Communicating Effectively with ELL Students

Feedback in Instructed Second Language Acquisition
In the first case, the English speaker shortened the response to make it clearer. In the second case, the English speaker settled on one verb instead of two to make a clear response. In the third case, the English speaker used correct grammar to express a complete thought instead of attempting to stammer his way through a response.
The functions that these modifications serve in communication are that they make expressions clearer and more easily understandable. They provide clarification in each case.
This language behavior connects to what Gass et al. (2013) show in their article on second language acquisition, in which outputs act as a synthesis of integrated inputs. The modifications that the English speakers make fit into comprehended input for a language learner in the sense that they are meant to act as clarifications of thoughts that were poorly expressed the first go around. This does help with language learning because it obliges the communication to be considered more fully before being expressed verbally.
I notice myself modifying my input to language learners in my classroom because sometimes I rush too quickly in trying to get it out and have to go back and say again more clearly what I said. It is really all about taking one’s time. If I am giving directions and trying to rush through them before the bell rings, I realize that I am communicating poorly and should really slow down, speak clearly, and not stammer through any explanations because that is not good for the learner. Slowing down does seem to help my ELLs in a big way as they are able to comprehend what I am saying the first time through instead of having to raise their hands and ask for clarification.
References
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1985). Variation in native speaker speech modification to non-
native speaker. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 37-57