The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 76 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners
Open accessAbstract
Two distinct approaches to L2 reading instruction—language-oriented and literacy-oriented—have long been debated in the literature. Similarly, SLA research has distinguished between form-focused and meaning-focused approaches. This paper examines these debates through the lens of explicit and implicit learning, proposing a balanced approach for young EFL learners. Drawing on research across cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and reading, the balanced approach rests on two theoretical pillars. First, it advocates for “focus on communication” to distinguish authentic engagement for pleasure or knowledge from mere literal text comprehension. Second, it argues that explicit and implicit instruction should be combined rather than integrated, as the brain’s dual memory systems—declarative and procedural—are neurologically distinct and operate independently and competitively. The paper concludes with pedagogical implications for Korean primary schools, suggesting explicit instruction in phonics, vocabulary, and grammar, paired with authentic storybook reading to foster implicit knowledge—the ultimate goal of language acquisition.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This conceptual paper argues that L2 reading instruction for young EFL learners should combine explicit and implicit instruction rather than integrate them, because the brain's declarative and procedural memory systems are neurologically distinct and operate independently and competitively. It proposes a "balanced approach" resting on two pillars: a "focus on communication" (FonC) that distinguishes authentic reading for pleasure or knowledge from mere literal comprehension, and the pairing of explicit phonics, vocabulary, and grammar instruction with authentic storybook reading.
Key findings
- The paper proposes that explicit and implicit instruction be *combined* rather than *integrated*, citing Ullman and Lovelett's (2018, p. 42) claim that "it is not the case that knowledge is in any sense transformed from declarative to procedural memory. Rather the two systems seem to acquire knowledge essentially independently," and that the systems "operate competitively" (Ullman, 2016).
- It argues for the term "focus on communication" (FonC) over "focus on meaning" (FonM), to distinguish reading for authentic purposes (pleasure, knowledge) from reading to complete comprehension questions or identify grammatical items in laboratory/classroom settings.
- Cited evidence for combining explicit and implicit instruction: Chu and Chen (2014) found a phonics-plus-text-reading group significantly outperformed a phonics-only group on a two-week delayed post-test, with the phonics-only group's scores declining over time; Woore et al. (2018) found phonics plus text reading was more effective for vocabulary development than reading alone.
- Cited evidence on memory-system shifts: Morgan-Short et al. (2014) found declarative memory predicts initial syntactic development while procedural memory predicts at more advanced stages; Hamrick et al. (2018) meta-analyses confirmed this shift in both L1 children and L2 adults; Hwang (2024) found a Meta-Language Group performed better on an immediate post-test but declined on a delayed post-test, whereas an Input Flood Group showed gains.
- Contextual claims: approximately 84% of English words follow phonetic patterns (Blevins, 2006); Nation (2007) states 95–98% of running words should be within learners' prior knowledge for meaning-focused input; Elley (1989) shows engaging stories can double vocabulary gains.
Methods
- Design: a conceptual/theoretical paper, not an empirical study. It synthesizes research across cognitive psychology, neuroscience, SLA, and reading to build a framework and pedagogical proposal; no participants, intervention, or data collection are reported.
- Analytical approach: it interprets three long-standing debates—phonics vs. whole language, Grammar-Translation vs. CLT, and intensive vs. extensive reading—through the lens of implicit and explicit learning, and integrates the Declarative/Procedural Model (Ullman, 2016; Ullman & Lovelett, 2018) with Skill Acquisition Theory (DeKeyser, 2015) into a model of the implicit-explicit interface (Figure 2).
- Output: a proposed balanced model (Figure 10) and a comparison table (Table 1) contrasting current Korean primary-school practice with the proposed approach across phonics/decoding and comprehension, plus pedagogical implications for Korean primary schools.
Limitations
- Stated in the paper: the paper repeatedly calls for further research, noting that "longitudinal research is needed to compare the long-term effects of decodable versus authentic texts on phonics acquisition," that "longitudinal studies are essential for a comprehensive evaluation of how input flood and input enhancement influence grammar acquisition over time," and that research on motivation/engagement effects on implicit grammar acquisition "remains scarce." It also notes that the ideal type of text for pairing with phonics "remains a subject of debate" and that "further research is required regarding this matter."
- Stated in the paper: a note to Figure 10 acknowledges that "only explicit language instruction was categorized as explicit instruction because this model is for young EFL learners," a scope restriction of the proposed model.
