1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language Teaching for Young Learners
  4. Volume 8, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 8, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2589-2053
  • E-ISSN: 2589-207x
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

This study examined the effects of guided and unguided pre-task planning on the complexity, accuracy, lexis, and fluency (CALF) in L2 oral production, as well as the quality of task outcomes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Additionally, the study compared the impact of first language (L1) and second language (L2) planning when it was unguided. Seventeen pairs of lower-secondary CLIL geography learners completed two oral decision-making tasks under three planning conditions: guided L2 planning, unguided L2 planning, and unguided L1 planning. In the guided planning condition, learners were provided with a structured worksheet that addressed both task content and language, while the unguided planning worksheet had no such structure. Learners’ task performances were measured regarding CALF and their task outcomes were also evaluated. Results indicated that learners achieved higher accuracy under the unguided planning condition, while greater complexity was found in the guided planning condition, with no significant effects detected for other dimensions. Nor were there any statistically significant differences in the language of planning. Furthermore, it was found that task topics with personal relevance positively influenced task outcomes. Implications for research and teaching on the role of different pre-task planning conditions in CLIL classrooms are discussed.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe
2025-09-06
2026-05-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ltyl.25001.khe.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Abdi Tabari, M., Golparvar, E., & Khezrlou, S.
    (2025) The role of task repetition in shaping L2 writing self-efficacy, L2 writing anxiety, and L2 production. System. Advance online publication: special issue on individual differences in TBLT. 10.1016/j.system.2025.103629
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103629 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abdi Tabari, M., Khezrlou, S., & Ghanbar, H.
    (2024a) Task repetition versus task rehearsal: Understanding effects of task-readiness factors and elemental genres on L2 writing task performance. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. 10.1177/13621688241249689
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241249689 [Google Scholar]
  3. Abdi Tabari, M., Khezrlou, S., & Tian, Y.
    (2024b) Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: Exploring interactions in the TBLT domain. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 62(2), 871–901. 10.1515/iral‑2022‑0123
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0123 [Google Scholar]
  4. Anton, M., DiCamilla, F.
    (1998) Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 541, 315–342. 10.3138/cmlr.54.3.314
     https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.54.3.314 [Google Scholar]
  5. Artieda, G., Roquet, H., & Nicolás-Conesa, F.
    (2017) The impact of age and exposure on EFL achievement in two learning contexts: Formal instruction and formal instruction + content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(4), 1–19. 10.1080/13670050.2017.1373059
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1373059 [Google Scholar]
  6. Aubrey, S., Lambert, C., & Leeming, P.
    (2022) The impact of first as opposed to second language pre- task planning on the content of problem-solving task performance. Language Teaching Research, 26(5), 867–892. 10.1177/1362168820917844
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820917844 [Google Scholar]
  7. Aubrey, S., & Philpott, A.
    (2022) Use of the L1 and L2 in strategic planning and rehearsal for task performances in an online classroom. Language Teaching Research, 29(3), 1139–1164. 10.1177/13621688221077421
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221077421 [Google Scholar]
  8. Basterrechea, M., & García Mayo, M. P.
    (2013) Language-related episodes during collaborative tasks: A comparison of CLIL and EFL learners. InK. McDonough & A. Mackey (eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp.25–43). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.34.05ch2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.34.05ch2 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bui, H. Y. G.
    (2014) Task readiness: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence from topic familiarity, strategic planning, and proficiency levels. InP. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance: Volume 5 (pp.63–94). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.5.03gav
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.03gav [Google Scholar]
  10. Bygate, M.
    (2018) Introduction. InM. Bygate (Ed.), Learning language through task repetition (pp.1–25). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.11.intro
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.11.intro [Google Scholar]
  11. Celaya, M. L., & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y.
    (2010) First language and age in CLIL and non-CLIL contexts. International CLIL Research Journal, 11, 60–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2013) A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualizing content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. 10.1515/eujal‑2013‑0011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2011) Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 311, 182–204. 10.1017/S0267190511000092
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000092 [Google Scholar]
  14. De Larios, J. R., Marín, J., & Murphy, L.
    (2001) A temporal analysis of formulation processes in L1 and L2 writing. Language Learning, 51(3), 497–538. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00163
     https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00163 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellis, R.
    (2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (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. 10.1093/applin/amp042
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp042 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2012) Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118271643
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118271643 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2022) Does planning before writing help? Options for pre-task planning in the teaching of writing. ELT Journal, 76(1), 77–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Foster, P., & Skehan, P.
