Introduction concerned learners as highlighted using the Input

Introduction

The acquisition
and learning processes of a second language are associated with difficulties,
particularly among adults. Therefore, the learning approaches used have to meet
the needs of the concerned learners as highlighted using the Input Interaction
Output model that responds to the concerns and requirements of those expected
to adopt a second language (Mitchell, Myles and Marsden, 2013). The process has
to be facilitated and have markers of comprehensible input that underlines the
exposure of learners to understandable and interesting reading and listening
material. Hence, the acquisition of the second language is dependent on the
learner’s understanding of the messages being communicated. The case example
highlights the need for adapting to the needs of the learners in the design of
the lesson targeted at enhancing the processes of second language acquisition
(SLA) (Dörnyei, 2006).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The learning
process presented in the video resonates with the elements outlined in the
interaction hypothesis that signify the importance of using the target language
interactively. Hence, the learners are provided the opportunity of negotiating
and understanding the meaning of different words through mediated interactions
(Kasper and Roever, 2005). The learning environment in the
video facilitates interactions among the students as evidenced by the time
allocations for different activities. For example, the adult learners from
different backgrounds are presented the opportunity for brainstorming and identifying
words that could be used for the discussion about a special occasion. The
application of theoretical concepts in the learning process supports the use of
systematic approaches for diverse learners seeking to acquire English as the
second language (Corder, 1967). The lesson and learning
environment are designed to promote interactions as stipulated using the
interaction hypothesis where the ease of acquiring the second language is
facilitated by its application in practical cases. The essay highlights the
necessity of connecting classroom experiences to theoretical concepts regarding
SLA with particular interest on the development of the desired vocabulary to
complete a sentence.

Discussion

The dictates of
the interaction hypothesis mirror those of the input hypothesis because of the
emphasis on passing information using the target language, particularly while
offering instructions to a diverse classroom. The input process references the
direct engagement of learners in English as the second language that requires
synthesis in what is known as the intake phase (Mitchell, Myles and Marsden,
2013). However, the input and interaction hypotheses emphasize the need for
learning process to be organized in a manner that can be comprehensible to the
learners. The Input Interaction Output model comprises of three significant features
factored in the processes of second language learning (L2) (Mitchell, Myles and
Marsden, 2013). The case example of the learning environment that involves
adults learning and acquiring English as the second language encapsulates the
three components that include input, interaction, and the output. The input can
be described through the facilitation of the teacher in the classroom and use
of the target language, English, in the instructions being provided to the
learners.

The interaction
phase is outlined using the activities designed for the lesson, including
responses to the queries of the teacher and the time allocated for learners to
engage with each other and exchange ideas about different topics. The
linguistic environment contributes and facilitates the ease of adapting a
foreign language and the resolution of the challenges that emerge for SLA. Krashen
and Gass offer pivotal theoretical support targeted at identifying the link
between the interaction and input of a language and the processes that result
in the output (Larsen-Freeman, 2014). While different factors
have been identified as being influential in SLA, the environment, motivational
variables, and cognitive functions of the learner have the greatest impact on
the process. Hence, the natural order that leads to the acquisition of the
second language dictates the necessity for ensuring the conditions listed above
are factored to maximize the ease of SLA (Williams and VanPatten, 2015). As
exemplified in the case study, the students display high levels of enthusiasm
associated with their interaction with the target language, English. Hence, the
learning method is structured in a way that motivates and boosts the confidence
to apply the language learned in the construction of simple sentences (Dörnyei, 2006).

The input
received is in the form of oral submissions by the tutor and written format to
guide the students in the activities designed to improve their apprehension of
English as their second language. The output is evidenced by the requirement
for writing down lists of words applicable to the topic of interest, discussion
with a partner in class, writing sentences, and presenting before fellow
students. The Input Interaction Output model emphasizes the need for the
learners to assimilate and engage consistently using the target language
(Williams and VanPatten, 2015). Hence, the classroom activities present
brainstorming and discussions among students as the suitable avenue for
increasing the level of interaction with the target language. The emphasis of
the class and motivational elements visible underscore the importance of the
input and interaction process without consideration on whether the output is
comprehensible or not (Dörnyei, 2000). Hence, the output process
is improved gradually as exemplified in the case study where learning was
structured towards the achievement of simple sentence construction.

The English
learners participating in the class were expected to use words obtained from
brainstorming to only write two sentences regarding their topic with the
assistance of their partners. Therefore interactions and discussions with
partners served to reinforce the concept of negotiating for meaning with fellow
learners who were non-native speakers of the target language. SLA has been
determined as achieving higher successes among children compared to adults as
exemplified by the speed of instructions and learning environment presented in
the video. The learning or acquisition context serves to facilitate the
importance of the input, interaction, and output processes in SLA (Peirce, 1995). Therefore, the environment could either being
non-instructed or instructed with the two contexts being visible in the case
study. For example, the teacher offers guidelines and instructions about the
approach to the topic at hand, but the learners are left to their own devices
firstly at the individual level and secondly as pairs to develop words that
could be used for the completion of the task assigned.

