Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T18:55:08.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION, BILINGUALISM, AND THE OLDER ADULT LEARNER

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2015

Jessica G. Cox
Jessica G. Cox*
Affiliation:
Franklin and Marshall College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Little is known about older adult language learners and effects of aging on L2 learning. This study investigated learning in older age through interactions of learner-internal and -external variables; specifically, late-learned L2 (bilingualism) and provision of grammar explanation (explicit instruction, EI). Forty-three older adults (age 60+) who were monolingual English or bilingual English/Spanish speakers learned basic Latin morphosyntax using a computer program with or without EI. Results showed no overall effects of EI, although bilinguals with EI had advantages when transferring skills. Bilinguals also outperformed monolinguals on interpretation regardless of instruction.

This study expands the scope of SLA research to include older adults and bilinguals, when traditionally participants are young adult monolinguals. It bolsters nascent research on older adults by adopting a tried-and-true paradigm: interactions between variables. Older adults’ overall success at learning language counters negative stereotypes of aging and demonstrates that bilingual linguistic advantages are lifelong.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 29 - 58
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Alexander, W. (2014). The benefits of failing at French. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/opinion/16alexander.html?smid=fb-share&_r=1.Google Scholar
Bak, T. H., Nissan, J. J., Allerhand, M. M., & Deary, I. J. (2014). Does bilingualism influence cognitive aging? Annals of Neurology, 75, 959–973.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Batterink, L. J., Oudiette, D., Reber, P. J., & Paller, K. A. (2014). Sleep facilitates learning a new linguistic rule. Neuropsychologia, 65, 169–179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooks, P. J., & Kempe, V. (2013). Individual differences in adult foreign language learning: The mediating effect of metalinguistic awareness. Memory and Cognition, 41, 281–296.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2013). The influence of bilingualism on third language acquisition: Focus on multilingualism. Language Teaching, 46, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Valencia, J. F. (1994). Additive trilingualism: Evidence from the Basque Country. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A. D., & Li, P. (2013). Learning Mandarin in later life: Can an old dog learn new tricks? Contemporary Foreign Language Studies, 396, 5–14.Google Scholar
Cox, J. G. (2013). Older adult learners and SLA: Age in a new light. In Sanz, C., & Lado, B. (Eds.), Individual differences, L2 development & language program administration: From theory to application (pp. 90–107). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Cox, J. G., & Sanz, C. (2015). Deconstructing PI for the ages: Explicit instruction v. practice in young and older bilinguals. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics, 53, 225–248.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2012). Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and structures in SLA. Language Learning, 62, 189–200.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R., & Prieto Botana, G. (2014). The effectiveness of processing instruction in L2 grammar acquisition: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36, 290–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, Y., & Li, P. (2015). The cognitive science of bilingualism. Language and Linguistics Compass, 9, 1–13.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 64–94.Google Scholar
Fernandez, C. (2008). Reexamining the role of explicit information in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 277–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartshorne, J. K., & Germine, L. T. (2015). When does cognitive functioning peak? The asynchonous rise and fall of different cogniive abilities across the life span. Psychological Science, 26, 433–443.Google Scholar
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of ESL. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.Google Scholar
Kalfus, R. (1977). A new audience for foreign language instruction: The older adult. Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 9, 49–50.Google Scholar
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., & Kharkhurin, A. (2010). Cognitive predictors of generalization of Russian grammatical gender categories. Language Learning, 60, 127–153.Google Scholar
Lado, B. (2008). The role of bilingualism, type of feedback, and cognitive capacity in the acquisition of non-primary languages: A computer-based study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Lado, B., Bowden, H. W., Stafford, C. A., & Sanz, C. (2014). A fine-grained analysis of the effects of negative evidence with and without metalinguistic information in language development. Language Teaching Research, 18, 320–344.Google Scholar
Lasagabaster, D. (2000). Three languages and three linguistic models in the basque educational system. In Cenoz, J., & Jessner, U. (Eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language (pp. 179–197). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language happen. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Lenet, A. E., Sanz, C., Lado, B., Howard, J. H. J., & Howard, D. V. (2011). Aging, pedagogical conditions, and differential success in SLA: An empirical study. In Sanz, C., & Leow, R. P. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processes, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism (pp. 73–84). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the classroom: A student-centered approach. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Levy, B., & Langer, E. (1994). Aging free from negative stereotypes: Successful memory in China and among the American Deaf. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 989–997.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309–365.Google Scholar
