Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance

Abstract

This paper examines the effects of planning and post-task activity on task-based performance. It is motivated by the need, given recent claims that task-based instruction has desirable pedagogic qualities, to investigate the effects of choosing different types of tasks, as well as different task implementation conditions, on the fluency, accuracy and complexity of the language which is produced when tasks are carried out. Three tasks are investigated: a personal task, a narrative task and a decision task. A 2-by-2 research design was used, with two planning conditions (10 minutes' planning time vs no planning time) and two post-task conditions (plus or minus knowledge of a post-task). Performance was assessed through the number of pauses (as a measure of fluency), the percentage of error-free clauses (to measure accuracy) and the level of subordination (as a measure of complexity). Confirming hypotheses and previous research, planning had clear effects on almost all measures. The hypothesis that foreknowledge of a post-task activity would selectively influence accuracy received only partial confirmation. Data from the present study was also related to results reported in an earlier study. This revealed that there is strong evidence of trade-off effects between the different dependent variables used, in that fluency, accuracy and complexity seem to enter into competition with one another, given the limited attentional capacities of second language users. Finally, there are indications that task characteristics interact with planning time and lead to selective improvements in particular areas. Tasks which contain clearer inherent structure, when planned, seem to favour accuracy, whereas tasks which require more on-line processing or which have complex outcomes, when planned, produce greater complexity.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brock, C. 1986: The effects of referential questions on classroom discourse . TESOL Quarterly 20: 47-59.

Brumfit, C. and Johnson, K. , editors, 1979: The communicative approach to language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bygate, M. 1996: Effects of task repetition: apprising the developing language of learners. In Willis, D. and Willis, J. , editors, Challenge and change in language teaching. London: Heinemann .

Candlin, C. 1987: Towards task-based language learning. In Candlin, C. and Murphy, D. , editors, Language learning task. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Cook, G. and Seidlehofer, B. , editors, 1995: Principle and practice in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Crookes, G. 1989: Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11: 367-83.

Ellis, R. 1987: Interlanguage variability and narrative discourse: style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9: 12-20.

Foster, P. in press: A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics.

Foster, P. and Skehan, P. 1996: The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition September 1996.

10.

Fotos, S. and Ellis, R. 1991: Communicating about grammar: a task-based approach . TESOL Quarterly 25: 605-28.

11.

Labov, W. 1972: Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press.

12.

Long, M. 1989: Task, group, and task-group interactions. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL 8: 1-26.

13.

— 1992: Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Seattle.

14.

Long, M. and Crookes, G. 1991: Three approaches to task-based syllabus design . TESOL Quarterly 26(1): 27-56.

15.

— 1993: Units of analysis in syllabus design: the case for task . In Crookes, G. and Gass, S. editors, 1993a: Tasks in a pedagogical context: integrating theory and practice. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

16.

Nunan, D. 1989: Designing tasks for the communicative classroom . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

17.

Plough, I. and Gass, S. 1993: Interlocutor and task familiarity: effects on interactional structure. In Crookes, M. and Gass, S. editors, 1993b: Tasks and language learning: integrating theory and practice. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

18.

Prabhu, N.S. 1987: Second language pedagogy. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

19.

Skehan, P. 1992: Second language acquisition strategies and task-based learning. Thames Valley University Working Papers in English Language Teaching, Volume 1, 178-208.

20.

— 1995: Analysability, accessibility, and ability for use . In Cook, G. and Seidlehofer, B. , editors, Principle and practice in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

21.

— 1996: A framework for the implementation of task based instruction . Applied Linguistics 17(1): 38-62.

22.

Swain, M. 1995: Three functions of output in second language learning . In Cook, G. and Seidlehofer, B. , editors, Principle and practice in applied linguistics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

23.

Tarone, E. 1988: Variation and interlanguage. London : Edward Arnold.

24.

Widdowson, H.G. 1989: Knowledge of language and ability for use. Applied Linguistics 10(2): 128-137.

25.

Willis, D. 1990: The lexical syllabus, London : Collins.

26.

Yule, G. , Powers, M. and Macdonald, D. 1992: The variable effects of some task-based learning procedures on L2 communicative effectiveness. Language Learning 42(2): 249-77.