The Effect of Task Type and Pre-task Planning Condition on the Accuracy of Intermediate EFL Learners' Writing Performance

Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice

مقاله 2، دوره 5، شماره 10، مرداد 2012، صفحه 36-60   

نوع مقاله: Research Paper

نویسندگان

Seyeed Mohammad Alavi¹؛ Narjes Ashari Tabar^{* 2}

¹Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literature, Universtiy of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

²Department of English, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده

Task-based language teaching, which requires learners to transact tasks resembling their real life language needs, demands language learners to perform planning at different stages of their learning. Since various types of tasks can be used in task-based instruction, the present study examined the effect of task types and various participatory structures during pre-task planning on the quality of learners' writing performance, (i.e., accuracy). Towards this end, 120 intermediate EFL students were randomly assigned to 3 experimental groups and one control group. While the experimental groups were subjected to different pre-task planning conditions, (i.e., individual, pair, and group), the control group performed tasks without any planning. During the treatment, they experienced task modeling, presentation and completion. A factorial design was followed in the present study, and the collected data were analyzed through ANOVAs that revealed task type and pre-task planning condition influenced the writing accuracy of the participants in a way that resulted in greater accuracy in the decision-making task in the experimental groups, thereby ensuring the effectiveness of the treatment in mitigating the long-standing problem of EFL learners in achieving higher levels of accuracy when a specific task type is concerned.

کلیدواژه‌ها

Task Type؛ Pre-task Planning Condition؛ Accuracy؛ writing performance؛ Strategic Planning؛ Task complexity

مراجع

Crookes, G., & Gass, S. M. (1993). Tasks in a pedagogic context: Integrating theory and practice. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.  

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task-based performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task  performance in a second language (pp. 3-34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins B.V. Publication.         

Ellis, R. (2006). The methodology of task-based teaching. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 36-53.

 Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3), 299-323.

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1999). The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, 3(3), 215-247.     

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2000). SPSS for windows step by step (2nd edition). New York: Pearson Education Company.

Guerrero, R. G. (2005). Task complexity and L2 narrative oral production. Unpublished doctoral  dissertation, University of Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved on May 14, 2011, from http://www. tesisenxaraxa.net

Heaton, J. B. (1975). Beginning composition through pictures. London: Longman.

Jafari, S. (2006). The effects of planning condition, task structure, and gender on different aspects of Iranian intermediate EFL learners' performance (fluency, accuracy, complexity,  and lexical density) in written tasks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Johnson, K. & Johnson, H. (1999). Encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Keating, G. D. (2008). Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: The involvement load hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 365-386.  

Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). Cognitive task complexity and linguistic performance in French L2 writing. In M. P. G. Mayo (Ed.),Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 117-135). Clevedon: Multilingual matters Ltd.     

Laufer, B. & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The  construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.

Malmir, A. (2008). The effect of task-based approach on the Iranian advanced EFL learners vs.  expository writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Allame Tabataba'i University, Tehran,  Iran.

Mofidi, A. (2005). The relationship between instrumental and integrative motivation of students  and their performance on planned and unplanned speaking tasks. Unpublished master's thesis, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.   

Ojima, M. (2006). Concept-mapping as pre-task planning: A case study of three Japanese ESL writers. System, 34, 566-585.  

Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2006). The impact of planning time on children's task-based interactions. System, 34, 547-565.

 Rahmanian, M. (2004).The relationship between pre-task and on-line planning and fluency,  accuracy and complexity of Iranian EFL students production in written narrative and descriptive tasks. Unpublished master's thesis, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.    

Rezazadeh, M., Tavakoli, M., & Eslami Rasekh, A. (2011). The role of task type in foreign language written production: focusing on fluency, complexity, and accuracy [Electronic  version]. International Education Studies, 4(2), 169-176.

Richards, J. C., &Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, Th. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Roohi, A. (2006). Striking an effective balance between accuracy and fluency in task-based  teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Samuda, V., & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Seifoori, Z. (2009). The impact of metacognitive strategies-based training and levels of planning  on accuracy, complexity, and fluency of focused task-based oral Performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Campus, Tehran, Iran.

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

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 185- 211.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93-120.

Tavakoli, P. (2009). Assessing L2 task performance: Understanding effects of task design. System, 37, 482-495.

Tuan, T. A., & Neomy, S. (2007). Investigating group planning in preparation for oral presentations in an EFL class in Vietnam. RELC, 38(1), 104-124.

Van Avermaet, P. and Gysen, S. (2006).  From needs to tasks: Language learning needs in a task-based approach. In K. Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 17-46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-based language teaching in a nutshell. In K. Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 1-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445-466.

Willis, J. (1996). A flexible framework for task-based learning. In J. Willis and D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 52-62). Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann.

Yuan, F. & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and online planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1-27.