    (1996) The influence of planning on performance in task-based learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 181, 299–324.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. (1999) The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, 31, 185–214. 10.1177/136216889900300303
     https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889900300303 [Google Scholar]
  21. Galdeano Chasco, M., & García Mayo, M. P.
    (2024) L1 use in pre-task planning by child EFL learners: A preliminary study on attention to form. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 8(1), 64–88. 10.1558/isla.27488
     https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.27488 [Google Scholar]
  22. García Mayo, M. P., & Lázaro Ibarrola, A.
    (2015) Oral interaction strategies among EFL and CLIL children in task-based pair work. System, 541, 40–54. 10.1016/j.system.2014.12.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  23. Genesee, F., & Lindholm-Leary, K.
    (2013) Two case studies of content-based language education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 3–33. 10.1075/jicb.1.1.02gen
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.1.1.02gen [Google Scholar]
  24. Geng, X., & Ferguson, G.
    (2013) Strategic planning in task-based language teaching: The effects of participatory structure and task type. System, 41(4), 982–993. 10.1016/j.system.2013.09.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hunt, K. W.
    (1970) Recent measures in syntactic development. InM. Lester (Ed.), Readings in applied transformation grammar. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Jarvis, H. L., & Gathercole, S. E.
    (2003) Verbal and non-verbal working memory and achievements on national curriculum tests at 11 and 14 years of age. Educational and Child Psychology, 20(3), 123–140. 10.53841/bpsecp.2003.20.3.123
     https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2003.20.3.123 [Google Scholar]
  27. Johnson, M. D., & Abdi Tabari, M.
    (2023) Task planning and oral L2 production: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 43(6), 1143–1164. 10.1093/applin/amac026
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amac026 [Google Scholar]
  28. Khezrlou, S.
    (2024) Effects of task repetition with grammatizing on oral task performance and knowledge development. Advance online publication. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Advance online publication. 10.1075/aral.23031.khe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.23031.khe [Google Scholar]
  29. (2023) Focus on form in task repetition through oral and written task modeling. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 61(2), 479–518. 10.1515/iral‑2020‑0125
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2020-0125 [Google Scholar]
  30. (2022) Insights into task-based language teaching. Castledown Publishers. 10.29140/9781914291074
     https://doi.org/10.29140/9781914291074 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2020a) Training planning in second language narrative writing. ELT Journal, 74(1), 49–62. 10.1093/elt/ccz050
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz050 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2020b) The role of task repetition with direct written corrective feedback in L2 writing complexity, accuracy and fluency. Journal of Second Language Studies, 3(1), 31–54. 10.1075/jsls.19025.khe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.19025.khe [Google Scholar]
  33. Kim, N.
    (2019) L1 versus L2 use in pre-task planning of novice L2 learners’ written tasks. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 23–49. 10.17154/kjal.2019.9.35.3.23
     https://doi.org/10.17154/kjal.2019.9.35.3.23 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kim, Y.
    (2013) Effects of pre-task modelling on attention to form and question development. TESOL Quarterly, 471, 8–35. 10.1002/tesq.52
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.52 [Google Scholar]
  35. Kormos, J.
    (2006) Speech production and second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kyle, K., Crossley, S. A., & Berger, C.
    (2018) The tool for the analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research Methods50(3), pp.1030–1046. 10.3758/s13428‑017‑0924‑4
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0924-4 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kyle, K., Crossley, S. A., & Jarvis, S.
    (2021) Assessing the validity of lexical diversity using direct judgements. Language Assessment Quarterly18(2), pp.154–170. 10.1080/15434303.2020.1844205
     https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1844205 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lally, G.
    (2008) First language influences in second language composition: The effects of pre-writing. Foreign Language Annals, 33(4), 428–432. 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.2000.tb00623.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2000.tb00623.x [Google Scholar]
  39. Lambert, C., Aubrey, S., & Leeming, P.
    (2021) Task preparation and second language speech production. TESOL Quarterly, 55(2), 331–365. 10.1002/tesq.598
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.598 [Google Scholar]
  40. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M.
    (2011) Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Leeming, P., Aubrey, S., & Lambert, C.
    (2022) Collaborative pre-task planning processes and second-language task performance. RELC Journal, 53(3), 534–550. 10.1177/0033688220953225
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220953225 [Google Scholar]
  42. Levelt, W. J.
    (1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/6393.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6393.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  43. Li, L., Chen, J., & Sun, L.
