INPUT AND OUTPUT VARIABLES IN THE ENGLISH TEACHING

PROCESS

This paper is submitted as a fulfilment for Research Methodology in English

Language Education’s group assessment

Lecturer:
Prof. Dr. Syafrizal, M.Pd.

Compiled by:
Group 1
Istifani Mauladiana 7777230006
Wiwin Eko Sriwinarti 7777230010
Ade Juanda 7777230011

MAGISTER OF ENGLISH EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHING

TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SULTAN AGENG TIRTAYASA UNIVERSITY
2024
 PREFACE

Thank God Almighty, with the assistance of Allah SWT, the authors have
completed the paper on “Input and Output Variables in the English Teaching
Process”. The goal of writing this paper is to complete the task provided by
Research Methodology in ELT and Journal Design lecturer Prof. Dr. Syafrizal,
M.Pd. The authors encountered numerous obstacles and hurdles when organizing
this work, but with the support of numerous people, those obstacles were overcome.
The authors additionally noticed there are still numerous flaws in the process of
composing this paper.
As a result, the authors would like to express gratitude to everyone who
helped with the writing of this work. I pray Allah responds and grants you all
blessings. The authors acknowledged that there were still issues with the structure
and content of this publication. The authors then hope that the reader’s feedback
will enable them to improve the following paper. Finally, but just as importantly,
perhaps, this paper will enable readers to learn more Research Methodology in ELT
and Journal Design.

Serang, March 8 2024

The Authors

i
 TABLE OF CONTENT

PREFACE .................................................................................................. i
TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................. ii
CHAPTER I .............................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of Study ........................................................................... 1
1.2 Research Focus..................................................................................... 2
1.3 Formulation of the Study ..................................................................... 2
1.4 Objectives of the Study ........................................................................ 2
1.5 Significance of the Study ..................................................................... 4
CHAPTER II ............................................................................................. 5
LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 5
2.1 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................ 5
2.1.1 The use of Variables ................................................................. 5
2.1.2 Definition of Input Variable ..................................................... 6
2.1.3 Definition of Output Variable .................................................. 7
2.2 Relevant Study ..................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER III ............................................................................................ 11
DISCUSSION ........................................................................................... 11
3.1 Input Variable in Teaching English Process ......................................... 11
3.2 Output Variable in the Teaching English Process ................................ 13
3.3 The Importance of input and output variables in the English Teaching
Process ................................................................................................ 16
CHAPTER IV ............................................................................................ 21
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ...................................................... 21
4.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 21
4.2 Suggestion ............................................................................................ 21
REFERENCES........................................................................................... 23

ii
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

Both input and output have been significant themes of discussion
among educators and researcher for the entirety of the history of English
Language Teaching (ELT). The vast majority of researchers have
highlighted the significant role that input plays in English Language
Teaching, and it is generally accepted that learners may not necessarily
obtain a high level of proficiency in the target language as a result of their
exposure to input. In addition to the role that input plays in the process of
teaching English as a second language, it has established that output also
plays an important part in the process. Depending on whether input or output
is more important for English Language Teaching, there are contrasting
points of view. Researchers were able to have a better understanding of how
to compare the effects of input-based and output-based training on the
development of second language skills because to the controversy that
surrounded the function of input and output in the process of learning a
second language. Rassaei (2012) The understanding of how input and
output affect comprehension and production of L2 forms and structures has
been considered to be an important issue in the field of second language
acquisition (SLA) research. Several studies have attempted to investigate
the relative effects of input-based and output-based instructions (Allen,
2000; DeKeyser & Sokalski, 1996; Erlam, 2003; Nagata, 1998; Salaberry,
1997).
The term input and output variable refer to a type of project that was
initially developed in the field of economics with the purpose of achieving
a state of harmony between the level of demand and the quantity and quality
of supply. After that, this kind of analysis was applied in a number of
different disciplines, including in education. The term input refers to all of
the sources that are integrated into the process of education during a specific

