Open Journal Systems

The effects of input flood and input enhancement techniques in teaching collocations to EFL learners

Bunyamin Celik

Article ID: 2088
Vol 6, Issue 1, 2024, Article identifier:

VIEWS - 143 (Abstract) 122 (PDF)

Abstract

Input flood and input enhancement are two prominent techniques to develop learners’ writing competence. While the former refers to offering multiple sources to increase students’ gains, the latter implies highlighting certain linguistic items to attract attention. A plethora of studies have been conducted to measure the effectiveness of both techniques. However, a gap in the literature has been noticed in comparing input flood with input enhancement technique in terms of writing improvement in Iraq. Thus, the present study was conducted to measure the impacts of the input flood technique to teach collocations on 48 EFL learners who joined an intensive language learning program at the Language Preparatory School of Tishk International University in Erbil, Iraq. Participants, chosen by convenience sampling method, were exposed to input flood or input enhancement techniques to expand their colloquial expression knowledge within six weeks in the 2022–2023 academic year spring semester. Data were collected via writing exams and interviews as a part of the explanatory sequential research design. The findings, analyzed by SPSS 27 and MAXQDA, revealed that experimental group students who received the instruction via input flood increased their writing marks more significantly than control group students whose instruction was via input enhancement. Likewise, students who received the instruction with input flood had more positive views than students receiving input enhancement. The findings of the study may have several implications for educators who think about teaching collocations via input flood and input enhancement techniques professionally.


Keywords

academic writing; input flood; input enhancement; vocabulary breadth

Full Text:

PDF



References

Bui TL (2021). The role of collocations in the English teaching and learning. International Journal of TESOL and Education, 1(2), 99-109.

Celik B (2021). Prospective foreign language teacher candidates’ views on the use of communication technologies in foreign language education and their self-efficacy beliefs: Case of Erbil, Iraq. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 8(1). doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v8i1p59

Celik B (2023). EFL learners’ perceptions on QR code enriched instruction in developing macro-skills. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 10(3). doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v10i3p326

Daskan A, Yildiz Y (2020). Blended learning: A potential approach to promote learning outcomes. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 7(4), 103-108. doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v7i4p103

Dastjerdi HV, Farshid M (2011). The role of input enhancement in teaching compliments. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(2). doi: 10.4304/jltr.2.2.460-466

Deveci T (2007). Why and how to teach collocation. English Teaching Forum, 34(1).

Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6pt2), 2134–2156. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Gablasova D, Brezina V, McEnery T (2017). Collocations in corpus‐based language learning research: Identifying, comparing, and interpreting the evidence. Language Learning, 67(S1), 155–179. doi: 10.1111/lang.12225

Granger S, Bestgen Y (2014). The use of collocations by intermediate vs. advanced non-native writers: A bigram-based study. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52(3). doi: 10.1515/iral-2014-0011

Hill J (2000). Revising priorities: From grammatical failure to collocational success. In: Lewis M (editor). Teaching Collocation: Further Developments in the Lexical Approach. LTP. pp. 47–67.

Izumi S (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(4), 541–577. doi: 10.1017/s0272263102004023

Jabbarpoor S, Tajeddin Z (2013). The effect of input enhancement, individual output, and collaborative output on foreign language learning: the case of English inversion structures. Resla, 12(1), 267-288.

Kara S (2023). The effects of web 2.0 tools on foundation english students’ success rates at a private university in Iraq. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 10(1). doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v10i1p22

Kara S, Abdulrahman SA (2022). The effects of direct written corrective feedback (WCF) on language preparatory school students’ IELTS independent writing section score. Canadian Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 2(4). doi: 10.53103/cjlls.v2i4.58

Khatami E, Ameri S, Navidinia H (2023). Watching videos and foreign language acquisition: Formulaic sequences in focus. Media and Intercultural Communication: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1(2), 40-60.

Kuckartz U (2010). Realizing mixed-methods approaches with MAXQDA. Available online: https://www.maxqda.com/download/Mixmethmaxqda-Nov01-2010.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2023).

Küçük T (2023). Technology integrated teaching and its positive and negative impacts on education. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 10(1). doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v10i1p46

Hamed Mahvelati E, Mukundan J (2012). The effects of input flood and consciousness-raising approach on collocation knowledge development of language learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(6), 182–192. doi: 10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.6p.182

Hamed Mahvelati E, Mukundan J (2012). The role of cognitive style in the collocational knowledge development of Iranian EFL learners through input flood treatment. English Language Teaching, 5(10). doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n10p105

Mangubhai F (2001). Book floods and comprehensible input floods: providing ideal conditions for second language acquisition. International Journal of Educational Research, 35(2), 147–156. doi: 10.1016/s0883-0355(01)00012-x

Mkhelif AZ (2021). Investigating Iraqi EFL University Students’ Knowledge of Grammatical Collocations in English [PhD thesis]. University of Leicester.

Ztuna S (2012). Effects of Input Flood and Negative Evidence on Learning of Make/Do Collocations: A Study with Seventh Grade Turkish EFL Students [PhD thesis]. Anadolu University (Turkey).

Peters E (2012). Learning German formulaic sequences: the effect of two attention-drawing techniques. The Language Learning Journal, 40(1), 65–79. doi: 10.1080/09571736.2012.658224

Pigada M, Schmitt N (2006) Vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading: A case study. Reading in a Foreign Language 18(1), 1–28.

Pineteh EA (2013). The academic writing challenges of undergraduate students: A South African case study. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(1). doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v3n1p12

Rabia M, Mubarak N, Tallat H, Nasir W (2017). A study on study habits and academic performance of students. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 7(10), 891–897. doi: 10.18488/journal.1.2017.710.891.897

Rao PS (2019). The role of English as a global language. Research Journal of English, 4(1), 65-79.

Richards JC, Renandya WA (editors) (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/cbo9780511667190

Safdari M (2019). Input flooding, input enhancement and writing performance: Effects and percepts. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 281–296. doi: 10.29333/iji.2019.12418a

Strobl C, Ailhaud E, Benetos K, et al. (2019). Digital support for academic writing: A review of technologies and pedagogies. Computers and Education, 131, 33–48. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.12.005

Szudarski P, Carter R (2014). The role of input flood and input enhancement in EFL learners’ acquisition of collocations. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 245–265. doi: 10.1111/ijal.12092

Webb S, Newton J, Chang A (2012). Incidental learning of collocation. Language Learning, 63(1), 91–120. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00729.x

Winke PM (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(2), 323–352. doi: 10.1017/s0272263112000903

Yucedal HM (2023). Integration of web 2.0 tools in EFL classes: Barriers and solutions. Revista Amazonia Investiga, 12(63), 109–122. doi: 10.34069/ai/2023.63.03.10

Yucedal HM, Abdulrahman SA, Kara S (2022). Process-genre approach in teaching writing to language preparatory school students at a private university in Iraq. Canadian Journal of Educational and Social Studies, 2(5). doi: 10.53103/cjess.v2i5.64


DOI: https://doi.org/10.59400/fls.v6i1.2088
(143 Abstract Views, 122 PDF Downloads)

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2023 Bunyamin Celik

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.