- Evident from the text: the paper presents no empirical data of its own—its claims rest on secondary synthesis of others' findings, and several cited studies are described as having short intervention durations ("ranging from one to four sessions") that the paper itself says "are inherently biased toward explicit learning." The pedagogical recommendations are framed specifically for Korean primary schools, so generalization to other EFL contexts is not established in the text.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
32 Sources not found · 28 Own interpretation · 13 Not checked yet · 9 No basis given · 8 No full text of the sources · 2 Partly supported · 1 Supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, in light of the Declarative/Procedural Model (Ullman, 2016) and the Active View of Reading (Duke & Cartwright, 2021), reading authentic storybooks may ultimately prove more effective.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Duke & Cartwright, 2021 source
The citation is attached to “the Active View of Reading,” identifying the model the citing authors invoke. Duke and Cartwright present that model in “The Active View of Reading” (page unavailable). The prediction about storybooks is the citing authors’ own inference, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Given that approximately 84% English words follow phonetic patterns (Blevins, 2006), phonics instruction is an essential tool for language learners.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > History of Phonics Instruction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Blevins, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This type of reading instruction could be described as something like input drought rather than input flood.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Early Reading instruction in the Korean Context
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“EFL textbooks for children typically include brief reading passages designed primarily to introduce specific vocabulary and grammar rather than to provide material that truly interests them (Arnold & Rixon, 2014;Kim & Leung, 2021;Llanes & Tragant, 2024).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Early Reading instruction in the Korean Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Arnold & Rixon, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked yetcites Kim & Leung, 2021 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not matchedcites Llanes & Tragant, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Many learners who have spent years immersed in a language still demonstrate limited proficiency, particularly in terms of grammatical accuracy (Cummins, 1998;Hammerly, 1987;Harley, 1993;Swain & Lapkin, 1989).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Usage-Based Approaches
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Another critical point to be considered is that the lack of distinction between decoding and reading comprehension has often led to confusion with regard to L2 reading instruction (Rixon, 2011).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rixon, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In other words, conscious focus may block the development of unconscious knowledge; therefore, Ullman (2016) suggests that instructional design must be carefully managed to account for this competitive interaction.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Declarative/Procedural Model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, exposure to input alone is not sufficient to ensure successful language acquisition.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Usage-Based Approaches
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is important to recognize that the short duration of intervention sessions, ranging from one to four sessions, are inherently biased toward explicit learning.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Ongoing debates on input flood and textual enhancement
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This discrepancy occurs because textbook units are predominantly structured to teach specific communicative expressions (e.g., Do you have a + NOUN?) and the unit's key vocabulary (e.g., pencil, ruler, eraser, glue stick, and crayons).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction in the Korean Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 31
- Probably not a substantial claim. 36
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Comparative studies also show that while explicit instruction groups often perform better on immediate tests, their gains tend to diminish over time, whereas contextualized or implicit groups show continued improvement in delayed assessments (e.g., Hwang, 2024;Vandenberghe et al., 2021).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Research on Grammar Acquisition
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hwang, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Vandenberghe et al., 2021 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the RQ 1 discussion of explicit measures (page unavailable), the context-only group’s form-recognition scores increased from the immediate to the two-week delayed test, while the decontextualized word-focused group’s mean decreased. The authors suggest the increase may reflect encounters with the words during the immediate tests, not continued improvement from contextualized instruction. They also report similar immediate and delayed results for meaning and use, so the claimed pattern does not hold across the assessed outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Given that motivation and engagement are critical factors affecting the reading experience as a key category of active self-regulation (Duke & Cartwright, 2021; see Figure 3), these differences may considerably influence the degree of implicit language acquisition.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > A Call for Research on Focus on Communication
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Duke & Cartwright, 2021 source
The citation is attached to the premise about motivation and engagement, not the citing authors’ subsequent inference about implicit language acquisition. The paper’s “Motivation and Engagement” section identifies both as aspects of active, self-regulated reading and says they predict reading ability; the “Active Self-Regulation Is Central to Reading” section likewise describes their role in the reading process. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.91)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This section examines the historical development of grammar instruction, which can be characterized by a tension between implicit and explicit learning paradigms and the eventual pursuit of a synthesized approach.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > History of Grammar Instruction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This lack of consistent phonics reinforcement ultimately diminishes the effectiveness of early literacy instruction and hinders the development of students' independent reading skills.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction in the Korean Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Two distinct approaches to L2 reading instruction-language-oriented and literacy-oriented-have long been debated in the literature.”
- Also stated in: § Introduction · boosted
“Two distinct approaches to L2 reading instruction have been widely discussed in the literature.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rixon (2011)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Han et al. (2009)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § Introduction · boosted
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, the initial advantages of explicitly acquired grammatical knowledge decreased in the delayed post-test, while the performance of the contextualized groups demonstrated improvement over time.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Ongoing debates on input flood and textual enhancement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Vandenberghe et al. (2021) source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
In the paper
“For instance, K. Nation (2019) proposes an expanded version of the Simple View of Reading (see Figure 6) and emphasizes that readers often unconsciously acquire vocabulary and grammar while gaining knowledge or enjoyment from the text by stating:”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Implicit and Explicit Learning in Reading
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites K. Nation (2019) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This body of research highlights that reading proficiency is not an isolated skill but is deeply influenced by broader cognitive abilities and various underlying factors (Grabe & Stoller, 2020; e.g., Atkinson et al., 2017;Butterfuss & Kendeou, 2018;Li & Clariana, 2019).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Implicit and Explicit Learning in Reading
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Grabe & Stoller, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Atkinson et al., 2017 source
- Not matchedcites Butterfuss & Kendeou, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“At the same time, they maintain that language learning remains fundamentally implicit.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Usage-Based Approaches
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulff & Ellis, 2018 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Second, it argues that explicit and implicit instruction should be combined rather than integrated, as the brain's dual memory systems-declarative and procedural-are neurologically distinct and operate independently and competitively.”
