Skip to main content

What is "Input Processing"?

Input Processing (IP) was proposed by Bill VanPatten, Professor of Spanish and Second Language Acquisition from Michigan State University. Bill may be known to some of you from his podcast show Tea with BVP. He is one of those rare university academics who makes a specific effort to engage with practising teachers.

IP was first proposed in a 1993 article (published with T. Cadierno in the Modern Language Journal) entitled "Input processing and second language acquisition: A role for instruction." My summary of it is based on an article "Input Processing and Processing Instruction: Definitions and Issues" (2013) by Hossein Hashemnezhad.

IP is a little complicated to explain, but I'll do my best to summarise the key points before suggesting how it relates to other ways of looking at classroom language teaching. Is this actually any use to teachers? I apologise in advance for over-simplifying or misunderstanding. To paraphrase Dr Leonard McCoy from Star Trek "I'm just a teacher".

Firstly IP is about how learners perceive and process the language they hear or read (input) and turn it into what they actually understand (intake). If we knew more about this then we should be able to refine teaching to maximise the efficiency of this process.

Here are the main principles VanPatten summarises in a 2004 article. Take your time with these!

1. The Primacy of Meaning Principle. Learners process input for meaning before they process it for form.
1a  The Primacy of Content Words Principle. Learners process content words in the input before anything else (e.g. nouns and verbs rather than, say, determiners, partitives or inflections).
1b The Lexical Preference Principle. Learners rely on lexical items as opposed to grammatical form before they process redundant meaningful forms.
1c The Preference for Non-redundancy Principle. Learners are more likely to process non-redundant meaningful grammatical form before they process redundant meaningful grammatical forms. (For example, in English in the phrase two books, the s is redundant because we know from the word two that book is plural, whereas in the phrase I baked the ed is non-redundant because it carries important meaning, i.e. "pastness").
1d The Meaning-Before-Non-meaning Principle. Irrespective of redundancy learners are more likely to process meaningful grammatical forms.
1e The Availability of Resources Principle. The overall understanding of a whole sentence must not drain overall processing resources. (My note: there is a limit to what short term memory can process.)
1f  The Sentence Location Principle. Learners tend to process the items near the start of a sentence first, then those in final position, then those in medial position.

2. The First Noun Principle. Learners tend to process the first noun or pronoun as the subject or agent of an action.
2a  The Lexical Semantics Principle. Learners tend to rely on word meanings rather than word order to process meaning.
2b The Event Probabilities Principle. Learners may rely on event probabilities rather than word order to interpret sentences (i.e. what is the meaning likely to be).
2c The Contextual Constraint Principle. Learners may rely less on the First Noun Principle if preceding context constrains the possible interpretation of a clause or sentence.

Are you still here?

Now, to cut a long story short, could we adapt our presentation and practice of input to somehow match the way students tend to process the input? In this way we might render the input more comprehensible and easy to process. As Wong and VanPatten (2003) put it, maybe we can "manipulate input in particular ways to push learners to process it better". (Don't forget that VanPatten goes along with Krashen in hypothesising that acquisition really only happens as a consequence of receiving comprehensible input. However, as I understand it, VanPatten disagrees with Krashen by claiming classroom instruction can accelerate the process through IP.)

Structured Input (SI)

So VanPatten believes that by structuring (patterning) the input you can increase the rate of acquisition. He suggests the following;

1.  Teach only one thing at a time. Don't overburden students until you are sure they have worked out form-meaning relationships.

2.  Keep meaning in focus. Students must understand to perform an activity.

3.  Learners must do something with the input. Not just repeat but "internally process", e.g. students might have to say they agree or disagree rather than just repeat.

4. Use input. Use oral and written input.

5.  Move from sentences to context. Work at sentence level, but move to longer utterances and texts.

6. Keep the processing strategies in mind.  VanPatten distinguishes between Referential and Affective activities. The former involve producing right or wrong answers, the latter invite opinions, beliefs and other affective responses which are more deeply engaging.

Remarks

When I read about the IP model I am struck by how it seems to be a way of bringing together the naturalistic (à la Krashen) view of language learning and teaching and structural/grammatical (focus on form(s)) view held by most teachers.

In examples of lessons I have read following the VanPatten IP model, e.g. here, he seems to advocate some quite mainstream communicative and oral-situational activities where there is an attempt to combine interesting meanings with highly patterned input. I am also reminded of what my friend Gianfranco Conti talks about with regard to patterned input, e.g. here. I also can't help thinking of the "noticing hypothesis" (Richard Schmidt, 1990) where it is claimed that drawing attention to a form is necessary for its acquisition. I suppose VanPatten might argue that we still too often neglect the meaning side of the equation in our desire to work though a grammatical (focus on forms) syllabus.

What do I draw form this as a (former) teacher? 