1
stage of learning; meanwhile, process refers to all of the variables and
factors that are incorporated into the process of education; and output refers
to the result of the process of putting the plan into action (Williams, 1975:
534; cited in Abuhamdia, 1983: 176; Betti, 2020; Igaab and Kareem, 2018;
Igaab, 2018; Betti, 1998; and 2006).
Nevertheless, there is a consensus that the exposure of learners to input
plays a significant role in English Language Teaching (ELT). In fact, it has
been demonstrated that it is extremely difficult to acquire a new language
without taking into account the role that input plays. The learners pay
attention to the form of the goal structure and analyze the input for meaning
through activities that do not require them to produce the target structure.
This type of education is known as structured-input instruction. The
structured-input group is provided with clear instruction on the essential
grammatical item, and is then given opportunities to practice this
characteristic through tasks that are input-based. Anna-Maria Andreou
mentioned this in her paper that was presented at the Conference: ECER
2008, titled “From Teaching to Learning?”.
In addition, meaning-oriented output-based teaching is designed to
ensure that students are only engaged in activities that are meaningful to
them. During these activities, students are expected to pay attention to the
meaning of both the stimulus and the response, and they are also provided
with opportunities to perform language production. This area of research
has found a fertile ground in the field of ELT, and there are now a number
of studies that have compared and contrasted structured-input training with
output-based education on assessments of comprehension and production.
It is suggested by Swain (1985, 1995, 2000, 2005) that the output is just as
significant as the input in the process of developing second language
knowledge to higher levels. According to Swain (1985), students’ attention
was diverted away from the semantic processing that was necessary for
interpreting data and towards the syntactic processing that was necessary
for encoding meaning (p.249). According to Swain (1995, 2005), one of the

2
 most important functions of output is to assist learners in becoming aware
of the gap that exists between their existing linguistic knowledge and the
actual language system that they are learning.
.
1.2 Research Focus
The authors will concentrate on input and output variables, as well as
their implementation in the English teaching process in accordance with the
expertise and relevant studies that have been previously discussed, in light
of the research background.

1.3 Formulation of Problem

The authors formulated the problem on:
1. What is input variable?
2. What is output variable?
3. How to implement input variable in the English teaching process?
4. How to implement output variable in the English teaching process?
5. What is the important of input and output variables in the English
teaching process?

1.4 Objectives of the Study

According to the formulation of the study, the authors would like to describe
the objectives of this work through the following:
1. Understand the input variable
2. Understand the output variable
3. Discuss how to implement input variable in the English teaching process
4. Explain how to implement output variable in the English teaching
process
5. Identify the importance of input and output variable in the English
teaching process

3
1.5 Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is discussed in the following:
1. Theoretically
This paper can be used as the references for the readers who wants to
take a depth study about input and output variable in the English
teaching process.
2. Practically
The result of this research will inform the reader about the importance
of input and output variable in the English teaching process.

4
 CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Theoretical Framework

2.1.1 The Use of Variables
As part of the process of doing research, it is necessary to take
into consideration a number of measurable factors that are susceptible
to change as a result of the conditions. A variable is a term that describes
these characteristics. Due to the fact that the concept of variable is the
topic of this study as well as the title of a research project, it is
considered to be of utmost importance in the field of research.
According to Adegun (2005), the majority of educational investigations
are focused with building interrelationships among variables.
Furthermore, every part of research requires fundamental features
and ingredients, which are referred to as variables. Research frequently
focuses on the interactions that exist between variables. In the context
of experimental research, a variable is not just something that can be
measured, but it is also something that a researcher may alter and
regulate in order to achieve the desired results. Under the definition
provided by Uzoagulu (1998), a variable is a characteristic that is shared
by all members of a population. According to Nwankwo and Emunemu
(2014), it is anything that may alter in value depending on the
circumstances or the manner in which it is handled. A variable,
according to Adegun (2005), is something that is capable of taking on a
variety of values, and the value of any single variable is contingent upon
the circumstances in which it is carried out. There are many different
types of variables, including but not limited to E, F, G, sex, attitude, age,
experience, and instructional technique (Aderounmu and Duyilemi,
1988).
Variables, according to Best and Kaln (1986), are the conditions
or features that the researcher manipulates, controls, or observes based

5
 on their own personal preferences. Research is comprised of these
primary components, which serve as the foundation for any research
endeavour. Therefore, it was inferred that there would be no research if
there were no variables taken into consideration. The term "variable"
refers to any category that is being measured, including but not limited
to an object, event, idea, feeling, time period, or any other category.
Variables possess several features, including a defined start and end
period, a requirement for a specific pattern such as daily, weekly, ad-
hoc, or monthly, and a full and comprehensive overview, among other
attributes.

