 Processing Instruction: An Update Bill VanPatten (2002) University of Illinois at Chicago

Definition  The Processing Input strategy uses a particular type of input to push learners away from non- optimal processing strategies.

Details and Characteristics Assists learner to make form-meaning connections Never produce target form being studied Learners are given explicit information about a linguistic form or structure Learners are made aware of the strategy that might negatively affect them Learners are pushed to process the form with structured input to get meaning from the form

Principles of IP

 To what degree can we either manipulate learner attention during IP and/or manipulate input data so that more and better form-meaning connections are made?

Examples

 Referential activity: there is a right or wrong answer and the learner must rely on the targeted grammatical form to get meaning.

Examples

 Affective Activity: Learners express an opinion belief or some other affective response and are engaged in processing information about the real world.

Example

PI vs TI  Critical difference- PI first identifies a potential problematic processing strategy and then provides activities that push learners away from that strategy, while TI does not.  It manipulates the input data so the students do what they need to do to change.  TI= Traditional instruction. Taken from the most popular Spanish text book at the time. Typical explanation of form  mechanical  meaningful  communicative practice

Discussion How do you currently teach grammar? Which activities might be PI and which might be TI?

Original study’s questions  Does altering the way learners process input have an effect on the developmental systems?  If there is an effect, is it limited to processing more input or does instruction in IP also have an effect on output?  If there is an effect, is it the same effect that traditional instruction (TI) has?

Original study’s details  Methods – Focus: word order and object pronouns  Students interpret and produce sentences  Assessment – Interpretation and production on the sentence level

Original study’s outcomes  Results  No differences in pretests  PI group outperformed the TI and control group  Outcomes  1. Altering the way learners process input can alter their developing systems  2. The effects of PI are not limited to processing  3. Effects of PI are different from TI

Questions/Other studies  Are the effects of PI generalizable to other structures?  Cadierno (1995) – Spanish preterit  Cheng (1995) – Spanish ser and estar  Farley (2001a) – Spanish subjunctive  Buck (2000) – English Present continuous  VanPatten & Wong (in press) – French causative  Benati (2001) – Italian future  Conclusion – Results are generalizable to other structures and different languages

Questions/Other studies cont.  Are the effects of PI due to different explicit information? VanPatten and Oikennon (1996) – Explicit vs non explicit info  Conclusion: The effects of PI are not due to the explicit information provided but to the nature of PI.

Questions/Other studies cont.  Are the effects of PI observable with different assessment tasks? VanPatten & Sanz (1995) – Written/oral/computer-based tests added  Conclusion: The effects of PI are not limited to sentence level tests.

Questions/Other studies cont.  Are the effects of PI different from those of other types of instruction? Farley (2001a) – Meaning-based output instruction  Conclusion: PI was not superior to MOI  Other ways of helping students process form  Meaning based output instruction has the same outcomes  Perhaps it is the meaning-oriented nature of instruction that is most important.

Conflicting Studies  DeKeyser and Solaski (1996)  Salaberry (1997)  Collentine (1998)  Allen (2000)  REBUTTAL: These studies are not replications of the original study

Remaining issues  PI is focused on input not output  Output is still important  There are other ways of helping students process form  Meaning based output instruction has the same outcomes

Output  “We do not advocate abandoning communicative tasks and tasks that provide opportunities for making output… [I]t is clear that learners need to develop their abilities in accessing the developing system for fluent and accurate production”  “We have never claimed that input is better than output in general nor that output plays no role in SLA.”  The debate is not about input or output in SLA

Discussion How do you balance input and output in your classroom?

Activity  Design a PI activity. Explain the grammatical form you want to teach and how you can teach it using PI.

“PI appears (so far!) almost to guarantee [a] positive effect.” -VanPatten (p.798)