中上 亜樹

<p> 本稿は，日本語の文法項目の習得を促すためにどのような指導が効果的かという疑問に対し，第二言語習得研究の理論や成果に基づいた指導法で授業を行うことで，従来の指導よりも高い効果が得られるかどうかを検証することが目的である。そのため，本稿では形容詞の比較を対象とし，第二言語習得研究の成果を基に提唱された指導法で，インプットに重点を置く「処理指導（Processing Instruction）」と，従来の口頭練習などのアウトプットに重点を置く産出中心の指導とを実践し，理解面，産出面でそれぞれの指導を受けた学習者の伸びに違いがみられるかどうか分析を行った。</p><p> その結果，処理指導では，対象項目について産出練習を行わなかったにも関わらず，従来の産出中心の指導と比べ，産出面を含め全体的に指導の効果が高かったことが明らかになった。このことから，学習者の認知プロセスに沿った指導を行うことは，より効率的な習得を導く助けになる可能性があることが分かった。</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>