1887
Volume 39, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

In light of the growing interest in the cognitive approach to task in second language (L2) research, comparatively little has been done to examine such effect over time and the role of individual differences (IDs). The present study was designed to verify some longitudinal evidence for the role of tasks in L2 production and whether IDs, in the example of goal orientations, may have a bearing on that role. Thirty lower-intermediate level undergraduates performed narrative tasks during a five-month period and some were subsequently interviewed. Analysis of the data suggests that goal orientation and task conditions have a combined effect on speaking performance and development. In view of that, this paper questions the validity of findings disregarding learner variability and argues for the necessity to direct future research focus at how IDs may interact with tasks in different ways to influence L2 production.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.39.1.03ben
2016-11-22
2019-09-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ames, C
    (1992) Classrooms: Goals, structure and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. doi: 10.1037/0022‑0663.84.3.261
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ben Maad, M.R
    (2010) Holistic and analytic processing modes in non-native learners’ performance of narrative tasks. System, 38(4), 591–602. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2010.09.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.09.013 [Google Scholar]
  3. (2012) Towards a discerning image of learners’ estimation of task difficulty and motivation: Goal orientations highlighted. Asian EFL Journal, 14(3), 40–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bygate, M
    (2001) Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In: M. Bygate , P. Skehan , & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp.23–48). Harlow: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cumming, A
    (2006) Goals for academic writing: ESL students and their instructors. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.15
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.15 [Google Scholar]
  6. Dörnyei, Z
    (2005) The psychology of language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dörnyei, Z. , & Kormos, J
    (2000) The role of individual and social variables in task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 275–300. doi: 10.1191/136216800125096
    https://doi.org/10.1191/136216800125096 [Google Scholar]
  8. Dörnyei, Z. , & Skehan, P
    (2003) Individual differences in second language learning. In: C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.589–63). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch18
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch18 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ellis, R
    (2000) Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 193–220. doi: 10.1191/136216800125069
    https://doi.org/10.1191/136216800125069 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (2009) The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474–509. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp042
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp042 [Google Scholar]
  12. Ellis, R. , & Barkhuizen, B
    (2005) Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Ferrari, S
    (2012) A longitudinal study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency variation in second language development. In: A. Housen , F. Kuiken , & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp.277–297). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.32.12fer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.12fer [Google Scholar]
  14. Foster, P. , & Skehan, P
    (1996) The influence of planning on performance in task-based learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3), 299–324. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100015047
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100015047 [Google Scholar]
  15. Foster, P. , Tonkyn, A. , & Wigglesworth, G
    (2000) Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 354–375. doi: 10.1093/applin/21.3.354
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.354 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gass, S. , Mackey, A. , Alvarez-Torres, M.J. , & Fernandez-Garcia, M
    (1999) The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49, 549–581. doi: 10.1111/0023‑8333.00102
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00102 [Google Scholar]
  17. He, T
    (2005) Effects of mastery and performance goals on the composition strategy use of adult EFL writers. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 61(4), 407–431. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.61.3.407
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.61.3.407 [Google Scholar]
  18. Housen, A. , Kuiken, F. , & Vedder, I
    (2012) Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.32
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32 [Google Scholar]
  19. Iwashita, N. , McNamara, T. , & Elder, C
    (2001) Can we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information processes approach to task design. Language Learning, 21(3), 401–436. doi: 10.1111/0023‑8333.00160
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00160 [Google Scholar]
  20. Kawauchi, C
    (2005) The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate L2 proficiency. In: R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.143–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.11.09kaw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.09kaw [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim, Y. , & Tracy-Ventura, N
    (2013) The role of task repetition in L2 performance development: What needs to be repeated during task-based interaction? System, 41(3), 829–840. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2013.08.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.08.005 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kormos, J
    (1999) Monitoring and self-repair in L2. Language Learning, 49(2), 303–342. doi: 10.1111/0023‑8333.00090
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00090 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2006) Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kuiken, F. , Mos, M. , & Vedder, I
    (2005) Cognitive task complexity and second language writing performance. In: S. Foster-Cohen & P. García-Mayo (Eds.), Eurosla Yearbook (pp.195–222). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Larsen-Freeman, D
    (2006) The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590–619. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml029
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029 [Google Scholar]
  26. Levkina, M. , & Gilabert, Y
    (2012) The effects of cognitive task complexity on L2 oral production. In: A. Housen , F. Kiuken , & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency investigating complexity, accuracy, and fluency in SLA (pp.171–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.32.08lev
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.08lev [Google Scholar]
  27. Mackey, A. , & Gass, S
    (2005) Second language research methodology and design. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. McLaughlin, B
    (1990) Restructuring. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 113–128. doi: 10.1093/applin/11.2.113
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.113 [Google Scholar]
  29. Myles, F
    (2012) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency: The role played by formulaic sequences in early interlanguage development. In: A. Housen , F. Kuiken , & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp.71–93). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.32.04myl
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.04myl [Google Scholar]
  30. Ortega, L
    (1999) Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(1), 109–148. doi: 10.1017/S0272263199001047
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001047 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2005) What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. In: R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.77–110). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.11.07ort
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.07ort [Google Scholar]
  32. Raupach, M
    (1984) Formulae in second language speech production. In: H. Dechert , D. Möhle , & M. Raupach (Eds.), Second language productions (pp.114–137). Tübignen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Révész, A
    (2014) Towards a fuller assessment of cognitive models of task-based learning: Investigating task-generated cognitive demands and processes. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 87–92. doi: 10.1093/applin/amt039
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt039 [Google Scholar]
  34. Robinson, P
    (2001) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In: P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.114–137). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012 [Google Scholar]
  35. Sangarun, J
    (2001) The effects of pre-task planning on foreign language performance (Unpublished doctoral thesis), OISE-University of Toronto.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Skehan, P
    (1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Skaalvik, E
    (1997) Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 71–81. doi: 10.1037/0022‑0663.89.1.71
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.71 [Google Scholar]
  38. Steele-Johnson, D. , Beauregard, R. , Hoover, P. , & Schmidt, A
    (2000) Goal orientation and task complexity effects on motivation, affect, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 724–738. doi: 10.1037/0021‑9010.85.5.724
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.724 [Google Scholar]
  39. Tavakoli, P. , & Skehan, P
    (2005) Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In: R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.239–273). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.11.15tav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.15tav [Google Scholar]
  40. Towell, R. , Hawkins, R. , & Bazergui, N
    (1996) The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 84–119. doi: 10.1093/applin/17.1.84
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.84 [Google Scholar]
  41. Wolfe-Quintero, K. , Inagaki, S. , & Kim, H.Y
    (1998) Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy and complexity. Technical report 17. Manoa: University of Hawai’i Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.39.1.03ben
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.39.1.03ben
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): CAF , familiary , goal orientation , planning , speaking development and task difficulty
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error