AbstractInstructed second language acquisition (ISLA) has been referenced in the larger field of the SLA literature for over two and a half decades. Currently, there are several theoretical underpinnings accounting for processes assumed to play a role in ISLA and quite an impressive number of studies have empirically addressed some aspect(s) of ISLA. Recently, a lengthy and relatively cohesive treatise of this substrand of SLA research in relation to both theoretical, empirical, and pedagogical perspectives has been published in two books (cf. Leow, 2015a; Loewen, 2015), and a new model of the L2 learning process in ISLA has been proposed (Leow, 2015a). These publications are timely and important given that the concept of ISLA not only needs to be clearly defined but also situated contextually. To this end, this article (a) revisits current definitions of ISLA in the SLA literature with the aim of identifying specific features of ISLA that underlie such definitions, (b) deconstructs ISLA by probing deeper into what comprises the terms instructed and SLA in ISLA, (c) provides a brief summary of the cognitive processes and variables postulated by the theoretical underpinnings of ISLA and pertinent empirical research, (d) recommends that ISLA be observed from one curricular approach together with its empirical and pedagogical ramifications, and (e) provides some measure of direction future ISLA research may follow.
Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 259-302). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States, 2013. Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC, 3(5), 2014.
Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium.
Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111, 1036-1060.
Baralt, M. (2013). The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face-to-face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 689-725.
Bowles, M. (2003). The effects of textual enhancement on language learning: An online/offline study of fourth-semester students. In P. Kempchinsky & C. E. Piñeros (Eds.), Theory, practice, and acquisition: Papers from the 6th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium and the 5th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish & Portuguese (pp. 395-411). Summerville, MA: Cascadilla.
Bowles, M. A. (2008). Task type and reactivity of verbal reports in SLA: A first look at an L2 task other than reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 359-387.
Bowles, M. A. (2010). The think-aloud controversy in second language research. New York: Routledge.
Bowles, M., & Leow, R. P. (2005). Reactivity and type of verbal report in SLA research methodology: Expanding the scope of investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 415-440.
Calderón, A. M. (2013). The effects of L2 learner proficiency on depth of processing, levels of awareness, and intake. In J. M. Bergsleithner, S. N. Frota, & J. K. Yoshioka (Eds.), Noticing and second language acquisition: Studies in honor in Richard Schmidt (pp. 103-121). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Cerezo, L., Caras, A., & Leow, R. P. (in press). Effectiveness of guided induction versus deductive instruction on the development of complex Spanish “gustar” structures: An analysis of learning outcomes and processes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
Collentine, J., & Freed, B. (2004). Learning contexts and its effects on second language acquisition: Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 153-171.
DeKeyser, R. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 97-113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305-352.
Ellis, N. C., & Sagarra, N. (2010). The bounds of adult language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 553-580.
Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (2005). Instructed second language acquisition: A literature review. Wellington: Ministry of Education, New Zealand.
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Godfroid, A., Housen, A., & Boers, F. (2010). A procedure for testing the noticing hypothesis in the context of vocabulary acquisition. In M. Pütz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Inside the learner's mind: Cognitive processing and second language acquisition (pp. 169-197). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Godfroid, A., Boers, F., & Housen, A. (2013). An eye for words: Gauging the role of attention in L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 483-517.
Housen, A., & Pierrard, M. (2005). Investigations in instructed second language acquisition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hsieh, H. C. (2008). The effects of type of exposure and type of post-exposure task on L2 development. Journal of Foreign Language Instruction, 2, 117-138.
Hsieh, H-C., Moreno, N., & Leow, R. P. (2015). Awareness, type of medium, and L2 development: Revisiting Hsieh (2008). In R. P. Leow, L. Cerezo, & M. Baralt (Eds.), A psycholinguistic approach to technology and language learning (pp. 131-150). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergammon.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 201-224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Leow, R. P. (1994). Teacher education and coherent curriculum development: The crucial link. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Educational linguistics, crosscultural communication, and global interdependence (pp. 337-346). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Leow, R. P. (1997). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 47, 467-506.
