Cited by 573EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningSecond Language Learning and Teaching

Does Second Language Instruction Make a Difference? A Review of Research

Open access
Long, Michael H.·1983·TESOL Quarterly

Abstract

Does second language instruction promote second language acquisition? Some studies conclude that instruction does not help (or even that it is counter-productive); others find it beneficial. The picture becomes clearer if two distinctions are made. First, researchers may address one or both of two issues: the absolute effect of instruction, on the one hand, and on the other, its relacive utility. Second, studies need to be sub-classified according to whether or not the comparisons they make involve controlling for the total amount of instruction, exposure, or instruction plus exposure, i.e. for the total opportunity to acquire the second language. Observing these distinctions, a review of research findings concludes that there is considerable (although not overwhelming) evidence that instruction is beneficiaL (1) for children as well as adults, (2) for beginning, intermediate and advanced students, (3) on integrative as well as discrete-point tests, and (4) in acquisition-rich as well as acquisition-poor environments. These findings have implications for theories of second language acquisition, such as Krashen's Monitor Theory, which make predictions about second language acquisition with and without instruction, and also for those involved in educational administrationl program design and classroom teaching.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3586253

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Long, M. H.
Affiliations
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
Corresponding author
Long, Michael H.
Venue
TESOL Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1983-09
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
359
ISSN
0039-8322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2156900568
Cited by
573
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 21
FWCI
95.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • TESOL Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Pennsylvania
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 › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Second Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
second language teaching, second language acquisition, children versus adults, Krashen's monitor model, language program design, classroom teaching

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.

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