Other learners will fail to identify them at all. The varying grammatical sensitivity, especially on grammatical features results in different processing strategies such as rule formation and hypothesis testing. Understanding the differences in levels of awareness, provide important information especially for linguistic teachers in order to make grammatical features more salient in a given input. In this regard, learners who do not pay enough attention to the form as well as the meaning of a feature will understand them as in the case of communicative language teaching classroom (Philippa, 619).
Additionally, understanding the difference in grammar features awareness among learners will assist in evaluating the significance of consciousness in understanding second languages. An aptitude test therefore assists in evaluating whether inputs provide incidental learning as well as the potential for learning other linguistic forms (Philippa, 619). Additionally, many educational institutions that adopt the communicative language teaching methodology must evaluate whether the language learning aptitude test enables learners to notice language features during incidental exposure in order to understand the significance of incidental exposure in learning as a pedagogical tool.
The research indicated a high correlation between individual learning ability and the level of awareness. In this case, the level of awareness and maintenance of a given level of awareness is predicted by indicative language learning. The hypothesis was supported by 72 percent accuracy of the crossword puzzle exposure task. However, the research does not explain further the implication of this observation. In my view, the observation that language learning has no significant impact on determining the level of a learner’s awareness level in a meaning-based exposure to linguistic input is