2.1.2 Definition of Input Variable

Oyebanji (2017) defines an input variable as the independent
variable that contributes to a specific outcome. It is a stimulus that
influences a reaction, an antecedent, or a factor that can be altered (for
example, under experimental or other settings) to affect the outcome. A
dependent variable, on the other hand, is the outcome variable that is
directly or indirectly caused by the input, antecedent variable. This is a
common assumption among academics and statisticians.
However, there are cases where what was thought to be the
independent variable turns out to be the dependent variable. An example is
a study that aims to evaluate the impact of study habits on academic
performance. Typically, study habits are classified as the variable, while
academic success is considered the dependent variable. In contrast, failing
in a test can either motivate a student to study more or make them give up
hope of performing better in future exams. As a result, the direction of
causality may be unclear at times or, in certain cases, bidirectional. It is also
possible that there are other unidentified reasons (input variables)
underlying the identified causes (output variables) that have a significant
impact on the dependent variable under consideration. No variables are
automatically classified as dependent or independent. In order to determine

6
 which of the variables in a study endeavour should be identified as
dependent or independent of the other, a major clarification is required as to
which one comes before or occurs first. The variable that occurs before the
things described by another variable is considered the independent variable,
while the other variable is identified as the dependent variable (Kalof, Dan,
and Dietz, 2008). For example, in the research topic 'Quality of instruction
and academic performance of students in universities in Southern Nigeria',
the input variable is 'Quality of instruction', while the output variable is
'Academic performance of students in universities in Southern Nigeria. For
a dependent variable to be considered good, it must be objective and
quantitative in nature, which means it must be precisely recorded and
monitored. Furthermore, it must be very sensitive to detect small changes in
the independent variable; nevertheless, this sensitivity must be balanced so
that the dependent variable is not influenced by even the smallest
uncontrollable influences in the environment of study.
The purpose of manipulating or observing input variables is to
determine how they affect the dependent variable. In order to determine how
input factor can affect the output variable, researchers actively modify input
variables in experimental research. Researchers analyze input variables in
observational or correlational studies without changing them directly, but
they still examine how they relate to the dependent variable.
In research papers, input factors are essentially the subject of inquiry
as scientists try to comprehend their significance in producing the desired
conclusion. They are essential elements in the planning and execution of
research projects aimed at investigating phenomena and determining
correlational or causative links.

2.1.3 Definition of Output Variable

Output variables, also known as dependent variables, are the
variables that researchers use to assess or evaluate the impacts of
independent variables. The researcher manipulates or controls each of the

7
variables and investigates their effect on the dependent variables. The
relation between independent and dependent variables is a critical
component of experimental design and hypothesis testing.
According to Sugiyono (2019), dependent variables are also known
as output, criterion, and consequent variables. The output variable is the
variable that is influenced by or results from the presence of the independent
variable. This is in line with Abu Bakar (2021) who stated that the dependent
variable is the variable that is influenced by the independent variable; the
dependent variable is the outcome of the independent variable. An example
of a dependent variable is the effect of the work environment on employee
work stress. This variable is referred to as the dependent variable since the
level of work stress is determined by the work environment as an
independent variable. Understanding and describing variables is critical for
planning experiments, analysing data, and making conclusions in research
projects.
Dependent variables are essential elements in scientific research,
whether it be an experimental or observational study. They serve as the
outcomes or phenomena that researchers want to comprehend, elucidate, or
forecast. The term 'dependent' is used to describe these variables since their
values or behaviours are determined by or influenced by other elements
within the study, which are commonly referred to as independent variables
or predictors. Expert definitions emphasize the correlation between
dependent variables and other components of a study, emphasizing their
vulnerability to alteration due to experimental manipulations or
observational conditions. The dependent variable is usually the main subject
of research and interpretation, playing a crucial role in making conclusions
about the effects or correlations being examined. The object can be
measured, observed, or assessed in order to correctly quantify its traits or
responses. For example, in a clinical trial investigating the effectiveness of
a new medication, the dependent variable may be the intensity of symptoms
or the level of improvement seen by the participants. Gaining a

8
 comprehensive understanding of the inherent qualities and attributes of the
dependent variable, as well as comprehending how it is impacted by
independent factors, is of utmost importance when it comes to formulating
meticulous experiments, carrying out resilient analyses, and arriving at
sound results in scientific research spanning several fields of study.

