Experimental Studies in L2 Classrooms

doi:10.1017/9781108333603.007

6 - Experimental Studies in L2 Classrooms

from Part II - Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 June 2019

Charlene Polio and

Jongbong Lee

Edited by

John W. Schwieter and

Alessandro Benati

Show author details

John W. Schwieter: Affiliation:
Wilfrid Laurier University
Alessandro Benati: Affiliation:
American University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

Book contents

Get access

Summary

In the past, experimental research was somewhat at odds with qualitative research, both in terms of ontology (one’s view of reality) and epistemology (what knowledge is). Experimental research falls within a postpositivist paradigm, which suggests that an objective and discoverable truth exists (its ontology) and that we can find out that truth by generating and testing hypotheses (its epistemology). Using the example of authentic listening materials, this means that under ideal circumstances, researchers should be able to determine the effect of authentic listening materials on listening comprehension. Qualitative research, on the other hand, falls within a postmodernist paradigm that rests on the ideas that there are multiple truths (its ontology) and that research should try to uncover the diversity of experiences and perspectives on a topic of inquiry (its epistemology).

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning , pp. 137 - 165

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333603.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Asher, J. J. (1972). Children’s first language as a model for second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 56, 133–139.Google Scholar

Aubrey, S. (2017a). Measuring flow in the EFL classroom: Learners’ perceptions of inter- and intra-cultural task-based interactions. TESOL Quarterly, 51(3), 661–692.Google Scholar

Aubrey, S. (2017b). Inter-cultural contact and flow in a task-based Japanese EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 21(6), 717–734.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bardovi-Harlig, K., Mossman, S., & Vellenga, H. E. (2015). The effect of instruction on pragmatic routines in academic discussion. Language Teaching Research, 19(3), 324–350.Google Scholar

Barkaoui, K. (2010). Explaining ESL essay holistic scores: A multilevel modeling approach. Language Testing, 27, 515–535.Google Scholar

Barkaoui, K. (2014). Quantitative approaches for analyzing longitudinal data in second language research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 65–101.Google Scholar

Beretta, A. (1986). Program-fair language teaching evaluation. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 431–444.Google Scholar

Boers, F., Dang, T. C. T., & Strong, B. (2017). Comparing the effectiveness of phrase-focused exercises: A partial replication of Boers, Demecheleer, Coxhead, and Webb (2014). Language Teaching Research, 21(3), 362–380.Google Scholar

Brown, J. (2014). Mixed methods research for TESOL. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8–22.Google Scholar

Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Collins, L., & Muñoz, C. (2016). The foreign language classroom: Current perspectives and future considerations. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 133–147.Google Scholar

De Costa, P., Valmori, L., & Choi, I. (2017). Qualitative research methods. In Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 541–561). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

De Silva, R. (2015). Writing strategy instruction: Its impact on writing in a second language for academic purposes. Language Teaching Research, 19(3), 301–323.Google Scholar

Dolean, D. D. (2016). The effects of teaching songs during foreign language classes on students’ foreign language anxiety. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 638–653.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Douglas Fir Group (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 19–47.CrossRef Google Scholar

Farley, A. P., Ramonda, K., & Liu, X. (2012). The concreteness effect and the bilingual lexicon: The impact of visual stimuli attachment on meaning recall of abstract L2 words. Language Teaching Research, 16(4), 449–466.Google Scholar

Galante, A., & Thomson, R. I. (2017). The effectiveness of drama as an instructional approach for the development of second language oral fluency, comprehensibility, and accentedness. TESOL Quarterly, 51(1), 115–142.Google Scholar

Gass, S. (2015). Experimental research. In Paltridge, B. & Phakiti, A. (eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource (pp. 101–118). New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar

Gass, S., Mackey, A., & Ross-Feldman, L. (2005). Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language Learning, 55, 575–611.Google Scholar

Gass, S., & Sterling, S. (2017). Ethics in ISLA. In Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 577–595). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Gilmore, A. (2008). Getting real in the language classroom: Developing Japanese students’ communicative competence with authentic materials. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Nottingham University.Google Scholar

Gilmore, A. (2011). “I prefer not text”: Developing Japanese learners’ communicative competence with authentic materials. Language Learning, 61(3), 786–819.Google Scholar

Hamada, Y. (2016). Shadowing: Who benefits and how? Uncovering a booming EFL teaching technique for listening comprehension. Language Teaching Research, 20(1), 35–52.Google Scholar

Hashemi, M. R. (2012). Reflections on mixing methods in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 33, 206–212.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hashemi, M. R., & Babaii, E. (2013). Mixed methods research: Toward new research designs in applied linguistics. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 828–852.Google Scholar

Heras, A., & Lasagabaster, D. (2015). The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 19(1), 70–88.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hung, H. T. (2017). Design-based research: Redesign of an English language course using a flipped classroom approach. TESOL Quarterly, 51(1), 180–192.Google Scholar

Jang, E. E., Wagner, M., & Park, G. (2014). Mixed methods research in language testing and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 123–153.Google Scholar

Karimi, M. N. (2015). EFL learners’ multiple documents literacy: Effects of a strategy-directed intervention program. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 40–56.Google Scholar

