# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Vygotskian Sociocultural Perspective on Immersion Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last week, I described strategies that empower ELs to understand instructions. This is one of two priorities for an EL teacher; scaffolding student engagement is the second. The first focus enables ELs to understand what we expect of them, while the second one propels them to communicate to their fullest ability.

Comprehensible Output: The Hypothesis

Merrill Swain , the originator of the comprehensible output hypothesis, suggested that people learn language by noticing that one uses it incorrectly. The learner then corrects herself and uses language that correctly follows the grammatical rules (1985). (1998) strongly disagrees with Swain's hypothesis.

When I talk comprehensible output, I am not referring to Swain's hypothesis. Instead, I see comprehensible output to mean anything the student is doing to demonstrate understanding. This can mean engaging in learning experiences or completing assessments. I borrowed the term "comprehensible output" because content teachers usually need help in two areas:

1. getting the EL to understand instruction (comprehensible input) and

2. determining if the EL understands the instruction (comprehensible output).

The output produced by ELs indicates the degree to which they comprehend the instructions and content. With this formative information, teachers can modify instruction.

Comprehensible Output: What Students Can Do

Comprehensible output is (Haynes, n.d). the belief that ELs can communicate at the level of their language proficiency ELs and non-ELs can demonstrate similar understandings in different ways. Indeed, forcing an EL to communicate in ways that are beyond their current language capabilities often frustrates them and creates an emotional distance between them and school - further widening the education gap. After ELs understand the instructions, I offer differentiated tasks that allow them to communicate their understanding in alternative forms and in ways that honor their current language development.

The bottom turqouise section of the diagram below represents the variety of ways ELs can signal that they understand. It is broken up into four sections based on increasing language proficiency starting with Beginning and proceeding to Developing, Expanding, and ending at Bridging. The sequence of these categories also denotes the quantity of words ELs can produce orally and in writing.

For Beginning ELs, maybe all they can do is gesture and repeat a few words, while Bridging ELs can independently merge written text, voice, and images together to create something new and sophisticated.Housed in this menu of options is the belief that communication isn't limited to printed or spoken words - gestures, images and videos also have a valid place within any classroom.

You will find a fully completed diagram at the end of this blog. It's a free downloadable PDF.

Beginning MLs

Even though Beginning ELs are not as proficient in English compared to other ELs, they can still point, label, match, and gesture to show understanding. Though these forms of output are not as linguistically sophisticated as writing extended pieces of text, they do demonstrate comprehension.

Beginning ELs, for example, can be expected to produce oral or written words or simple phrases. Watch this video of me working with Zhang Ho, a 7th grader from China. The science teacher wanted him to know some specific science vocabulary. Based on Zhang Ho's English skills, gesturing while saying the vocabulary words was sufficient evidence of his understanding.

The newer the EL is to English, the more I lean on technology as a crutch to produce comprehensible output. Google Translate is an EL teacher's best friend - always there to help but sometimes adding to the confusion. By providing easy rewordings that simply teacher instructions, Google Translate explicitly honors the importance of students' home languages and frees ELs to display intelligence when their current English level betrays them.

Here's a screenshot from Zhang Ho's history project created in Google Slides . He was expected to analyze the impact of dams. Notice the academic quality of his writing, which he initially wrote in Chinese and then used Google Translate to communicate in English. Zhang Ho's use of the before and after images were additional tools that communicated his analytical thinking. These pictures carried us along his analysis when his words no longer could.

I also recommend watching this by , a passionate, experienced education consultant specializing in EL instruction and author of Carol Salva Boosting Achievement: Reaching Students with Interrupted or Minimal Education. She describes what Beginning ELs can do in a secondary setting even when students have interrupted educations or no prior educational experience. Carol works miracles!

Developing MLs

Developing ELs can transition from gesturing basic ideas to communicating through graphs and images that incorporate simple text. These ELs can be expected to produce text at the sentence level because they have a growing stockpile of basic and content-specific words. They can stitch these words together to form simple - though often grammatically inaccurate - sentences.

Here is a series of images Ayaka drew to demonstrate her understanding of the main ideas in this World Vision's video on access to clean water . Notice how she produced simple sentences with basic vocabulary words to communicate her ideas. Ayaka is morphing from an EL who used to point, label, and gesture to a student who can use images combined with simple sentences to communicate her ideas.