2.2 Relevant Study

Here are some relevant studies that explore the role of input and
output variables in language teaching:
The Role of Input, Interaction, and Output in the Development of
Oral Fluency (2009): This study examines the second language acquisition
process with a focus on how input, interaction, and output contribute to the
development of oral fluency in English as a Foreign Language (EFL)
context. It includes both theoretical perspectives and a case study, providing
insights into the challenges faced by Chinese English learners.
Krashen Revisited: Case Study of the Role of Input, Motivation,
and Identity in Second Language Learning (2021): This paper revisits
Stephen Krashen’s Input Hypothesis and enriches it by considering the roles
of motivation and identity in second language learning. It emphasizes the
importance of comprehensible input and the need for teachers to create
robust reading programs and utilize multimedia and technologies.
A Study on the Input and Output of Vocabulary Teaching Based
on Noticing Theory (2020): This research focuses on vocabulary teaching
and how the Noticing Theory can be applied to enhance the balance between
input and output in language learning.
Output — Informed Language Teacher: This resource discusses
the balance between input and output when teaching a language and
includes a study on correcting students’ oral output in class.

9
 These studies provide a diverse range of perspectives and findings
that can inform teaching practices and contribute to a deeper understanding
of the dynamics between input and output in language education.

10
 CHAPTER III
DISCUSSION

3.1 Input Variable in Teaching English Process

According to the input hypothesis, Krashen’s theory of
Comprehensible Input is a major causative factor in second language
acquisition. It is also the most fundamental approach for the purpose of a
leaner to understand a language and acquire the language. Therefore, the
comprehensibility of the teaching materials is the key. A suitable set of
teaching materials for the learners is compulsory.
On the contrary, there are some theories against Krashen’s theory in
providing the necessary language input for second language acquisition.
Those theories are Gass’ Comprehended Input (1988), White’s
Incomprehensible Input (1987), and Swain’s Comprehensible Output
(1985). One of the theories is White’s Incomprehensible Input hypothesis,
which highlights the point that the input incomprehensibility or
comprehension difficulty can provide important negative feedback to the
learner. The input incomprehensibility or comprehension difficulty is
necessary for the constitution of second language acquisition (Bahrani,
2013:39).
Learning to speak a second or foreign language is, indeed, not a simple
process. As a matter of fact, the students are usually taught speaking by
repeating or imitating a conversation model in the textbook as an input at
school. This kind of activity, which only gives a conversation model in the
textbook, tends to discourage the students in learning speaking.
In language learning, input is the language data, which the learner is
exposed to. It is commonly acknowledged that for the purpose of second
language acquisition to take place there must be two prerequisites, namely
thesecond language input available to the learners and a set of internal
mechanism to account for how second language data are processed (Ellis,
2003).

11
 There are many internal, as well as, external factors, which influence
second language acquisition. Among them, the language input that learners
receive in second language acquisition is one of the external factors, which
plays a fundamental role. Language input refers to what is available to be
utilized by language learners for second language acquisition (Corder, 1967
in Bahrani 2013: 34).
Input available to second language learners is the raw data from which
they derive both meaning and awareness of the rules and structures of the
target language (Chaudron, 1985 in Van Loi and Franken 2010: 63).
Any component that aids in the language learning process is referred
to as an input variable while teaching English. The classroom environment,
student characteristics, instructional strategies, learning activities, and
teacher-student interaction are a few examples of these variables.
1. Teaching Methods
Various methods of education, including task-based learning,
communicative language teaching, and direct instruction, can be
regarded as input variables. These techniques have an impact on the way
language is taught and used in the classroom.
2. Instructional Materials
Textbooks, internet resources, multimedia tools, and other
educational tools are examples of input variables that give linguistic
input and organization to learning activities.
3. Learning Activities
Students are engaged in language practice and skill development
through input variables such role-plays, games, conversations, and
writing assignments.
4. Student Characteristics
Individual differences among students influence how they learn and
utilize English. These differences include language proficiency,
learning preferences, motivation, and cultural background.

12
 5. Classroom Environment
Input variables that can affect student engagement and language
learning outcomes include things like classroom layout, seating
arrangements, noise level, and atmosphere.
6. Teacher-student Interaction
Language learning is influenced by the type and quality of
interactions between teachers and students, including opportunities for
meaning negotiation, scaffolding, and teacher feedback.