Kartchava, E., & Ammar, A. (2014a). Learners’ beliefs as mediators of what is noticed and learned in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 86–109.Google Scholar

Kartchava, E., & Ammar, A. (2014b). The noticeability and effectiveness of corrective feedback in relation to target type. Language Teaching Research, 18(4), 428–452.Google Scholar

Kim, Y. (2013). Effects of pretask modeling on attention to form and question development. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 8–35.Google Scholar

Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N. (2015). Promoting task-based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom contexts: The role of task complexity. The Modern Language Journal, 99(4), 656–677.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Research methodology on language development from a complex systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 200–213.Google Scholar

Laufer, B., & Rozovski-Roitblat, B. (2015). Retention of new words: Quantity of encounters, quality of task, and degree of knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 19(6), 687–711.CrossRef Google Scholar

Li, Q. (2012). Effects of instruction on adolescent beginners’ acquisition of request modification. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 30–55.Google Scholar

Lin, M. H. (2016). Effects of corpus-aided language learning in the EFL grammar classroom: A case study of students’ learning attitudes and teachers’ perceptions in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 871–893.Google Scholar

Loewen, S. (2015). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1980). Inside the “black box”: Methodological issues in classroom research on language learning. Language Learning, 30(1), 1–42.CrossRef Google Scholar

Luke, D. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (2017). Classroom-based research. In Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 541–561). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mahboob, A., Paltridge, B., Phakiti, A., Wagner, E., Starfield, S., Burns, A., …, De Costa, P. I. (2016). TESOL Quarterly research guidelines. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 42–65.Google Scholar

Moranski, K., & Kim, F. (2016). “Flipping” lessons in a multi-section Spanish course: Implications for assigning explicit grammar instruction outside of the classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 100(4), 830–852.Google Scholar

Nguyen, L. T. C., & Gu, Y. (2013). Strategy-based instruction: A learner-focused approach to developing learner autonomy. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 9–30.Google Scholar

Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary development. In Coady, J. & Huckin, T. (eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174–200). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Polio, C., & Friedman, D. A. (2017). Understanding, evaluating, and conducting second language writing research. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Porte, G. (2012). Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training student reviewers worth its while? A study of how training influences the quality of students’ feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 67–89.Google Scholar

Rassaei, E. (2015). Recasts, field dependence/independence cognitive style, and L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 19(4), 499–518.Google Scholar

Riazi, A. M., & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning: Opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47, 135–173.Google Scholar

Saito, Y., & Saito, K. (2017). Differential effects of instruction on the development of second language comprehensibility, word stress, rhythm, and intonation: The case of inexperienced Japanese EFL learners. Language Teaching Research, 21(5), 589–608.Google Scholar

Sato, E., Chen, J. C. C., & Jourdain, S. (2017). Integrating digital technology in an intensive, fully online college course for Japanese beginning learners: A standards-based, performance-driven approach. The Modern Language Journal, 101(4), 756–775.Google Scholar

Scherer, G. A. C., & Wertheimer, M. (1964). A psycholinguistic experiment in foreign language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Serrano, R., Stengers, H., & Housen, A. (2015). Acquisition of formulaic sequences in intensive and regular EFL programmes. Language Teaching Research, 19(1), 89–106.Google Scholar

Short, D. J., Fidelman, C. G., & Louguit, M. (2012). Developing academic language in English language learners through sheltered instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 334–361.Google Scholar

Sonbul, S., & Schmitt, N. (2013). Explicit and implicit lexical knowledge: Acquisition of collocations under different input conditions. Language Learning, 63(1), 121–159.Google Scholar

Spada, N., Jessop, L., Tomita, Y., Suzuki, W., & Valeo, A. (2014). Isolated and integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 18(4), 453–473.Google Scholar

Spinner, P., Gass, S. M., & Behney, J. (2013). Ecological validity in eye-tracking: An empirical study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(2), 389–415.Google Scholar

Sun, C. H. (2017). The value of picture-book reading-based collaborative output activities for vocabulary retention. Language Teaching Research, 21(1), 96–117.Google Scholar

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Google Scholar

Tavakoli, P., Campbell, C., & McCormack, J. (2016). Development of speech fluency over a short period of time: Effects of pedagogic intervention. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 447–471.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tian, L., & Macaro, E. (2012). Comparing the effect of teacher codeswitching with English-only explanations on the vocabulary acquisition of Chinese university students: A lexical focus-on-form study. Language Teaching Research, 16(3), 367–391.Google Scholar

Tomita, Y., & Spada, N. (2013). Form-focused instruction and learner investment in L2 communication. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 591–610.Google Scholar

Wegener, D., & Blankenship, K. (2007). Ecological validity. In Baumeister, R. F. & Vohs, K. D. (eds.), Encyclopedia of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 275–276). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar

Xu, Y., Chang, L. Y., & Perfetti, C. A. (2014). The effect of radical-based grouping in character learning in Chinese as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 773–793.Google Scholar

Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 111–133.Google Scholar

Yeldham, M. (2016). Second language listening instruction: Comparing a strategies-based approach with an interactive, strategies/bottom-up skills approach. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 394–420.Google Scholar