, Individual Differences, Language Handicaps