Department of Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018 Aug 8;61(8):2062-2075. doi: 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-17-0339.
Unlike traditional implicit approaches used to improve grammatical forms used by children with developmental language disorder, explicit instruction aims to make the learner consciously aware of the underlying language pattern. In this study, we compared the efficacy of an explicit approach to an implicit approach when teaching 3 novel grammatical forms varying in linguistic complexity.
The study included twenty-five 5- to 8-year-old children with developmental language disorder, 13 of whom were randomized to receive an implicit-only (I-O) intervention whereas the remaining 12 participants were randomized to receive a combined explicit-implicit (E-I) intervention to learn 3 novel grammatical forms. On average, participants completed 4.5 teaching sessions for each form across 9 days. Acquisition was assessed during each teaching session. Approximately 9 days posttreatment for each form, participants completed probes to assess maintenance and generalization.
Analyses revealed a meaningful and statistically significant learning advantage for the E-I group on acquisition, maintenance, and generalization measures when performance was collapsed across the 3 novel targets (p < .02, Φs > 0.60). Significant differences between the groups, with the E-I group outperforming the I-O group, only emerged for 1 of the 3 target forms. However, all effect sizes ranged from medium to large (Φs = 0.25-0.76), and relative risk calculations all exceeded 0, indicating a greater likelihood of learning the target form with E-I instruction than I-O instruction.
Study findings indicate that, as compared to implicit instruction, children are more likely to acquire, maintain, and generalize novel grammatical forms when taught with explicit instruction. Further research is needed to evaluate the use of explicit instruction when teaching true grammatical forms to children with language impairment.
与用于改善发育性语言障碍儿童使用的语法形式的传统隐式方法不同，显性教学旨在使学习者有意识地意识到潜在的语言模式。在这项研究中，我们比较了显性教学和隐式教学在教授 3 种语言复杂度不同的新语法形式时的效果。
该研究包括 25 名 5 至 8 岁患有发育性语言障碍的儿童，其中 13 名随机分配接受仅隐式（I-O）干预，而其余 12 名参与者随机分配接受显性-隐式（E-I）干预以学习 3 种新语法形式。平均而言，参与者在 9 天内为每种形式完成了 4.5 次教学课程。在每次教学课程中都进行了习得评估。大约在每种形式的治疗后 9 天，参与者完成了探针以评估保持和泛化。
分析表明，在习得、保持和泛化测量方面，E-I 组的表现优于 I-O 组，这具有统计学意义（p <.02，Φs > 0.60）。仅在 3 个目标形式中的 1 个形式中，组间出现了显著差异，E-I 组的表现优于 I-O 组。然而，所有的效应大小均从中等到较大（Φs = 0.25-0.76），相对风险计算均超过 0，表明 E-I 教学比 I-O 教学更有可能学习目标形式。
研究结果表明，与隐式教学相比，当用显性教学教授新语法形式时，儿童更有可能习得、保持和泛化新语法形式。需要进一步研究评估在向语言障碍儿童教授真正的语法形式时使用显性教学的效果。