- Also stated in: § Declarative/Procedural Model · hedged
“Furthermore, as the two systems often exist in a competitive relationship, the specific learning environment determines which system takes precedence (Ullman, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ullman & Lovelett, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Declarative/Procedural Model · hedged
In the paper
“Lee (2007) found that Korean secondary EFL students showed a decrease in comprehension while reading enhanced texts, despite effectively mastering the target grammar.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Ongoing debates on input flood and textual enhancement
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lee (2007) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, SLA research has distinguished between form-focused and meaning-focused approaches.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The declarative memory system primarily depends on the hippocampus and medial temporal lobe structures for the initial acquisition and consolidation of knowledge, which is eventually moved to neocortical regions for long-term storage (Ullman, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Skill Acquisition Theory
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In this context, Swain and Lapkin (1989) argued against instruction that prioritized content alone, advocating for the”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar-Translation method vs CLT
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Swain and Lapkin (1989) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“By the mid-20th century, this was superseded by meaning-centered methodologies like CLT, resulting in a significant reduction of explicit grammar instruction in educational settings (Gartland & Smolkin, 2016;Katz & Blyth, 2008).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar-Translation method vs CLT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gartland & Smolkin, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Katz & Blyth, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“DeKEyser (2015) observes that while this automatized state is functionally equivalent to implicit knowledge, although the two remain theoretically and inherently distinct.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Skill Acquisition Theory
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites DeKEyser (2015)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, the literacy-oriented approach focuses more on meaning and favors the use of authentic reading materials, which facilitates a more implicit learning environment.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > A Framework for Understanding L2 Reading Instruction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Field observations within primary schools in South Korea (hereafter, Korea) suggest that English reading instruction is often ineffective at either advancing students' reading ability or cultivating positive attitudes toward language learning (Kim & Leung, 2021).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kim & Leung, 2021 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
In the paper
“However, their scores declined in the delayed post-test, whereas the Input Flood Group showed performance gains.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Ongoing debates on input flood and textual enhancement
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hwang (2024)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“From the implicit and explicit learning perspective, no explicit grammar or reading strategy instruction are provided; however, the vocabulary and sentence patterns in reading materials strictly follow the targeted expressions of a certain unit (MOE, 2022;Parker & Valente, 2019).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Early Reading instruction in the Korean Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites MOE, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Parker & Valente, 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, in Korean primary EFL classrooms, very little explicit grammar instruction is provided, since the curriculum is officially based on CLT approach (MOE, 2022;Yoo, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar Instruction in the Korean Context
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites MOE, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked yetcites Yoo, 2016 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The language-oriented approach prioritizes linguistic forms and typically employs modified, less authentic reading materials; consequently, the teaching and learning processes are predominantly explicit.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > A Framework for Understanding L2 Reading Instruction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, during the 1980s and 1990s, researchers such as Cummins (1998), Hammerly (1987), Harley (1993), and Swain and Lapkin (1989) began to question the efficacy of purely communicative approaches.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar-Translation method vs CLT
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consequently, phonics instruction is often marginalized, which deprives students of the opportunity to systematically practice letter-sound relationships across a diverse lexical range.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction in the Korean Context
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the historical development of phonics instruction reflects an emerging consensus on a balanced approach, this trend is primarily observable in L1 reading contexts, whereas phonics instruction in EFL settings often remains unsystematic.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction in the Korean Context
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, a distinction remains: while phonics researchers generally agree on the necessity of combining systematic instruction with meaningful reading engagement, the most effective method for L2 grammar instruction remains a subject of ongoing debate.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar-Translation method vs CLT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Specifically, when L2 learners engage with enhanced materials, the explicit concentration on linguistic form facilitates grammar acquisition via declarative memory but may obstruct comprehension and implicit learning in procedural memory, given that these two systems function in a competitive manner (Ullman, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Ongoing debates on input flood and textual enhancement
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Furthermore, as the two systems often exist in a competitive relationship, the specific learning environment determines which system takes precedence (Ullman, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Declarative/Procedural Model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Usage-based approaches share a central assumption in SLA theories: linguistic input is the primary source from which learners develop their L2 (Wulff & Ellis, 2018).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Usage-Based Approaches
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulff & Ellis, 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The trajectory of grammar instruction closely mirrors that of phonics.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar-Translation method vs CLT
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the historical development of phonics instruction reflects an emerging consensus on a balanced approach, this trend is primarily observable in L1 reading contexts, whereas phonics instruction in EFL settings often remains unsystematic.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction in the Korean Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“An alternative perspective is the weak interface (N.Ellis, 2011), which posits that explicit knowledge exerts an indirect influence on implicit knowledge rather than being directly converted into it.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Implicit-Explicit Interface
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites N.Ellis, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Notably, age plays a critical role, as declarative memory performance tends to improve throughout childhood, reaches a plateau during early adulthood, and gradually declines thereafter (Ullman, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Skill Acquisition Theory