Understanding and skillfully adjusting these input variables in

English instruction can improve student learning and help them acquire the
language more successfully. In order to provide their pupils with a suitable
learning environment, teachers frequently take these factors into account
while organizing lessons, choosing resources, and creating activities.

3.2 Output Variable in the Teaching English Process

There are many previous studies that covered the explanation of the
output variables in teaching English process. The output or dependent
variable within the line of teaching English is related to the possible
conditions occurring within classroom which includes the students.
According to Febriani, Jabu, and Korompot (2023) output variable
of English teaching process includes the student’s perception of the
teaching-learning progress itself. This means that student’s perception as the
variable is important to determine how well the student can absorb the
materials from the tool used by the teachers in teaching process. This
particular result on dependent variable is also shown through the student’s
overall attitude and motivation in the classroom which is also affected by
the teacher’s learning behavior in class (Rifai, 2010). In other words, the
output variables in teaching English process are affected majorly by the
teaching-learning attitude of the students and teachers within the classroom.

13
Based on this, this study plans to employ on using student’s attitude towards
learning as one of the output variables.
The student’s learning attitude and teacher’s teaching behavior are
two main factors that build classroom climate. Jabar, et al. (2023) explained
that the output variables of teaching English process involves classroom
climate that is mainly the result of media integration and learning approach,
student’s attitude, stimulation, and supportive behavior. All of the
mentioned variables are correlated to determine the end result of teaching
English process. This means that to make sure the teaching English process
running well, the classroom climate needs to be ensured of its success. Thus,
the output variables of teaching English process includes the combined
factors between student’s attitude in learning and the teacher’s attitude in
teaching.
Moreover, Jabar et al. (2023) also mentioned that the output
variables of teaching English process is heavily affected by the student’s
personality and external environment. This further emphasized the role of
student’s approach to the study as well as the employment of teaching tools
or methodology to make sure that the teaching-learning process runs
successfully. Therefore, it is essential to analyze the classroom climate and
consider the output variables based on student’s attitude and teacher’s
attitude in the classroom.
Swain’s Output Hypothesis served as a turning point in SLA,
through which output began to draw researcher’s attention. Many empirical
studies emerged to examine the Output Hypothesis. Izumi et al. (1999,
2000) examined whether output promoted noticing of linguistic form and
whether output resulted in the acquisition of linguistic form by designing
two-phase essay writing and reconstructing tasks. It was not confirmed that
output promoted noticing of linguistic form; the hypothesis that output
resulted in second language acquisition was just partially confirmed. In
these two studies, the tasks devised couldn’t control he learners’ focus of
attention with respect to the targeted form, without ensuring that their

14
processing capacity was not overloaded. In addition, Izumi’s studies were
severely constrained by the small sample size. Following up on Izumi et
al.’s (1999, 2000) study, Izumi and Biglow (2000) further investigated
learner’s cognitive processes triggered by output. They found that output
didn’t always attract learner’s attention to the target grammatical form, but
extended opportunities for producing output and relevant input played a
crucial role in improving learner’s use of target structure.
Some research tried to compare the effects of input and output. Rod
Ellis and He Xien (1999) carried out an experimental study of the different
effects of pre-modified input, interactionally modified input, and modified
output on the comprehension of direction and the acquisition of new
vocabulary in a listening-to-do task. It was found that the output modified
group outperformed the other two types of input groups both in
comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. However, the modified input
group and the interaction group didn’t show too much difference. The
conclusions have been drawn that interaction that provides opportunities for
learners to use and negotiate new vocabulary items in dialogically
symmetrical discourse seems to create better conditions for incidental
vocabulary acquisition than interaction in teacher-controlled exchanges that
restrict the kind of inter-mental activity claimed to foster learning. Since this
study didn’t narrowly distinguish modified input and modified output for
the reason that output must be accompanied by input and interaction, so it
can not serve as evidence that modified output works better than modified
input. The de la Fuente study (2002) had a similar design with learners of
L2 Spanish rather than English. In this study, the “output” group of learners
also outperformed the rest of students in post-tests with regard to productive
vocabulary. The studies quoted both show benefits arising from “pushing”
students to produce L2 output, as least as far as vocabulary is concerned.
Later, further studies provided supporting evidence for the impact of
modified output on the learning of question forms and simple past tense
(McDonough, 2005; MacDonough & Mackey, 2006; Mackey, 2007).