According to
Krashen, acquisition as part of SLA serves to explain the incidental experience
with the new language while learning is the intentional component. Hence, SLA
is guided by biological aspects in the subconscious that occur in natural
environments while learning is structured and conscious and majorly restricted
to the classroom setting. The case example highlights part of the learning
process where students are engaged in conscious processes that facilitate and
ease the acquisition of English as the L2. The classroom experience mirrors
Krashen’s perspective on SLA as proposed in the “Monitor Theory” where the
input is expected to be one level beyond the comprehension of the learner. The
lesson is structured in a way that the learners are challenged to develop two
sentences slightly beyond their capacity as indicated by the need for finding
suitable words that could be used to express the topic. The input hypothesis is
propped against the concept of UG (Universal Grammar) and the Government and
binding theory as the means of enhancing the proficiency of the learners.

The classroom
experience further highlights the application of the input hypothesis in the
alteration of the content to guide and offer direction to the learners on the
necessary linguistic areas. The input sets the pace and base for further
development of competence in SLA and the learner progresses based on the
information and guidance provided in the formal and informal environments. The
input process should be structured to maximize the realization of
comprehensibility as a vital component for SLA (Dörnyei,
2006). The
theory on Universal Grammar underlines the shared properties of different
languages, and therefore, learning should be structured using parameters that
will enhance the ease of constructing grammatically correct sentences (Williams
and VanPatten, 2015). The premise of the classroom experience where learners
are expected to identify words that would be meaningful to their chosen topic
reinforces the concept of shared features in grammar. Therefore, one’s
sufficient words are accumulated learners exhibit ease constructing sentences
as the means of expressing themselves in the target language.

The acquisition
aspect of L2 mirrors the processes the adults underwent as children while
acquiring the first language. Hence, the subconscious perspective of L2
acquisition happens according to the cognitive capacity of the adult and
requires meaningful and frequent interaction with the target language (Williams
and VanPatten, 2015). The classroom experience where instructions and guidance
is offered using English as the target language serves as part of natural
communication that facilitates acquisition through the use of subconscious
processes (Ortega, 2008). The teacher uses gestures
and writings to guide the students through the class activity as an
exemplification of the importance of using the input hypothesis where the
learners are exposed to language elements beyond their level (Wesche, 1994). The communication pattern and choice of brainstorming
and exchanges between learners highlights the necessity of natural
communication in enhancing the successes of SLA. Additionally, the learned
system represents the product achieved from the synthesis of formal
instructions and leads to the utilization of conscious processes.

The classroom
experience offers the opportunity for the diverse adult students to use both
subconscious and conscious processes in SLA. Therefore, through the classroom
activities students develop and appreciation for the grammar rules used in the
construction of English sentences (Block, 2007). Learning is at the
periphery of SLA compared to acquisition that requires the use of subconscious
process to communicate and develop comprehension gradually. Ellis and Krashen
concur on the importance attached to the understanding of the difference
between acquisition and learning as one is incidental while the other is
intentional (Ellis, 1998). The incidental aspect indicates the
possibility of acquiring the second language without formal instructions as
explained using the Input Interaction Output model. The input requires the
consistent interaction and use of the target language that stimulates the
subconscious.

Notably, the
input should be comprehensible but the output is not evaluated critically when
a learner is exposed to subconscious processes of SLA (Corder,
1967). Nevertheless,
Long’s interaction hypothesis highlights the need for extending SLA beyond
informal setting to the structured classroom setting where the teacher has
ensured that learners get the opportunity to discuss in pairs. Additionally,
the comprehensible model stipulates the need for the input to observe and
ensure the content learners adopt is meaningful (Corder,
1967). The
teacher facilitates and ensures the input is comprehensible by providing examples
and allowing the contribution of the learners. The negotiation of meaning is
realized when the students get the opportunity of discussing their chosen
words.

Learning serves
the pivotal role and influences the acquisition of language because of the
exposure to organized grammar systems and the development of an appreciation
for the structures used in the second language (Ellis,
1998). The
learners receive the audience of their teacher while getting the opportunity to
ask questions about the construction of sentences using the words that had been
proposed during the brainstorming part. The motivational element is evidenced
in the class as the teacher recognizes the need for learners complementing
their partners for the work done (Dörnyei, 2000).

Conclusion

The connection
between the practical and theoretical aspects of SLA underline the need for
considering the learning experiences of the adult students concerned. The
classroom example highlights the processes used in L2 learning through
structured mechanisms. Notably, the classroom experience connects with the
integrated Input Interaction Output model that looks at the comprehensive
acquisition and learning processes that dominate the theoretical development in
SLA. Input and interaction are intertwined and reflect the need for learners
being exposed to instructions and discussions in the target language, which was
English in the sample classroom example. The distinction between acquisition
and learning is critical in the development of programs targeted at achieving
successful SLA outcomes. Acquisition highlights the use of subconscious
processes while learning is structured and dependent on the classroom
environment; however, the two processes were applied in the classroom
experience as the students enjoyed the opportunity of interacting using the
target language.