I again depend on technology to scaffold Developing ELs' communication of ideas. Google Slides , Adobe Spark , , and are FANTASTIC ways for ELs to demonstrate their content knowledge and create from their understanding. The video and voice functions in these programs augment the limited text that ELs can produce.

Here's a video that Ho Jung created using Adobe Spark (there's a 10-sec intro). His fellow classmates were writing mini-reports in history class to describe early human life. Because Ho Jung was only able to create simple sentences, his history teacher and I honored his level of English by allowing him to produce basic sentences enhanced by the creative use of voice recording, images, and animation.

More importantly, these freemium programs promote critical thinking - requiring students to evaluate what content to use and how to communicate it. No longer just consumers of content, ELs become prosumers, people who consume and create content.

Expanding MLs

These ELs have sophisticated control of the English language. Educators can expect Expanding ELs to sew sentences together to form a coherent paragraph. Expanding ELs are able to learn text structures such as describe, sequence, cause-effect, problem-solution, and argument . Jennifer Gonzalez, one of my favorite education bloggers, explains how teaching text structures can increase students' comprehension of nonfiction texts.

Gonzalez suggests that as students are reading a text that describes an object, we can outline the traits and details of that object on a diagram. Doing so helps students see how a descriptive text structures sentences and paragraphs. I produced a mini-poster series called Bathroom Brief 18-23 that depicts each of the text structures.

Bridging MLs

Bridging ELs possess a heightened ability to switch from social to formal language on command. They're skilled enough to communicate divergent and analytical thoughts with precision, sophistication, and accuracy. Because of their ability to communicate connections between ideas, Bridging ELs should be expected to produce a central written message with multiple paragraphs and organize a coherent oral presentation aided by visuals, videos, graphs, charts, texts.

Service-learning is an appropriate output for Bridging ELs because of the rigorous demands on literacy needed to conduct research, organize findings, make suggestions, take actions, collaborate with others and reflect on the results. One notable example of service-learning is taken from Matt Colley's history class.

Students were to research a social issue they cared about such as LGBT rights, police brutality, and access to healthy foods. They then analyzed the root causes of the issue. Students were instructed to plan actions they could take to address the problem. After identifying how their social issue is manifested in their own communities , they started planning actions such as creating a petition, meeting with the mayor, and working with the school cafeteria to provide more access to healthier meals.

Service-learning bridges social and academic language because students have to be conscious about using the appropriate register. They use social language to plan and collaborate with classmates, but they shift to academic language when drafting their petition letter, writing an analysis of their survey to send to the superintendent, and organizing their presentation to a potential donor.

Takeaway

Now that I've adopted these two priorities - 1.) develop comprehensible input, then 2.) foster engagement - I see my work from a completely different perspective. I search from the menu of strategies for approaches that can develop comprehension, and I offer a rainbow of options to demonstrate their ideas in a way that honors the language they can produce. With these two lenses, I walk hand-in-hand with ELs as they learn to master English.

Next Post

I hoped you've enjoyed this short detour from WIDA's Essential Actions, though it is a tangent of Action 8's. Please visit the blog again next week when I'll share WIDA's Action 9 and describe ways to create a language-rich classroom. When ELs are creating with language and immersed in language, then they'll truly develop mastery and control of English.

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning . Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Krashen, S. (1998). A Comprehensible Universe. 175-182. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77626-0.

Swain, M. (1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 235-256. New York: Newbury House.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
#28. Comprehensible Output: What Students Can Do - ELL Strategies | TanKHuynh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Comprehensible Output is how ELLs show they understand your content and instructions. Explore the output you should expect from ELLs at every level.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Krashen (1982, 1985) considered anxiety as debilitative and argued that CF is potentially detrimental to L2 learning as it can increase L2 anxiety, raise affective filters, hinder ability to process comprehensible input and consequently decrease L2 learning ability. Additionally, Krashen (1998) noted that oral communication is the most anxiety-provoking classroom activity and argued that "pushed output" (e.g., pushing learners to produce correct target form by given them CF) hinders acquisition as it provokes anxiety in learners, raises the affective filter and inhibits L2 learning. Like other instructional techniques, CF can be anxiety-provoking in oral communication classes if learners are not made aware of purpose of CF in improving their language learning (Swain & Lapkin, 1995).

