Aki Nakaue

This study presents the characteristics and creation process of the teaching materials developed for a 2-3 week Japanese intensive course that has been offered since 2022. The course is designed for beginner-level foreign residents aiming to acquire basic Japanese for daily life and to achieve A1 proficiency. It also addresses challenges encountered by instructors with limited experience in teaching Japanese, such as graduate students and Japanese language school teachers. The teaching materials were developed and continuously refined to enable instruction without the use of a mediator language. Additionally, a teacher’s guide was created to help instructors navigate these challenges.

<p>The present study examines the effectiveness of a teaching method that is based on the theories and results of second language acquisition research. The effects of an input-based instruction method called Processing Instruction, which is supported by second language acquisition research, were compared with those of the traditionally used output-based instruction, which focuses on learners' production of the language, by analyzing test results in comprehension and production of Japanese adjective comparisons.</p><p>The results indicated that the learners in both groups gained from the instruction. Nevertheless, the instructional gain was greater for the learners who received Processing Instruction than those who received output-based instruction, based on comprehension and production tests, even with the absence of the output practice in Processing Instruction. This result suggests that instruction methods in accordance with learners' cognitive processes enhance and support the learners' successful acquisition of the language.</p>

<p>Earlier studies of second language acquisition indicated that the "input" is one of the keys for success of language learning. However, teachers often focus on the amount of "output" that students produce, rather than on the input that students receive in the classroom.</p><p>In this study, two different styles of lessons "processing instruction" and "output-oriented instruction" were compared to measure their effectiveness. In the "processing instruction" lesson, students were provided with a significant amount of input without any output practice opportunity after the introduction of target grammar. On the other hand, the "output-oriented instruction" lesson included various output practices like the mechanical form-oriented practice to communicative practice.</p><p>Each group was made up of eleven students who were given comprehension and recall tests on four occasions: before, immediately after, five days after, and sixty days after the respective lessons.</p><p>After the "processing instruction" lessons, students showed better results in both comprehension and recall tests and retained language upto sixty days later as well. The result suggests that after the grammar introduction, it is more effective to give students sufficient amount of input to enhance students' understanding rather output practices such as drill exercises.</p>