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Conversely, the theory may not comprehensively account for learning in certain contexts.These include scenarios involving children who lack the cognitive capacity to conceptualize abstract grammatical rules, adult learners with below-average verbal aptitude, or the acquisition of highly complex linguistic or cognitive structures.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Skill Acquisition Theory
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites DeKEyser (2015)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Therefore, it is important to understand what executive function skills are and how they function, as they are not only critical for reading comprehension but also significantly support implicit learning (Grabe & Stoller, 2020).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Implicit and Explicit Learning in Reading
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Grabe & Stoller, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In light of these challenges, Wulff and Ellis (2018) argue that successful SLA requires deliberate attention to linguistic features.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Usage-Based Approaches
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulff & Ellis, 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In response to these limitations, several instructional strategies were developed to reconcile semantic content (meaning) with linguistic accuracy (form).These included input enhancement (Sharwood Smith, 1991, 1993) and Long's (1991) focus on form, which embeds grammatical attention within primarily meaningful and communicative contexts.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Grammar-Translation method vs CLT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sharwood Smith, 1991, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Long's (1991) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, this reading instructional approach is overtly implicit; however, it remains covertly explicit.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Early Reading instruction in the Korean Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, the procedural memory system involves the basal ganglia and frontal premotor circuits; these areas are responsible for the mastery of motor and cognitive skills, including the recognition of rule-based sequences and implicit learning (Ullman, 2016).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Declarative/Procedural Model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, third-grade students in Korean primary schools are introduced to the phonemes for the letters m and n (see Figure 8), yet they are subsequently tasked with reading phonetically unrelated vocabulary such as pencil, ruler, eraser, glue stick, and crayons (see Figure 9) rather than aligned examples like melon, mom, notebook, and nine.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Phonics Instruction in the Korean Context
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finding authentic and engaging texts that align with young EFL learners' reading proficiency is extremely challenging, as their vocabulary and grammatical knowledge remain quite limited.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Meaningful reading and text difficulty
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Young EFL learners' vocabulary and grammatical knowledge remain quite limited.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, reading for the sake of enjoying content is more likely to result in authentic reading than reading to complete comprehension questions.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Communication: Authentic reading purpose
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Once learners have mastered basic phonics through explicit phonics instruction and text reading, they will likely be familiar with numerous sight words and high-frequency vocabulary.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Reading Comprehension Instruction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, this paper suggests explicit and implicit instruction be combined rather than integrated.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Why combining rather than integrating?
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, authentic and engaging texts are significantly more likely to lead to authentic reading than modified texts.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Communication: Authentic reading purpose
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This distinction is necessary to avoid the common misconception that reading for literal meaning in the absence of explicit instruction is equivalent to meaning-focused reading.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Communication: Authentic reading purpose
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More importantly, it is regarded that glossing is well-fitted to the balanced approach: combination of explicit teaching of word meaning and authentic text reading without hindering engaging with the meaning of the content.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Research on Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As depicted in Figure 10, this balanced model brings together explicit instruction, which utilizes declarative memory, and implicit instruction, which relies on procedural memory, effectively advocating for a weak interface stance.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > What is a balanced approach?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Particularly, when considering affective factors such as motivation and engagement, significant differences likely exist between reading authentic texts (Activity B) and reading texts designed for language teaching (Activity E).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > A Call for Research on Focus on Communication
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The analysis of debates regarding phonics, grammar, and reading instruction suggests that a balanced approach should combine explicit and implicit instruction rather than fully integrate the two.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > A Balanced Approach: Combining Explicit and Implicit Instruction
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By adopting this balanced approach, young EFL learners can benefit from both explicit instruction, which leverages the declarative memory system, and authentic reading, which engages the procedural memory system to foster implicit knowledgethe ultimate goal of language learning.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Reading Comprehension Instruction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relying solely on one system would be an inefficient use of the brain's cognitive resources.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Why a balanced approach?
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the interpretation, this paper proposes a balanced approach to EFL reading instruction: combining explicit instruction with opportunities for implicit learning through authentic reading experience.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > A Balanced Approach to Early EFL Reading Instruction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They may also have acquired a degree of implicit grammatical knowledge during these reading experiences.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Reading Comprehension Instruction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“According to research on neuro psychology (e.g., Evans & Stanovich, 2013;Ullman, 2016), humans have two memory and learning systems, and the two systems are so distinct that they cannot be integrated.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Why combining rather than integrating?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Evans & Stanovich, 2013 source
- Not matchedcites Ullman, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Boers (2022), who reviews research on glossing, reports that glosses placed close to unfamiliar words are more effective than those placed further away, and that L1 glosses are more beneficial than L2 ones.”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Suggestions for future glossing research
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boers, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
Findings from cognitive psychology and neuroscience about declarative and procedural memory systems apply to young EFL reading instruction.