This study aimed at examining the differences in high-anxiety and low-anxiety learners' beliefs about corrective feedback (henceforth, CF) when they were made aware of the purpose, significance, and types of CF. The differences were sought with regard to the necessity, frequency, and timing of CF, types of errors, types of CF, and choice of correctors. One hundred and sixty Iranian EFL learners in three language institutes in the centre of Iran participated in the study. The learners were assigned to either a high-anxiety group ( N = 80) or a low-anxiety group ( N = 80) according to their score on the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS). Data from FLCAS and CF questionnaires showed that the observed differences between the two groups were not significant. All in all, the results indicated that regardless of their anxiety level both groups had similar beliefs about CF and strongly favoured receiving frequent CF in English oral communication classes when they were made aware of the purpose, significance, and types of CF as suggested by . Pedagogical implications for providing CF are also discussed.

View all citing articles on Scopus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The comprehensible output (CO) hypothesis states that we acquire language when we attempt to transmit a message but fail and have to try again. Eventu...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the field of second language acquisition, there are many theories about the most effective way for language learners to acquire new language forms. One theory of language acquisition is the comprehensible output hypothesis.

Developed by Merrill Swain, the comprehensible output ( CO) hypothesis states that learning takes place when learners encounter a gap in their linguistic knowledge of the second language (L2). By noticing this gap, learners becomes aware of it and may be able to modify their output so that they learn something new about the language. Although Swain does not claim that comprehensible output is solely responsible for all or even most language acquisition, she does claim that, under some conditions, CO facilitates second language learning in ways that differ from and enhance input due to the mental processes connected with the production of language. This hypothesis is closely related to the Noticing hypothesis. Swain defines three functions of output:

1. Noticing function: Learners encounter gaps between what they want to say and what they are able to say, and so they notice what they do not know or only know partially in this language.

2. Hypothesis-testing function: When a learner says something, there is always an at least tacit hypothesis underlying his or her error, e.g. about grammar. By uttering something, the learner tests this hypothesis and receives feedback from an interlocutor. This feedback enables reprocessing of the hypothesis if necessary.

3. Metalinguistic function: Learners reflect on the language they learn, and thereby the output enables them to control and internalize linguistic knowledge.

Oops something went wrong:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the field of second language acquisition, there are many theories about the most effective way for language learners to acquire new language forms. One theory of language acquisition is the comprehensible output hypothesis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Output in SLA (Second Language Acquisition)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.

Williams, Jessica 2001. Focus on forms research and its application. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, Vol. 1, Issue. 1, p. 31.

Rott, Susanne Williams, Jessica and Cameron, Richard 2002. The effect of multiple-choice L1 glosses and input-output cycles on lexical acquisition and retention. Language Teaching Research, Vol. 6, Issue. 3, p. 183.

Kuiken, Folkert and Vedder, Ineke 2002. The effect of interaction in acquiring the grammar of a second language. International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 37, Issue. 3-4, p. 343.

Williams, John N. and Lovatt, Peter 2003. Phonological Memory and Rule Learning. Language Learning, Vol. 53, Issue. 1, p. 67.

Jensen, Eva Dam and Vinther, Thora 2003. Exact Repetition as Input Enhancement in Second Language Acquisition. Language Learning, Vol. 53, Issue. 3, p. 373.

Shehadeh, Ali 2003. Learner output, hypothesis testing, and internalizing linguistic knowledge. System, Vol. 31, Issue. 2, p. 155.

Robinson, Peter 2003. The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. p. 631.

Chaudron, Craig 2003. The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. p. 762.

Izumi, Yukiko and Izumi, Shinichi 2004. Investigating the Effects of Oral Output on the Learning of Relative Clauses in English: Issues in the Psycholinguistic Requirements for Effective Output Tasks. The Canadian Modern Language Review, Vol. 60, Issue. 5, p. 587.

Williams, John N. and Lovatt, Peter 2005. Phonological Memory and Rule Learning. Language Learning, Vol. 55, Issue. S1, p. 177.

Van Lommel, Sven Laenen, Annouschka and d'Ydewalle, Géry 2006. Foreign‐grammar acquisition while watching subtitled television programmes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 76, Issue. 2, p. 243.

