Explicit versus Implicit Instruction: Which Is Preferable for Learning an Artificial Morphological Rule in Children?

Abstract

Introduction: It is not clear which method is preferable in the instruction of grammar in children: explicitly, whereby information concerning the nature of the rule to be learned is provided, or implicitly, whereby this information is not provided. In a recent study wherein an artificial morphophonological rule (AMR) was learned without explicit explanation (implicit instruction), unlike 12-year-olds and young adults, 8-year-olds failed to explicitly discover the nature of the rule and to generalize it to novel items. Given that implicit learning mechanisms in children are more mature than explicit ones, here we investigated whether providing explicit explanation can help 8-year-olds learn the AMR. Method: The AMR consisted of phonological transformations of verbs expressing a semantic distinction: whether the preceding noun was animate or inanimate. Results: The explicit explanation exerted an initial positive effect on learning to apply the AMR to repeated items. Importantly, most explicitly instructed learners were able to generalize the AMR to new items correctly, however, with a small decrease in speed. Discussion: Despite immature explicit learning mechanisms, explicit explanation followed by practice can trigger the development of explicit knowledge of a complex language rule in children. This method of instruction enabled rule generalization and enhanced processes of proceduralization.

A role for incidental auditory learning in auditory-visual word learning among kindergarten children

“…Our goal was to determine whether perceptual regularities created by the repetition of either nonadjacent vowel or consonant sequences across a set of to-be-learned pseudo-words influence word learning and specifically, the formation of picture-referent associations. Unlike previous studies in which perceptual similarities (e.g., a common affix) conveyed class or category information (Ferman & Karni, 2014;Merkx, Rastle, & Davis, 2011;Tamminen, Davis, Merkx, & Rastle, 2012), but similar to the role of color in Protopapas et al (2017), similarity was not related to the identity of the individual referents.…”

“…In our study, we relied on what is discussed in the literature as the underlying morphophonological properties of Hebrew words (Arad, 2006;Berman, 1987;Berman, 2003;Clark & Berman, 1984;Ravid et al, 2016;Segal, Nir-Sagiv, Kishon-Rabin, & Ravid, 2009;Shimron, 2003). Whereas in earlier studies of word learning, phonological similarities were tied to the perceptual attributes of a given semantic category or based on affixes that conveyed class information (Ferman & Karni, 2014;Merkx et al, 2011;Tamminen et al, 2012), this was not the case here. By dissociating this morphophonological structure from the semantics typically associated with it when using existing words, we were able to ask whether the perceptual repetition of this structure influences learning.…”

Väljamõeldud morfoloogiareegli omandamine 8-aastastel lastel

“…Pfenningeri ja Singletoni (2017) väitel mõjutab õppimise kiirust see, kuivõrd kogenud õppijaga on tegemist, st et kui lapsel on juba koolihariduse käigus tekkinud õpikogemus, suudab ta nn klassiruumitingimustes uut keelt omandada kiiremini (Pfenninger, Singleton 2017), sest ta kognitiivsed võimed on paremad ning ta oskab omandatud õpioskusi tõhusamalt ära kasutada. Ferman ja Karni (2010, 2014 ongi näidanud, et täiskasvanud on paremad õppijad kui 12-aastased ning 12-aastased omakorda paremad õppijad kui 8-aastased.…”

“…Fermani katse (Ferman 2017, Ferman, Karni 2010, 2014 eeskujul koostati väljamõeldud grammatikareegli (sobiva tunnuse valimine verbile sõltuvalt subjekti elususest või elutusest) omandamise eksperiment eesti keele jaoks. Elususe ja elutuse kategooria pakub võimaluse vaadelda semantikast tingitud morfoloogilise reegli omandamist ning on sobiv eelkõige seetõttu, et tegemist ei ole olemasoleva kategooriaga, st et eesti keeles seda kategooriat morfoloogiliste tunnustega ei eristata.…”

Brain, Cognition and Language: Current Issues in Child Language

“…Ferman and Karni [10] focus on instructional methods for grammar with child learners in ‘Explicit versus implicit instruction: which is preferable for learning an artificial morphological rule in children?' In this article, Ferman and Karni study whether explicit instruction in the form of explanations is beneficial for children to learn grammar.…”