“Drawing on research across cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and reading, the balanced approach rests on two theoretical pillars.”
“Second, it argues that explicit and implicit instruction should be combined rather than integrated, as the brain's dual memory systems-declarative and procedural-are neurologically distinct and operate independently and competitively.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The historical development of phonics instruction in L1 contexts is relevant to EFL settings.
“Although the historical development of phonics instruction reflects an emerging consensus on a balanced approach, this trend is primarily observable in L1 reading contexts, whereas phonics instruction in EFL settings often remains unsystematic.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Young EFL learners who are beginning to learn English require reading instruction that encompasses both decoding and text comprehension.
“However, for young EFL learners who are beginning to learn English, reading instruction should encompass both decoding and text comprehension.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Young EFL learners already have relatively well-developed nonlinguistic knowledge through their ample experience of reading in their L1.
“given the simplicity of text genres young eFl learners read and the straightforwardness of meaning of the content, young eFl learners already have relatively well-developed nonlinguistic knowledge through their ample experience of reading in their l1.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The purpose of reading should be the pursuit of knowledge or pleasure, rather than merely completing questions or identifying specific grammatical items.
“This highlights a fundamental issue: the purpose of reading should be the pursuit of knowledge or pleasure, rather than merely completing questions or identifying specific grammatical items.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Young EFL learners' vocabulary and grammatical knowledge remain quite limited.
“Finding authentic and engaging texts that align with young EFL learners' reading proficiency is extremely challenging, as their vocabulary and grammatical knowledge remain quite limited.”
The paper relies on this without support.
For young EFL learners, the primary authentic purpose of reading is to enjoy the meaning of the content rather than to gain information or knowledge.
“For young EFL learners, the primary authentic purpose of reading is to enjoy the meaning of the content rather than to gain information or knowledge.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Young EFL learners often read with teacher support alongside aids such as audio modeling, illustrations, and glossing.
“Decisions regarding text difficulty should be made in light of early EFL classroom conditions, where students often read with teacher support alongside aids such as audio modeling, illustrations, and glossing.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > Implicit and Explicit Learning in Reading
“these executive function skills perform a vital "behind-the-scenes role" in the reading comprehension process (Duke & Cartwright, 2021, p. 531).”
§ Harnessing Dual Memory Systems: A Balanced Approach to Explicit and Implicit Reading Instruction for Young EFL Learners > References
“Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S25-S44.”
Citations
Cites
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 · Cited by 15,798
The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory?
Baddeley, A. (2000) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01538-2 · Cited by 7,359
Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate
Evans, J. S. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612460685 · Cited by 4,271
Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/bf00401799 · Cited by 2,956
Implicit learning of artificial grammars
Reber, A. S. (1967) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(67)80149-x · Cited by 2,026
Focus on Form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology
Long, M. (1991) · Studies in Bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.2.07lon · Cited by 1,775
Learning to Read Words: Theory, Findings, and Issues
Ehri, L. C. (2005) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0902_4 · Cited by 1,482
Baddeley, A. (2010) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014 · Cited by 1,392
Word Knowledge in a Theory of Reading Comprehension
Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1080/10888438.2013.827687 · Cited by 1,362
Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert
Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100618772271 · Cited by 1,297
Teaching and Researching Reading
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315726274 · Cited by 1,107
MEASURING IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE OF A SECOND LANGUAGE: A Psychometric Study
Ellis, R. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263105050096 · Cited by 1,032
Input Enhancement in Instructed SLA
Smith, M. S. (1993) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100011943 · Cited by 883
Alderson, J. C. (1985) · RELC Journal · doi:10.1177/003368828501600214 · Cited by 855
Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship.
Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545 · Cited by 790
Vocabulary Acquisition from Listening to Stories
Elley, W. B. (1989) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.2307/747863 · Cited by 756
Principles of instructed language learning
Ellis, R. (2005) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2004.12.006 · Cited by 682
Implicit and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning, Testing and Teaching
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (2009) · Channel View Publications eBooks · doi:10.2307/jj.27195491 · Cited by 553
The Science of Reading Progresses: Communicating Advances Beyond the Simple View of Reading
Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1002/rrq.411 · Cited by 510
Nation, P. (2007) · Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.2167/illt039.0 · Cited by 494
Stanovich, K. E. (2009) · Journal of Education · doi:10.1177/0022057409189001-204 · Cited by 467
The Implementation of Communicative and Task-Based Language Teaching in the Asia-Pacific Region
Butler, Y. G. (2011) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190511000122 · Cited by 456
Top Ten Principles for Teaching Extensive Reading
Day, R., & Bamford, J. (2002) · Reading in a Foreign Language · doi:10.64152/10125/66761 · Cited by 439
Implicit and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning, Testing and Teaching
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (2009) · Multilingual Matters eBooks · doi:10.21832/9781847691767 · Cited by 429
Smith, M. S. (1991) · Second language Research · doi:10.1177/026765839100700204 · Cited by 406
Declarative and Procedural Determinants of Second Languages
Paradis, M. (2009) · Studies in Bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.40 · Cited by 392
Ellis, R., Baştürkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2002) · System · doi:10.1016/s0346-251x(02)00047-7 · Cited by 347
The Role of Executive Functions in Reading Comprehension
Butterfuss, R., & Kendeou, P. (2017) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-017-9422-6 · Cited by 314
Challenges in Teaching English to Young Learners: Global Perspectives and Local Realities
Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A. (2014) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.1002/tesq.148 · Cited by 300
The Declarative/Procedural Model
Ullman, M. T. (2016) · Neurobiology of Language · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-407794-2.00076-6 · Cited by 294
Pearson, P. D. (2004) · Educational Policy · doi:10.1177/0895904803260041 · Cited by 279
Instructional Strategies and SLA in Early French Immersion
Harley, B. (1993) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100011980 · Cited by 181
Declarative and procedural memory as individual differences in second language acquisition
Morgan‐Short, K., Faretta‐Stutenberg, M., Brill-Schuetz, K. A., Carpenter, H. S., & Wong, P. C. M. (2013) · Bilingualism Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728912000715 · Cited by 170
Ullman, M. T., & Lovelett, J. T. (2016) · Second language Research · doi:10.1177/0267658316675195 · Cited by 169
Children’s reading difficulties, language, and reflections on the simple view of reading
Nation, K. (2019) · Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties · doi:10.1080/19404158.2019.1609272 · Cited by 159
Teaching Children to Become Fluent and Automatic Readers
Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Morris, R. D., Morrow, L. M., Woo, D. G., Meisinger, E. B., Sevcik, R. A., Bradley, B. A., & Stahl, S. A. (2006) · Journal of Literacy Research · doi:10.1207/s15548430jlr3804_1 · Cited by 154
Bowers, J. S. (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09515-y · Cited by 150
Gorsuch, G. J., & Taguchi, E. (2008) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2007.09.009 · Cited by 148
Repeated Reading versus Continuous Reading: Influences on Reading Fluency and Comprehension
O’Connor, R. E., White, A., & Swanson, H. L. (2007) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440290707400102 · Cited by 132
Lee, S. (2007) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00400.x · Cited by 131
Shintani, N. (2015) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.1002/tesq.166 · Cited by 129
Winke, P. M. (2013) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263112000903 · Cited by 121
How research might inform the debate about early reading acquisition
Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (1995) · Journal of Research in Reading · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.1995.tb00075.x · Cited by 120
Child first language and adult second language are both tied to general-purpose learning systems
Hamrick, P., Lum, J. A. G., & Ullman, M. T. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1713975115 · Cited by 120
Copland, F., & Garton, S. (2014) · ELT Journal · doi:10.1093/elt/ccu030 · Cited by 115
Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: implications for theory and practice
LYSTER, R. (2004) · Journal of French Language Studies · doi:10.1017/s0959269504001826 · Cited by 111
'In reality its almost impossible': CLT-oriented curriculum change
Humphries, S., & Burns, A. (2015) · ELT Journal · doi:10.1093/elt/ccu081 · Cited by 108
Lee, S., & Pulido, D. (2016) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168816637381 · Cited by 98
Everybody's Selling It-But Just What Is Explicit, Systematic Phonics Instruction?
Mesmer, H. A. E., & Griffith, P. L. (2005) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1598/rt.59.4.6 · Cited by 90
Begeny, J. C., Krouse, H. E., Ross, S. G., & Mitchell, R. C. (2009) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-009-9090-9 · Cited by 89
Chang, A. C.-S., & Millett, S. (2015) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.05.003 · Cited by 87
Atkinson, L., Slade, L., Powell, D., & Levy, J. P. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.007 · Cited by 86
Usage-based approaches to second language acquisition
Wulff, S., & Ellis, N. C. (2018) · Studies in Bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.54.03wul · Cited by 84
Designing a topic-based syllabus for young learners
Bourke, J. (2006) · ELT Journal · doi:10.1093/elt/ccl008 · Cited by 76
Conti‐Ramsden, G., Ullman, M. T., & Lum, J. A. G. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01090 · Cited by 75
Reading comprehension in L1 and L2: An integrative approach
Li, P., & Clariana, R. B. (2018) · Journal of Neurolinguistics · doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2018.03.005 · Cited by 72
ATTENTIONAL PROCESSING OF INPUT IN EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT CONDITIONS
Indrarathne, B., & Kormos, J. (2016) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s027226311600019x · Cited by 65
Glossing and vocabulary learning
Boers, F. (2021) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444821000252 · Cited by 56
Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners?
LICHTMAN, K. (2016) · Journal of Child Language · doi:10.1017/s0305000915000598 · Cited by 50
Insights into Fluency Instruction: Short- and Long-Term Effects of Two Reading Programs
Schwanenflugel, P. J., Kuhn, M. R., Morris, R. D., Morrow, L. M., Meisinger, E. B., Woo, D. G., Quirk, M. P., & Sevcik, R. A. (2009) · Literacy Research and Instruction · doi:10.1080/19388070802422415 · Cited by 44
Therrien, W. J., Kirk, J. F., & Woods‐Groves, S. (2011) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/0741932511410360 · Cited by 41
Canadian Immersion and Adult Second Language Teaching: What's the Connection?