    (2015) The effects of different lengths of pre-task planning time on L2 learners’ oral test performance. TESOL Quarterly, 49(1), 38–66. 10.1002/tesq.159
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.159 [Google Scholar]
  44. Lo, Y. Y., & Lin, A. M. Y.
    (2019) Teaching, learning and scaffolding in CLIL science classrooms. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(2), 151–165. 10.1075/jicb.00006.lo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.00006.lo [Google Scholar]
  45. Lu, X.
    (2010) Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474–496. 10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu [Google Scholar]
  46. Lyster, R.
    (2007) Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.18
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18 [Google Scholar]
  47. Michel, M., Kormos, J., Brunfaut, T., & Ratajczak, M.
    (2019) The role of working memory in young second language learners’ written performances. Journal of Second Language Writing, 451, 31–45. 10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  48. Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L.
    (2008) Balancing communication and grammar in beginning-level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 11–37. 10.1177/1362168807084492
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807084492 [Google Scholar]
  49. Newport, E. L.
    (2020) Children and adults as language learners: Rules, variation, and maturational change. Topics in Cognitive Science, 121, 153–169. 10.1111/tops.12416
     https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12416 [Google Scholar]
  50. Nielson, K. B., & DeKeyser, R.
    (2019) Working memory and planning time as predictors of fluency and accuracy. Journal of Second Language Studies, 21, 281–316.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
    (2009) Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555–578. 10.1093/applin/amp044
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp044 [Google Scholar]
  52. Park, S.
    (2010) The influence of pre-task instructions and pre-task planning on focus on form during Korean EFL task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research, 141, 9–26. 10.1177/1362168809346491
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809346491 [Google Scholar]
  53. Pena, C. A., & Pladevall-Ballester, E.
    (2020) Effects of focus on form on primary CLIL students’ foreign language performance in task-based oral interaction. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 8(1), 53–79. 10.1075/jicb.17028.alf
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.17028.alf [Google Scholar]
  54. Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L.
    (2014) How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. 10.1111/lang.12079
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079 [Google Scholar]
  55. Reineman, J.
    (2002) Using the first language in second language instruction. TESL EJ Forum (online). Available athttps://www.tesl-ej.org/ej20/f1.html
  56. Robinson, P.
    (2001) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.287–318). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. (2011) Task based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61(1), 1–36. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00641.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x [Google Scholar]
  58. Roquet, H., & Pérez-Vidal, C.
    (2017) Do productive skills improve in content and language integrated learning contexts? The case of writing. Applied Linguistics, 38(4), 489–511. 10.1093/applin/amv050
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv050 [Google Scholar]
  59. Sangarun, J.
    (2005) The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning. InR. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.111–142). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.11.08san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.08san [Google Scholar]
  60. Schleppegrell, M. J.
    (2004) The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Routledge. 10.4324/9781410610317
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610317 [Google Scholar]
  61. Segura, M., Roquet, H., & Pérez-Vidal, C.
    (2021) The effects of a CLIL programme on linguistic progress at two different points in time. Journal of Language and Education, 7(1), 171–189. 10.17323/jle.2021.10981
     https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2021.10981 [Google Scholar]
  62. Skehan, P.
    (2014) Processing perspectives on task performance. John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5 [Google Scholar]
  63. Skehan, P., Bui, G., Wang, Z., & Shum, S.
    (2024) Re-examining accuracy measures in second language task-based spoken performance. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Advance online publication. 10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100098
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100098 [Google Scholar]
  64. Skehan, P. & Foster, P.
    (2005) Strategic and on-line planning: The influence of surprise information and task time on second language performance. InR. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.193–216). 10.1075/lllt.11.12ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.12ske [Google Scholar]
  65. Tedick, D. J., & Lyster, R.
    (2020) Scaffolding language development in immersion and dual language classrooms. Routledge. 10.4324/9780429428319
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429428319 [Google Scholar]
  66. Wang, Z.
    (2014) On-line time pressure manipulations: L2 speaking performance under five types of planning and repetition conditions. InP. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp.27–62). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.5.02wan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.02wan [Google Scholar]
  67. Weinburgh, M., Silva, C., Smith, K. H., Groulx, J., & Nettles, J.
    (2014) The intersection of inquiry-based science and language: Preparing teachers for ELL classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(5), 519–541. 10.1007/s10972‑014‑9389‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9389-9 [Google Scholar]
  68. Yuan, F., & Ellis, R.
    (2003) The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1–27. 10.1093/applin/24.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe
Loading
Pre-task planning in CLIL classrooms
Language Teaching for Young Learners 8, 59 (2026); https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe
/content/journals/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe
/content/journals/10.1075/ltyl.25001.khe
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): CLIL; guided planning; planning language; unguided planning

Most Cited

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