Leow, R. P. (1998). The effects of amount and type of exposure on adult learners’ L2 development in SLA. Modern Language Journal, 82, 49-68.
Leow, R. P. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2?: An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84, 496-509.
Leow, R. P. (2007). Input in the L2 classroom: An attentional perspective on receptive practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 21-50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leow, R. P. (2009). Input enhancement and L2 grammatical development: What the research reveals. In J. Watzinger-Tharp & S. L. Katz (Eds.), Conceptions of L2 grammar: Theoretical approaches and their application in the L2 classroom (pp. 16-34). Boston, MA: Heinle.
Leow, R. P. (2013). Schmidt’s noticing hypothesis: More than two decades after. In J. M. Bergsleithner, S. N. Frota, & J. K. Yoshioka (Eds.), Noticing and second language acquisition: Studies in honor in Richard Schmidt (pp. 23-35). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Leow, R. P. (2015a). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York: Routledge.
Leow, R. P. (2015b). Implicit learning in SLA: Of processes and products. In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 47-65). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leow, R. P., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). To think aloud or not to think aloud: The issue of reactivity in SLA research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 35-57.
Leow, R. P., Grey, S., Marijuan, S., & Moorman, C. (2014). Concurrent data elicitation procedures, processes, and the early stages of L2 learning: A critical overview. Second Language Research, 30(2), 111-127.
Liou, H.-C. (2012). The roles of second life in a college computer-assisted language learning (CALL) course in Taiwan, ROC. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(4), 365-382.
Loewen, S. (2013). Instructed second language acquisition. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 2716-2718). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Loewen, S. (2015). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Morgan-Short, K., & Bowden, H. W. (2006). Processing instruction and meaningful output-based instruction: Effects on second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 31-65.
Morgan-Short, K., Heil, J., Botero-Moriarty, A., & Ebert, S. (2012). Allocation of attention to second language form and meaning: Issues of think alouds and depth of processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 659-685.
Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Peterson, M. (2012). EFL learner collaborative interaction in second life. ReCALL, 24(1), 20-39.
Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283-331.
Rosa, E., & Leow, R. P. (2004). Awareness, different learning conditions, and second language development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 269-292.
Rosa, E., & O'Neill, M. (1999). Explicitness, intake and the issue of awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 511-556.
Rossomondo, A. E. (2007). The role of lexical temporal indicators and text interaction format in the incidental acquisition of the Spanish future tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 39-66.
Sachs, R., & Suh, B-R. (2007). Textually enhanced recasts, learner awareness, and L2 outcomes in synchronous computer-mediated interaction, In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 197-227). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sanz, C., Lin, H-J., Lado, B., Bowden, H., & Stafford, C. A. (2009). Concurrent verbalizations, pedagogical conditions, and reactivity. Two CALL studies. Language Learning, 59, 33-71.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190.
Smith, B. (2010). Employing eye-tracking technology in researching the effectiveness of recasts in CMC. In F. M. Hult (Ed.), Directions and prospects for educational linguistics (pp. 79-97). Dordrecht: Springer.
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471-483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Telles, J. A. (2015). Teletandem and performativity. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 15(1), 1-30.
Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. (2009). Second language use, socialization, and learning in internet interest communities and online games. Modern Language Journal, 93, 802-821.
Tomlin, R. S., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183-203.
VanPatten, B. (2007). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 115-135). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Winke, P. M. (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 323-352.
Yanguas, I., & Lado, B. (2012). Is thinking aloud reactive when writing in the heritage language? Foreign Language Annals, 45(3), 380-399.
Yoshida, M. (2008). Think-aloud protocols and type of reading task: The issue of reactivity in L2 reading research. In M. Bowles, R. Foote, S. Perpiñán, & R. Bhatt (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2007 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 109-209). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.