SWAIN, M., & LAPKIN, S. (1989) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1989.tb02537.x · Cited by 40
Systematic phonics instruction belongs in evidence-based reading programs: A response to Bowers
Buckingham, J. (2020) · The Educational and Developmental Psychologist · doi:10.1017/edp.2020.12 · Cited by 39
What If “Just Right” Is Just Wrong? The Unintended Consequences of Leveling Readers
Hoffman, J. V. (2017) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1002/trtr.1611 · Cited by 38
Jamaludin, K. A., Alias, N., Khir, R. J. M., DeWitt, D., & Kenayathula, H. B. (2015) · School Effectiveness and School Improvement · doi:10.1080/09243453.2015.1069749 · Cited by 37
Yeung, S. S., & Savage, R. S. (2019) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/0022219419894563 · Cited by 36
The Immersion Approach: Litmus Test of Second Language Acquisition through Classroom Communication
HAMMERLY, H. (1987) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1987.tb00378.x · Cited by 35
Ardoin, S. P., Binder, K. S., Foster, T. E., & Zawoyski, A. M. (2016) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2016.09.002 · Cited by 34
The Histories and Mysteries of Grammar Instruction
Gartland, L. B., & Smolkin, L. B. (2015) · The Reading Teacher · doi:10.1002/trtr.1408 · Cited by 30
O’Reilly, T., Feng, D. G., Sabatini, J., Wang, Z., & Gorin, J. S. (2018) · Educational Assessment · doi:10.1080/10627197.2018.1513787 · Cited by 30
Fujita, H., & Fujita, K. (2021) · Primates · doi:10.1007/s10329-021-00891-0 · Cited by 21
Debates in Second Language Education
Macaro, E., & Woore, R. (2021) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781003008361 · Cited by 21
Bakhshandeh-Rostami, I., & Jafari, K. (2018) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-018-0060-4 · Cited by 20
Hammerschmidt‐Snidarich, S. M., Maki, K. E., & Adams, S. R. (2019) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.22241 · Cited by 18
Comparison of the Effects of Two Phonics Training Programs on L2 Word Reading
Chu, M.-C., & Chen, S.-H. (2014) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/28.10.pr0.114k17w0 · Cited by 17
Fluency Gains in Struggling College Readers from Wide Reading and Repeated Readings
Ari, O. (2014) · Reading Psychology · doi:10.1080/02702711.2013.864361 · Cited by 15
Promoting L2 reading fluency at the tertiary level through timed and repeated reading
Park, J. (2022) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2022.102802 · Cited by 14
Materials for early language learning
Ghosn, I.-K. (2018) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315623672-24 · Cited by 13
Vandenberghe, B., Perez, M. M., Reynvoet, B., & Desmet, P. (2021) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263120000431 · Cited by 12
Bowers, J. S. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09602-z · Cited by 12
Rebuschat, P. (2015) · Studies in bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.48.003int · Cited by 11
Measuring the effects of repeated exposure to children’s graded readers
Llanes, À., & Tragant, E. (2021) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688211036609 · Cited by 10
Teaching Reading and Viewing to L2 Learners
Zhang, L. J. (2016) · English language education · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-38834-2_10 · Cited by 9
L2 reading fluency progression using timed reading and repeated oral reading
Shimono, T. R. (2018) · Reading in a Foreign Language · doi:10.64152/10125/66743 · Cited by 8
The effect of input flooding and explicit instruction on L2 acquisition of English inverse scope
Wu, M.-J., & Ionin, T. (2023) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688231153759 · Cited by 8
Hwang, H. (2023) · IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching · doi:10.1515/iral-2023-0015 · Cited by 7
Making the Moves from Decoding to Extensive Reading with Young Learners
Arnold, W., & Rixon, S. (2014) · Palgrave Macmillan eBooks · doi:10.1057/9781137023230_2 · Cited by 5
Aboud, K. S., Bailey, S., Sefcik, A. M., & Cutting, L. E. (2015) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781316095829.033 · Cited by 3
Yoo, B. (2016) · Journal of the Korea English Education Society · doi:10.18649/jkees.2016.15.3.161 · Cited by 3
Seoul Eonnam Elementary School, S. K., Kim, J. M., & Alex, H.-C. L. (2021) · The Journal of AsiaTEFL · doi:10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.3.7.858 · Cited by 1
Self-citationRyu, H., & Choi, S. (2024) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688241286668 · Cited by 1
Alderson, J. C. (1984) · Reading in a Foreign Language · doi:10.64152/10125/67061
Working Memory in Second Language Learning
Baddeley, A. (2015) · Working Memory in Second Language Acquisition and Processing · doi:10.2307/jj.26931951.7
Syllabus development in early English language teaching
Parker, V., & Valente, D. (2018) · The Routledge Handbook of Teaching English to Young Learners · doi:10.4324/9781315623672-23
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- Abdulkader F. A. (2019). Exploring Saudi EFL teachers’ and learners’ perceptions regarding the application of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in the English Language Classroom (Publication No. 27991989) [Doctoral Dissertation]. Northumbria University. ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis.