Lin, H.-J. (2009). Bilingualism, feedback, cognitive capacity, and learning strategies in L3 development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861–883.Google Scholar
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In Crooks, G., & Gass, S. (Eds.), Tasks and language learning (pp. 123–163). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Sachs, R. (2012). Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning, 62, 704–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O., & Jacoby, L. L. (2008). New considerations in aging and memory: The glass may be half full. In Craik, F. I. M. & Salthouse, T. A. (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and aging, 3rd ed. (pp. 251–310). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Midford, R., & Kirsner, K. (2005). Implicit and explicit learning in aged and young adults. Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, 12, 359–387.Google Scholar
Nation, R., & McLaughlin, B. (1986). Novices and experts: An information processing approach to the “good language learner” problem. Applied Psycholinguistics, 7, 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nayak, N., Hansen, N., Krueger, N., & McLaughlin, B. (1990). Language-learning strategies in monolingual and multilingual adults. Language Learning, 40, 221–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.Google Scholar
Park, D. C. (2000). The basic mechanisms accounting for age-related decline in cognitive function. In Park, D. C. & Schwarz, N. (Eds.), Cognitive aging: A primer (pp. 3–21). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Safont Jordá, M. P. (2003). Metapragmatic awareness and pragmatic production of third language learners of English: A focus on request act realizations. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 7, 43–69.Google Scholar
Sagasta Errasti, M. P. (2003). Acquiring writing skills in a third language: The positive effects of bilingualism. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 7, 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, C. (2000). Bilingual education enhances third language acquisition: Evidence from Catalonia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 23–44.Google Scholar
Sanz, C. (2005). Adult SLA: The interaction between internal and external factors. In Sanz, C. (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory, and practice (pp. 3–20). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Sanz, C. (2007). The role of bilingual literacy in the acquisition of a third language. In Pérez-Vidal, C., Juan-Garau, J., & Bel, A. (Eds.), A portrait of the young in the new multilingual Spain (pp. 22–40). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54, 35–78.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schoonen, R., van Gelderen, A., de Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Snellings, P., Simis, A., & Stevenson, M. (2002). Linguistic knowledge, metacognitive knowledge and retrieval speed in LI, L2, and EFL writing. In Ransdell, S. & Barbier, M. (Eds.), New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 101–122). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Schulz, R. A., & Elliott, P. (2000). Learning Spanish as an older adult. Hispania, 83, 107–119.Google Scholar
Service, E., & Craik, F. I. M. (1993). Differences between young and older adults in learning a foreign vocabulary. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 608–623.Google Scholar
Stafford, C. A., Bowden, H. W., & Sanz, C. (2012). Optimizing language instruction: Matters of explicitness, practice, and cue learning. Language Learning, 62, 741–768.Google Scholar
Stafford, C. A., Sanz, C., & Bowden, H. W. (2010). An experimental study of early L3 development: Age, bilingualism and classroom exposure. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7, 162–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Rowen, N., & Hart, D. (1990). The role of mother language literacy in third language learning. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 3, 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagarelli, K. M., Ruiz-Hernández, S., Moreno Vega, J. L., & Rebuschat, P. (forthcoming). Variability in second language learning: The roles of individual differences, learning conditions, and linguistic complexity. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Special Issue): Cognitive Approaches to Complexity and Instruction in Second Language Acquisition Cognitive Approaches to Complexity and Instruction in Second Language Acquisition.Google Scholar
Tolentino, L. C., & Tokowicz, N. (2014). Cross-language similarity modulates effectiveness of second language grammar instruction. Language Learning, 64, 279–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, A., Schoonen, R., de Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Snellings, P., Simis, A., & Stevenson, M. (2003). Roles of linguistic knowledge, metacognitive knowledge, and processing speed in L3, L2, and L1 reading comprehension: A structural equation modeling approach. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7, 7–25.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in SLA. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5–32). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler adult intelligence scale (WAIS-III): Wechsler memory scale (WMS-III). Sidcup, UK: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Whiting, E., Chenery, H. J., & Copland, D. A. (2011). Effect of aging on learning new names and descriptions for objects. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 18, 594–619.Google Scholar
Wickens, C. D. (2007). Attention to the second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 45, 177–191.Google Scholar
Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction in French: The roles of explicit information and structured input. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 187–205). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Zagona, K. (2002). The syntax of Spanish. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.Google Scholar