It is the cache of ${baseHref}. It is a snapshot of the page. The current page could have changed in the meantime.
Tip: To quickly find your search term on this page, press Ctrl+F or ⌘-F (Mac) and use the find bar.

Planning Time, Strategy Use, and Written Task Production in a Pedagogic vs. a Testing Context | Meraji | Journal of Language Teaching and Research
Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol 2, No 2 (2011), 338-352, Mar 2011
doi:10.4304/jltr.2.2.338-352

Planning Time, Strategy Use, and Written Task Production in a Pedagogic vs. a Testing Context

Seyed Reza Meraji

Abstract


As there has been little attempt to delve into performance differentials occasioned as a function of planning time in pedagogic versus testing contexts, the present study, taking up a mixed methods approach, addressed the effects of pre-task planning on the written output of intermediate EFL learners under four conditions: 1) no planning in a pedagogic context, 2) pre-task planning in a pedagogic context, 3) no planning in a testing context, and 4) pre-task planning in a testing context. Results showed that provision of pre-task planning time fostered accuracy, syntactic complexity, and fluency in the pedagogic context. In the testing context, also, more accurate, syntactically complex, and fluent output was generated by planners compared to no-planners. Finally, the data gleaned through the interviews showed that metacognitive and cognitive strategies were the most used strategies and that no significant difference existed between planners in the two contexts in terms of strategy use.


Keywords


pre-task planning; accuracy; complexity; fluency; metacognitive strategies; cognitive strategies

References


Alavi, S. M. (2005). On the adequacy of verbal protocols in examining an underlying construct of a test. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31, 1–26.
doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.02.004

Anderson, J. (1983). Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Chamot, A., O’Malley, J. M., Küpper, L., & Impink-Hernandez, M. V. (1987). A study of learning strategies in foreign language Instruction: First year report. Rosslyn, VA: InterAmerican Research Associates.

Cohen, A. D. (1994). Verbal report on learning strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 678–682.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.

Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(4), 367–383.
doi:10.1017/S0272263100008391

Dörnyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 55–85.
doi:10.2307/3587805

Elder, C., & Iwashita, N. (2005). Planning for test performance: Does it make a difference?. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 219–238.

Ellis, R (Ed.). (2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in second Language acquisition, 26, 59–84.
doi:10.1017/S0272263104261034

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–323.
doi:10.1017/S0272263100015047

Fowler, W. S. & Coe, N. (1976). Nelson English language texts. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd.

Gilabert, R. (2004). Task complexity and L2 narrative oral production. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Barcelona.

Gilabert, R. (2007). The simultaneous manipulation of task complexity along planning time and [+/- Here-and-Now]: Effects on L2 oral production. In M. del Pilar Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters, 44–68.

Givon, T. (1985). Function, structure, and language acquisition. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1008–1025.

Huitt, W. (2003). The information processing approach. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cogsys/infoproc.html (accessed 20, 9, 2008).

Ishikawa, T. (2007). The effect of manipulating task complexity along the [+/- Here-and-Now] dimension on L2 written narrative discourse. In M. del Pilar Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters, 136–156.

Iwashita, N., McNamara, T., & Elder, C. (2001). Can we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information-processing approach to task design. Language Learning, 51(3), 401-436.
doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00160

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. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 143–164.

Malvern, D., Richards, B., Chipere, N., & Duran, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
doi:10.1057/9780230511804

Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 52–83.
doi:10.1017/S0272263198001041

O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1996). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. New York: the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Kupper, L, & Russo, R. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Language Learning, 35, 21–46.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1985.tb01013.x

Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 Oral Performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109–148.
doi:10.1017/S0272263199001047

Ortega, L. (2005). What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 77–109.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning, 47, 101–143.
doi:10.1111/0023-8333.31997003

Richards, J., Platt, J., & Weber, H. (1985). Longman dictionary of applied linguistics. London: Longman.

Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22 (1), 27–57.
doi:10.1093/applin/22.1.27

Robinson, P. Ting, S. C. C & Urwin, J. (1996). Three dimensions of second language task complexity. The University of Queensland Working Papers in Language and Linguistics,1 (1), 16–32.

Rouhi, A. & Marefat, H. (2006). Planning time effect on fluency, complexity and accuracy of L2 output. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Khareji, 27, 123–141.

Salvador, J. (1991). Humano se nace. Barcelona: Lumen.

Sangarun, J. (2005). The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 111–141.

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

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. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 167–185.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1 (3), 185–211.
doi:10.1177/136216889700100302

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49 (1), 93–120.
doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00071

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and Tasks. In P. Robinson. (Ed.) Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 183–205.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2005). Strategic and on-line planning: The influence of surprise information and task time on second language performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 193–216.

Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 239–273.

VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52 (4), 755–803.
doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00203

Wendel, J. (1997). Planning and second language narrative production. Ph.D. dissertation, Temple University.

Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14 (1), 85–106.
doi:10.1177/026553229701400105

Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.

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.
doi:10.1093/applin/24.1.1


Full Text: PDF


Journal of Language Teaching and Research (JLTR, ISSN 1798-4769)

Copyright @ 2006-2014 by ACADEMY PUBLISHER – All rights reserved.