- Blevins, W. (2006). Phonics from A to Z: A practical guide. Scholastic Inc.
- Chall, J. S. (1996). Learning to read: The great debate (3rd ed.). Harcourt Brace & Company.
- Cummins, J. (1998). Immersion education for the millennium: What have we learned from 30 years of research on second language immersion?. In M. R. Childs & R. M. Bostwick (Eds.) Learning through two languages: Research and practice. Second Katoh Gakuen International Symposium on Immersion and Bilingual Education (pp. 34–47). Katoh Gakuen.
- Day, R. (2020). Teaching reading (Revised ed.). TESOL Press.
- DeKEyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in Second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 94–112). Routledge.
- Ellis, N. (2011). Implicit and explicit SLA and their interface. In C. Sanz, & R. P. Leow (Eds.), Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processes, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism (pp. 35–48). Georgetown University Press.
- Ellis, N., & Wulff, S. (2015). Usage-based approaches to SLA. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 75–93). Routledge.
- Emans, R. (1968). History of phonics. Elementary English, 45(5), 602–608.
- Enever, J., Moon, J., & Raman, U. (2009). Young learner English language policy and implementation: International perspectives. Garnet Publishing.
- Germain, C. (2018). The neurolinguistic approach (NLA) for learning and teaching foreign languages: Theory and practice. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
- Han, Z. H., Anderson, N. J., & Freeman, D. (2009). Crossing the boundaries: An introduction. In Z. H. Han, & N. J. Anderson (Eds.), L2 reading research and instruction: Crossing the boundaries. Michigan ELT.
- Katz, S., & Blyth, C. S. (2008). What is grammar? In S. Katz, & J. Watzinger-Tharp (Eds.), Conceptions of L2 Grammar: Theoretical approaches and their application in the L2 classroom. Heinle Cengage Learning.
- Kim, T., Lee, S., Song, S., Pae, H., Lee, Y., Shin, Y., Kim, M., Jang, Y., Hong, J., Shin, S., Yoon, C., & Kim, K. (2025). Elementary School English 3. Chunjae Education.
- Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition. Second Language Learning, 3(7), 19–39.
- Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Citeseer.
- Ministry of Education (MOE). (2022). The Curriculum of English Subject. Ministry of Education.
- Miyasako, N. (2002). Does text-glossing have any effects on incidental vocabulary learning through reading for Japanese senior high school students? Language Education & Technology, 39, 1–20.
- National Reading Panel (US), National Institute of Child Health, & Human Development (US) (NICHHD). (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.
- Ortega, L. (2015). Second Language Learning Explained? SLA across 10 Contemporary Theories. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 245–272). Routledge.
- Reinders, H., & Ellis, R. (2009). The effects of two types of input on intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In R. Ellis, J. E. Philp, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 2817–302). Multilingual Matters. · DOI
- Rixon S. (2011). Beyond ABC: Investigating current rationales and systems for the teaching of early reading to young learners of English (Publication No. 634436) [Doctoral Dissertation]. University of Warwick. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
- Rose, J. (2006). Independent review of the teaching of early reading. Department for Education and Skills.
- Rowe, K. (2005). Teaching reading: Report and recommendations. Department of Education, Science and Training.
- Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated readings. The Reading Teacher, 32(4), 403–408.
- Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis) abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman, & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Approaching difficulties in literacy development: Assessment, pedagogy and programmes (pp. 23–38). Guilford Press.
- Seo M. O. (2018). Development and application of an English Reading instructional model based on self-directed learning for 5th Grade in Elementary School [Doctoral Dissertation]. Korea National University of Education. Riss. https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T14747055.
- Stoller, F. L., Anderson, N. J., Grabe, W., & Komiyama, R. (2013). Instructional enhancements to improve students’ reading abilities. English Teaching Forum, 51(1), 2–11.
- 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.0 · DOI
- Ünal Gezer, M. (2021). Storybooks, songs, and games: Tools to boost early literacy development in Primary English Classrooms. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 8(4), 2683–2700.
- VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (2015). Introduction: The nature of theories. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 1–16). Routledge.
Cited by
Still being checked.
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, J. M.
- Affiliations
- LLMVC (The School of Language, Literature, Music and Visual Culture), University of Aberdeen
- ORCID
- Kim, Jeong Mi
- Venue
- Reading Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2026-09-18
- Pages
- 1-30
- ISSN
- 0270-2711 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-0685
- OpenAlex
- W7213539825
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Reading Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- explicit instruction, implicit learning, EFL learners, young learners, declarative memory, procedural memory, form-focused instruction, meaning-focused instruction, phonics instruction, storybook reading
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