15
 However, Krashen (1998) questioned the Output Hypothesis by
posing four difficulties of comprehensible output. He argued that: first,
comprehensible output is rare to promote linguistic competence; secondly,
high levels of linguistic hypothesis are possible; thirdly, no evidence can
show that comprehensible output leads to language acquisition; finally,
learners feel uncomfortable when forced to output.
After over a decade of research into Swain’s Output Hypothesis,
there is still a lack of data showing that learner output has any effect on
second language learning (Shehadeh, 2002). Therefore, he proposed two
sets of research directions in order to move this field forward: the first set
relates to modified output and includes examining the direction toward
which modifications are made, the specific type of linguistic modifications
and the frequency of modified output on L2 learning; “the second set relates
to the function of output in L2 learning as a triggering process and includes
output as a tool for metalinguistic talk, for noticing and focusing learners’
attention on subsequent input” (Shehadeh, 2002, p. 612).

3.3 The Importance of Input and Output Variables in the English Teaching
Process
The role of the three closely relevant factors, namely input,
interaction and output has gradually been acknowledged in second language
(L2) learning. It is now widely recognized that input is essential for
language acquisition. In addition to input, it is also accepted that interaction
plays a crucial role in the process of learning L2. Output--an automatic
output, to be exact--is one pedagogical goal in learning L2. So, input,
interaction and output are three essential compositing elements in L2
acquisition. But for years there has been a debate about their role.
3.3.1 Input
In language learning, input is the language data which the
learner is exposed to. It is commonly acknowledged that for second
language acquisition to take place there must be two prerequisites: L2

16
 input available to the learners and a set of internal mechanism to account
for how L2 data are processed (Ellis, 1985). Towards the issue of input
there are generally three views: behaviorist, mentalist and interactionist
view, each holding a different emphasis in explaining SLA. A
behaviorist view treats language learning as environmentally
determined, controlled from outside by the stimuli learners are exposed
to and the reinforcement they receive. In contrast, mentalist theories
emphasize the importance of the learner’s ‘black box’. They maintain
that learners’ brains are especially equipped to learn language and all
that is needed is minimal exposure to input in order to trigger acquisition
(Ellis, 1997). Interactionist theories acknowledge the importance of both
input and internal language processing, emphasizing the joint
contribution of linguistic environment and the learners’ inner
mechanism in interaction activities, which I will discuss later.
3.3.2 Output
Output is the language a learner produces. Swain, the most
influential figure for Output Hypothesis, has argued that comprehensible
output also plays a part in L2 acquisition. She pointed out early in 1985
that only when learners are “obliged” to produce comprehensible output
otherwise comprehensible input alone is insufficient to L2 learning
process. According to her there is no better way to test the extent of one’s
knowledge (linguistic or otherwise) than to have to use that knowledge
in some productive way—whether it is explaining a concept to someone
(i.e. teaching) or writing a computer program, or in the case of language
learning, getting even a simple idea across, and in doing so, he might
modify a previous utterance or he might try out form that he had not
used before. However, prior to her important paper in 1985, output was
traditionally viewed as a way of producing what had previously been
learned and the idea that output could be part of the learning mechanism
itself was not seriously contemplated (Gass & Selinker 2001). Then in
1995, she stated that output might stimulate learners to move from the

17
semantic, open-ended, nondeterministic, strategic processing prevalent
in comprehension to the complete grammatical processing needed for
accurate production. Output, thus, would seem to have a potentially
significant role in the development of syntax and morphology.
Gass (2001) summarizes the four functions of output in L2
learning based on Swain’s ideas: testing hypothesis about the structures
and meanings of L2; receiving crucial feedback for the verification of
these hypotheses; forcing a shift from more meaning-based processing
of the second language to a more syntactic mode; and developing
fluency and automaticity in interlanguage production.
In many researchers’ opinion, automaticity benefits learning.
Firstly, as automatic processing consumes fewer attentional resources
than does controlled processing (involved when conscious effort and
attention is required to perform a task), the more automatic performance
becomes the more attentional resources left over for other purposes. For
example, if one can handle the phonology and syntax of a second
language automatically, then more attention can be paid to processing
semantic, pragmatic, and sociolinguistic levels of communication.
Secondly, when a mechanism becomes automatic it will process
information very quickly and accurately. Thirdly, there are strong
reasons for associating automaticity with important aspects of fluency
(Skehan, 1998; Hulstijn, 1997,etc).

