The Effect of Task Complexity and Strategic Planning Time on Writing Accuracy: A Case Study of Undergraduate Students at AMU
International Journal of Language and Linguistics
Volume 6, Issue 1, January 2018, Pages: 1-7
Received: Oct. 16, 2017; Accepted: Oct. 23, 2017; Published: Dec. 14, 2017
Views 1261      Downloads 95
Author
Malek Ahmad Kord, Department of English, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Tasked –Based Language Teaching has widely provided learners some opportunities to learn spoken and written language through learning activities in the major of English Language Teaching (ELT). A growing body of research on the effects of task complexity on written productions, the present study explored the impacts of task complexity and strategic planning time on ESL learners’ written performance in terms of accuracy. To this end, forty-five undergraduate English Language Learners, both male and female (within the age range of 17-25) have been recruited from Aligarh Muslim University. Two tasks were chosen as instruments for data collection. One is an argumentative essay and the other is a narrative task to measure the accuracy of the participants’ written production, under different planning conditions (pre-task planning, within-task planning, and no planning). One-way MANOVA was employed as the statistical means of analysis. The findings revealed a significant effect of task complexity under different planning conditions on Error-free clauses (the percentage of clauses that do not contain any errors) and correct verb forms (the percentage of accurately used verbs in terms of tense, aspect, modality, and subject-verb agreement) regarding accuracy.
Keywords
Task-Based Language Teaching, Task Complexity, Strategic Planning Time, Accuracy
To cite this article
Malek Ahmad Kord, The Effect of Task Complexity and Strategic Planning Time on Writing Accuracy: A Case Study of Undergraduate Students at AMU, International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Vol. 6, No. 1, 2018, pp. 1-7. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20180601.11
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Long, M. (Ed.) (2007). Problems in SLA, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[2]
Gilabert, R. (2005). Task complexity and L2 narrative oral production. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Barcelona, Spain.
[3]
Gilabert, R. (2007). Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 215-240.
[4]
Ortega, L. (2005). What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pretask planning. In Ellis, R. (Ed.) Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[5]
Rahimpour, M. (2007). Task complexity and variation in L2 learners’ oral discourse. Working Papers in Language and Linguistics, University of Queensland, 1-9.
[6]
Rahimpour, M. (2008). Implementation of task-based approaches to language teaching. Pazhuhesh-e-Zabanha-ye Khareji Journal, University of Tehran, 41, 45-61.
[7]
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1-32.
[8]
Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2001). Task-based language learning. In R. Carter and D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 173-179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[9]
Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26 (1), 27-56.
[10]
Robinson, P. (2003). The cognition hypothesis, task design, and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21 (2), 45-105.
[11]
Robinson, P. (2006). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. P. G. Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning, (pp. 7–26). Clevdon: Multilingual Matters.
[12]
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. 239–277). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
[13]
Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P. (2008). Task design and second language performance: the effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 58 (2), 439-473.
[14]
Skehan, P. & P. Foster (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research 1: 185-211.
[15]
Skehan, P. & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49 (1), 93-120.
[16]
Rahimpour, M. (2010). Current trends on syllabus design in FL instruction. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1660-64.
[17]
Ellis, R (Ed.) (2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[18]
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[19]
Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance assessment. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 167–185). Harlow: Pearson Education Longman.
[20]
Skehan P. (2003). Task based instruction. Language Teaching 36 (1): 1–14.
[21]
Skehan, P. & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.): Cognition and Second Language Instruction. (pp. 149-187). New York NY: Cambridge University Press.
[22]
Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Ed.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). London: Longman.
[23]
Ellis, R. (1987). Inter language variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9 (1), 1-20.
[24]
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, U. K.: Oxford University Press.
[25]
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 12-20.
[26]
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of c, Fluency, and accuracy complexity in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied linguistics, 27, 590-619.
[27]
Ong, J. & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second language Writing, 19, 218-233.
[28]
Ong, J. & Zhang, L. J. (2013). Effects of the manipulation of cognitive processes on EFL writers’ text quality. TESOL quarterly, 47 (2), 375-397.
[29]
Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109-148.
[30]
Yuan, F. & R. Ellis. (2003). The effects of pre task and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics 24 (1): 1–27.
[31]
Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 19 (3), 229-246.
[32]
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[33]
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analyzing Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[34]
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22 (1), 27-57.
[35]
Robinson, P. (2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45 (3), 193-213.
[36]
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.): Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[37]
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
[38]
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquistion. Applied Linguistics 30 (4), 461-473.
[39]
Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 14: 357-385.
[40]
Ishikawa, T. (2006). The effects of task complexity and language proficiency on task- based language performance. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 3 (4), 193-225.
[41]
Hosseini, P. & Rahimpour, M. (2010). The Impact of Task Complexity on L2 Learners' Written Narratives, CCSE, 3 (3), 198-205.
[42]
Salimi, A. & Dadashpour, S. (2012b). Task Complexity and Language Production Dilemmas (Robinson's Cognition Hypothesis vs. Skehan's Trade-off Model). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 643-652.
[43]
Mehrang, F. & Rahimpour, M. (2010). The impact of task structure and planning conditions on oral performance of EFL learners. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3678-3686.
[44]
Long, M. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77-99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
[45]
Givon, T. (1989). Mind, code, and context. essays in pragmatics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[46]
Van Patten, B. (1990). Attending to content and form in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301.
[47]
Seedhouse, P. (1999). ‘Task-based interaction’. ELT Journal 53: 149–156.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
548 FASHION AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10018
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-688-8931