Morgan-Short, Kara and Bowden, Harriet Wood 2006. PROCESSING INSTRUCTION AND MEANINGFUL OUTPUT-BASED INSTRUCTION:: Effects on Second Language Development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Vol. 28, Issue. 01,

Yoshimura, Fumiko 2006. Does manipulating foreknowledge of output tasks lead to differences in reading behaviour, text comprehension and noticing of language form?. Language Teaching Research, Vol. 10, Issue. 4, p. 419.

Hanaoka, Osamu 2007. Output, noticing, and learning: An investigation into the role of spontaneous attention to form in a four-stage writing task. Language Teaching Research, Vol. 11, Issue. 4, p. 459.

Muranoi, Hitoshi 2007. Practice in a Second Language. p. 51.

MacKey, Alison 2007. Practice in a Second Language. p. 85.

Dekeyser, Robert M. 2007. Practice in a Second Language. p. 19.

Leow, Ronald P. 2007. Practice in a Second Language. p. 21.

Song, Mi-Jeong and Suh, Bo-Ram 2008. The effects of output task types on noticing and learning of the English past counterfactual conditional. System, Vol. 36, Issue. 2, p. 295.

Leeser, Michael J. 2008. Pushed Output, Noticing, and Development of Past Tense Morphology in Content-Based Instruction. The Canadian Modern Language Review, Vol. 65, Issue. 2, p. 195.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TESTING THE OUTPUT HYPOTHESIS | Studies in Second Language Acquisition | Cambridge Core

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TESTING THE OUTPUT HYPOTHESIS - Volume 21 Issue 3

# data[].attributes.headline
Strategies to Cultivate Comprehensible Input

# data[].attributes.subject
Strategies to Cultivate Comprehensible Input

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The comprehensible output theory is closely related to the need hypothesis, which states that we acquire language forms only when we need to communicate or make ourselves understood.[4] If this hy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Testing the Noticing Function of the Output Hypothesis | Alsulami | English Language Teaching | CCSE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Testing the Noticing Function of the Output Hypothesis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Merrill Swain is a Canadian applied linguist whose research has focused on second language acquisition (SLA). Some of her most notable contributions to SLA research include the Output Hypothesis and her research related to immersion education. Swain is a Professor Emerita at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto. Swain is also known for her work with Michael Canale on communicative competence. Swain was the president of the American Association for Applied Linguistics in 1998. She received her PhD in psychology at the University of California. Swain has co-supervised 64 PhD students.

The Output Hypothesis

Main page: Comprehensible output

Merrill Swain came to propose the Output Hypothesis based on her observations of French immersion classrooms that very rarely did students say anything longer than a clause, and that many graduates of French immersion programs still had grammatical inaccuracies in their speech that never went away even after many years of immersion education. In contrast with Stephen Krashen 's 1977 Input Hypothesis, Swain's Output Hypothesis posited that comprehensible input on its own is not enough for language learning.

The Output Hypothesis proposes that "through producing language, either spoken or written, language acquisition/learning may occur", because learners are more likely to notice gaps in their knowledge when producing output, and learn as a result of trying to fill that gap.

The Output Hypothesis attributes three main functions to the production of language (output) that are relevant to language learning:

1. The noticing/triggering function - in attempting to produce language, learners may become aware of a gap between their intended meaning and the form closest to that meaning that they can produce using their current knowledge.

2. The hypothesis-testing function - output can be a reflection of hypotheses about the language that learners are testing.

3. The metalinguistic (reflective) function - "using language to reflect on language produced by others or the self mediates second language learning".

Immersion Education

Merrill Swain has contributed significantly to immersion pedagogy through her extensive observation and research of French immersion classrooms and other second language learning contexts. In the 1970s, immersion education in Canada centrally focused on comprehensible input, achieved by teaching school subjects in French. In the 1970s, Swain pushed for change in the way immersion language teaching was conducted. Swain pointed out in a 1974 paper co-authored by Henry Barik about their observations in French immersion classrooms in two schools in Elgin county that even after many years in the immersion program, that "some of the errors do not disappear". As such, Swain pushed for a "combination of emphasis on grammatical accuracy and ... meaningful communication from the very start". Swain hypothesized that when exposed to content instruction in the target language, learners can deduce the meaning of language through contextual knowledge without needing to understand grammatical structures, and that it is more difficult to use this kind of shortcut when producing output. Swain suggested that students should be given more opportunities to produce output in the target language, as it would cause students to better notice structural aspects of the language. These ideas formed the basis of Swain's Output Hypothesis.