  • Give lots of patterned input where target vocabulary and structures are repeated.
  • Make tasks as interesting and meaningful as possible. 
  • Get students to notice and practise grammatical forms, but focus on the most important ones which affect meaning.
  • Work both at sentence and paragraph level.
  • Try to introduce only one new structure at a time to avoid cognitive overload.
  • Encourage students in your lesson plans to engage on a personal level with the input.
  • Some complex sounding hypotheses lead to fairly obvious conclusions!

Whether we need to go further by finely tuning input to closely resemble the processing principles described above (e.g. by rearranging the order of words in sentences), I'm not so sure.

References

Hashemnezhad, H.  (2013). "Input Processing and Processing Instruction: Definitions and Issues." International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature. Vol 2, No. 1 (http://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJALEL/article/view/820)
 
Schmidt,R.W (1990). "The role of consciousness in second language learning." Applied Linguistics 11, 129–58.  

VanPatten, B. (2004). Several reflections on why there is good reason to continue researching the effects of processing instruction. In B. VanPatten, (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, Research and Commentary (325-335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
 
VanPatten, B. & Cadierno, T. (1993). "Input processing and second language acquisition: A role for instruction. Modern Language Journal," 77, 45-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1993.tb01944.x

Wong, W. & VanPatten, B. (2003). The evidence is IN: Drills are out. Foreign Language Annals, 36(3), 403-423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2003.tb02123.x




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Delayed dictation

What is “delayed dictation”?

Instead of getting students to transcribe immediately what you say, or what a partner says, you can enforce a 10 second delay so that students have to keep running over in their heads what they have heard. Some teachers have even used the delay time to try to distract students with music.

It’s an added challenge for students but has significant value, I think. It reminds me of a phenomenon in music called audiation. I use it frequently as a singer and I bet you do too.

Audiation is thought to be the foundation of musicianship. It takes place when we hear and comprehend music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present. You can audiate when listening to music, performing from notation, playing “by ear,” improvising, composing, or notating music. When we have a song going round in our mind we are audiating. When we are deliberately learning a song we are audiating.

In our language teaching case, though, the earworm is a word, chunk of l…

Sentence Stealers with a twist

Sentence Stealers is a reading aloud game invented by Gianfranco Conti. I'll describe the game to you, then suggest an extension of it which goes a bit further than reading aloud. By the way, I shouldn't need to justify the usefulness of reading aloud, but just in case, we are talking here about matching sounds to spellings, practising listening, pronunciation and intonation and repeating/recycling high frequency language patterns.

This is how it works:

Display around 15 sentences on the board, preferably ones which show language patterns you have been working on recently or some time ago.Hand out four cards or slips of paper to each student.On each card students must secretly write a sentence from the displayed list.Students then circulate around the class, approaching their classmates and reading a sentence from the displayed list. If the other person has that sentence on one of their cards, they must hand over the card. The other person then does the same, choosing a sentenc…

Have a repertoire, lighten your workload (part one)

The next four blogs I'm going to post are the equivalent of one of those TV clip shows - you know, the ones where they need to fill a weekly slot by showing the best bits, or deleted scenes, from the series. But these four blogs have a theme. The clue is in the title. Like you, I worked hard when I was teaching, but I was pretty good at keeping things in proportion using a combination of economical planning, rapid marking and experience. The extra time those things created even allowed me to stay relaxed and have fun (most of the time) and to come up with the occasional innovative idea.

So, what I'm going to suggest here is that, if you have a little repertoire of go-to classroom activities, you can save yourself a lot of time and stress, and, what's more, all for the benefit of your classes. You see, I think (actually, I know) pupils like routines, but they also appreciate a bit of variety. So if you apply your repertoire of lesson/activity types sensibly you can satisfy b…

"Ask and move" task

This is a lesson plan using an idea from our book Breaking the Sound Barrier (Conti and Smith, 2019). It's a task-based lesson adapted from an idea from Paul Nation and Jonathan Newton. It is aimed at Y10-11 pupils aiming at Higher Tier GCSE, but is easily adaptable to other levels and languages, including A-level. This has been posted as a resource on frenchteacher.net.

This type of lesson plan excites me more than many, because if it runs well, you get a classroom of busy communication when you can step back, monitor and occasionally intervene as students get on with listening, speaking and writing.

Curriculum planning

Many MFL departments are talking about planning in response to whole school initiatives related to Ofsted's latest emphasis: CURRICULUM. This post is about how a department might respond to such an initiative. It's fairly broad-brush, given the nature of the issue, but not too airy-fairy, I hope.

Here is Ofsted's definition of the curriculum:

“The curriculum is a framework for setting out the aims of a programme of education, including the knowledge and understanding to be gained at each stage (intent); for translating that framework over time into a structure and narrative, within an institutional context (implementation) and for evaluating what knowledge and understanding pupils have gained against expectations (impact/achievement).” (My highlighting.)

So Ofsted wants schools to:

• know their curriculum – design and intent;
• know how their curriculum is being implemented;
• know what impact their curriculum is having on pupils’ knowledge and understanding.

(I'…