The input and output variables in the English teaching process

each play a crucial role in facilitating language acquisition. By
strategically leveraging both, educators can create a more dynamic,
effective learning environment. Here are the importance of both input
and output in the context of teaching English:

18
The importance of Input:
1. Enhances Language Comprehension: Regular exposure to
comprehensible input helps learners gradually understand the structure
and meaning of the English language, thereby improving their
comprehension skills over time.
2. Builds Vocabulary: Exposure to varied and rich language input enables
learners to encounter and learn new vocabulary in context, which is
more effective than memorization techniques.
3. Facilitates Natural Acquisition: The process of acquiring language
through input is more natural and mirrors the way first languages are
learned, making it less intimidating and more intuitive for learners.
4. Introduces Cultural Context: Input provides not just linguistic
knowledge but also cultural insights. Through different types of input
(literature, media, conversations), learners gain an understanding of the
cultural nuances and social norms associated with English-speaking
cultures.
5. Improves Listening and Reading Skills: Focused input activities
enhance learners' listening and reading abilities, essential skills for
effective communication and further language study.

The Importance of Output:

1. Active Language Practice: Output requires learners to actively use the
language, thereby reinforcing their learning and aiding in the retention
of vocabulary and grammar.
2. Enhances Speaking and Writing Skills: Regular opportunities for output
allow learners to improve their speaking and writing skills, crucial
components of language proficiency.
3. Facilitates Feedback and Correction: When learners produce language,
it provides teachers with opportunities to give feedback and correct
errors, leading to improved accuracy over time.

19
4. Encourages Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving: Producing
language output often requires learners to think critically and solve
problems, such as how to express an idea clearly or how to structure a
narrative.
5. Boosts Confidence and Motivation: Successfully communicating in a
second language, even in a simple interaction, can significantly boost
learners' confidence and motivation, encouraging further study and
practice.
6. Integrating Input and Output for Optimal Learning:
For the most effective English teaching and learning process, input and
output should be integrated in a balanced manner. This approach ensures
that learners are not only passive recipients of language knowledge but
also active participants in their language acquisition journey. Activities
like interactive discussions, writing assignments based on reading texts,
and role-playing based on listening exercises can provide a seamless
blend of input and output. Such integration supports a more holistic
development of language skills, encompassing comprehension and
production, listening and speaking, reading and writing.

20
 CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

4.1 Conclusion
In summary, the thoughtful integration of input and output variables in
the English teaching process offers a comprehensive approach to language
learning. It allows for the natural acquisition of linguistic and cultural
knowledge while actively engaging learners in the application of their
language skills, thereby.
On the other hand, output variables include language proficiency,
communication skills, vocabulary knowledge, and overall language
development. Tracking these variables can help determine whether the
teaching process is effective or requires adjustments. It also helps to gauge
the success of language instruction and identify areas in which students need
more support, whether in grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, or
comprehension.
Understanding input and output variables can help teachers improve
their language teaching process and create a more conducive learning
environment for students. It can also help students to set realistic language
learning goals and evaluate their learning progress.
Studying input and output variables is essential in the English teaching
process as it helps to understand the effectiveness of teaching methods and
materials used in language instruction. Input variables refer to the teaching
materials, methods, technology integration, language exposure, and
resources used in instruction. Input variables significantly contribute to how
students learn and process information, and it impacts their language
acquisition and development.

4.2 Suggestion
In conclusion, the interplay between input and output variables in
language teaching is a cornerstone of effective language acquisition. Input

21
variables, encompassing the rich tapestry of linguistic exposure, provide the
essential building blocks from which learners construct their understanding
of the new language. Output variables, on the other hand, represent the
learners’ ability to use the language actively, thereby solidifying their
competence.
As educators, our role is to curate input that is not only
comprehensible and relevant but also engaging and culturally rich, thus
fostering a deeper connection with the language. Simultaneously, we must
encourage and facilitate ample opportunities for output, where learners can
practice, experiment, and refine their language skills in meaningful
contexts.
The dynamic relationship between input and output in language
learning is not merely a linear process but a complex, interactive cycle that
fuels the growth of linguistic proficiency. By optimizing both variables in
our pedagogical approaches, we can unlock the full potential of language
learning, empowering our students to communicate with confidence and
clarity in an increasingly interconnected world.