Merrill Swain's research also showed that teachers' typical language use was limited in the variety of grammatical forms used, which meant that students had a low amount of exposure to those forms not used by teachers. This lopsided input was a factor in students ' continued inaccuracies in some forms. To remedy this, Swain suggested that teachers should design activities that "naturally elicit particular uses of language".

2003: Recipient of the Robert Roy award, given by the Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers for her contributions to the field of second language education.

2004: Recipient of the Distinguished Scholarship and Service Award, given by the American Association for Applied Linguistics for her contributions to the field of applied linguistics.

Merrill Swain is the co-author or co-editor of 12 books or special issues, 95 book chapters, and 135 papers in refereed journals. Listed here is a small sample of her numerous works.

Barik, H. C., & Swain, M. (1974). English-French bilingual education in the early grades: The Elgin study. The Modern Language Journal, 58(8), 392-403.

Harley, B., & Swain, M. (1978). Form and Function in a Second Language: A Close Look at the Verb System

Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskian Perspective on Corrective Feedback in L2: The Effect of Random versus Negotiated Help on the Learning of English Articles. Language Awareness, 9(1), 34-51.

Swain, M. (2013). Cognitive and affective enhancement among older adults: the role of languaging. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 4-19.

Swain, M. (1996). Discovering Successful Second Language Teaching Strategies and Practices: From Programme Evaluation to Classroom Experimentation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 17(2-4), 89-104.

Swain, M. (1974). French immersion programs across Canada: Research findings. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 31(2), 117-129.

Swain, M. (1996). Integrating language and content in immersion classrooms: research perspectives: [1]. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 52(4), 529-548.

Swain, M. (2001). Integrating Language and Content Teaching through Collaborative Tasks. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 58(1), 44-63.

Swain, M. (1988). Manipulating and Complementing Content Teaching to Maximize Second Language Learning. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada, 6(1), 68-83.

Swain, M. (1978). School Reform through Bilingual Education: Problems and Some Solutions in Evaluating Programs. Comparative Education Review, 22(3), 420-433.

Swain, M. (2013). The inseparability of cognition and emotion in second language learning. Language Teaching, 46(2), 195-207.

Swain, M. (1997). The Output Hypothesis, Focus on Form and Second Language Learning. In Vivien Berry, Bob Adamson, William Littlewood (Eds.), Applying linguistics: Insights into language in education (pp 1-21). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, English Centre.

Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: just speaking and writing aren't enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50(1), 158-164.

Swain, M. (1981). Time and Timing in Bilingual Education. Language Learning, 31(1), 1-15.

Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer-Peer Dialogue as a Means of Second Language Learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171-185.

Swain, M., & Deters, P. (2007). "New" Mainstream SLA Theory: Expanded and Enriched. The Modern Language Journal, 91(5), 820-836.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2013). A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education: The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 101-129.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-Based Second Language Learning: The Uses of the First Language. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 251-274.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371-391.

Tarone, E., & Swain, M. (1995). A sociolinguistic perspective on second language use in immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 79(2), 166.

Tarone, E., Swain, M., & Fathman, A. (1976). Some Limitations to the Classroom Applications of Current Second Language Acquisition Research. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 19-32.

# data[].attributes.body
Students reflecting on and then role-playing characters from a book.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Swain, Long, & Allwright Hypotheses: Juggling with Language Learning Theories

# data[].attributes.body
Slide Show

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Comprehensible output hypothesis - Download as a PDF or view online for free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2022 Language Learning Tip #2 - Comprehensible Output

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding Merrill Swain's Output Hypothesis for Language Learning Merrill Swain developed the Output Hypothesis based on her observations of French immersion classrooms. She noticed that stude

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This image illustrates both the comprehensive output hypothesis set forward by Swain and the interaction hypothesis set forward by long. The child on the right is looking at the object but doesn't know the word. This is where they are experiencing a gap in their language development. They are interacting face to face with another child which helps them develop and fill the gap that they were missing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nov 3, 2016 - Discover (and save!) your own Pins on Pinterest.