22
 REFERENCES

Abiodun-Oyebanji, O. J. (2017). Research variables: Types, uses and definition of

terms. Research in Education, July, 43-54.
Abubakar, H. R. I. (2021). Pengantar metodologi penelitian. SUKA-Press UIN
Sunan Kalijaga.
Adegun, J. A. 2005. Variables in Educational Research. In Bandele, S.O., Seweje,
R. 0. and Alonge, M. F. (Eds.) Lagos; Premier Publishers
Aderounmu, O. and Duyilemi, D. 1988. Element of Educational Research. Lagos;
Okanlawon Publishers.
Al Rifai, N. (2010). Attitude, motivation, and difficulties involved in learning the
English language and factors that affect motivation in learning it. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5216-5227.
Allen, L. (2000). Form-meaning connections and the French Causetive: An
experiment in Input Processing. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 22, 69-84.
Andreou. A. M. (2008). Input- and Output-Based Instruction in the Teaching and
Learning of English Reflexive Pronouns From Teaching to Learning?
(ECER Conference), European Educational Research Association.
Bandele, S.O. 2004, Educational Researching Perspectives. Ibadan: Niyi
Communication and Printing Ventures.
Best, J. W. and Kaln, J. V. 1986. Research in Education, New Delhi; Prentice Hall
of India Private Limited.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. OUP Oxford.
Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition, Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and output in the incidental
acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
21(2), 285-301.
Ellis, Rod. 2003. Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

23
Febriani, Y., Jabu, B., & Korompot, C.A. (2023). Students' Perceptions of the Media
Used by Teachers in Teaching English in Junior High Schools. Pinisi Journal
of Education, Vol. 3 No.6, 2023.
Gass, S. M. & Selinker, L. (2001). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory
Course 2nd edition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. New Jersey.
Izumi, S. (1999). Promoting noticing and SLA: An empirical study of the effects of
output and input enhancement on ESL relativization (Unpublished Doctoral
dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Izumi, S., & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second
language acquisition?. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239-278.
Jabar, C. S. A., Hadiyanto, Kusumastuti, G., & Prabawati, W. (2023). Classroom
Climate: Unique Dependent and Independent Variables. Journal for Lesson
and Learning Studies, 6(1).
Kalof, L. Dan, A. and Dietz, T. 2008. Essentials of Social Research. Berkshire,
England: Open University
Krashen, S. (1998). Comprehensible output?. System, 26(2), 175-182.
Krashen, Stephen D. 2003. Principles and Practice in Second Language
Acquisition. University of Southern California: Internet Edition.
la Fuente, D., & José, M. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(1), 81-112.
McDonough, J. (1994). A teacher looks at teachers’ diaries. ELT Journal, 48(1)
McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners'
responses on esl question development. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 27(1), 79-103.
Meath-Lang, B. (1990). The dialogue journal: Reconceiving curriculum and
teaching. In J.K. Peyton (Ed.), Students and teachers writing together:
Perspectives on journal writing (p.5-17). Alexandria, VA: Teachers of
English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.
Numrich, C. (1996). On becoming a language teacher: Insights from diary studies.
TESOL Quarterly, 30(1),1

24
Nwankwo, J. I. and Emunemu, B. 0. 2014. Handbook on Research in Education and
the Social Sciences. Ibadan: Giraffe Books.
Rassaei, E. (2012). The effects of input-based and output-based instruction on L2
development. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second
Language, 16.3, 1-25.
Shehadeh, A. (2002). Comprehensible output, from occurrence to acquisition: An
agenda for acquisitional research. Language Learning, 52(3), 597-647.
Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University
Press.
Sugiyono, S. (2019). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif Kuantitatif Dan
R&D. Bandung: Cv. Alfabeta.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible
input and comprehensible output in its development. Input in second
language acquisition, 15, 165-179.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. Principle
and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of HG Widdowson,
2.3, 125-144.
Swain, M. (1997). The output hypothesis, focus on form and second language
learning. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition
through collaborative dialogue. Sociocultural theory and second language
learning, 97, 97-114.
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. Handbook of
research in second language teaching and learning, 1, 471-483.
Uzoagulu, A. E., 1998. Practical Guide to Writing Research Project Reports in
Tertiary Institutions. Enugu; John Jacobs Classic Publisher Ltd.
Williams, W. (1975). “Implementation Analysis and Assessment”. Policy Analysis,
1, 3, 53-66

25