VIE-VENT

The present research observes learners in the three modes doing two language learning tasks. Researchers from both cognitive and sociocultural perspectives on SLA have found that tasks themselves may influence the quantity and focus of LREs produced. In some cases, increasing task complexity, that is, the number of cognitive resources required to complete the task (Robinson 2001), has been found to be associated with a greater number of LREs, greater focus on form, and better learning outcomes (Révesz 2011; Kim 2012; Baralt 2014). A number of other features of task design have also been found to interact in different ways that affect the quantity, focus and resolution or LREs, and learning associated with these. The following section will discuss these features and effects in order to justify decisions regarding the tasks employed in the present study.

García Mayo (2002a) compared text reconstruction, in which learners inserted into a gapped text appropriate function words (e.g. articles and prepositions), linking words and inflectional morphemes, with dictogloss (Wajnryb 1990), in which learners heard a text read out loud at normal speed, jotted down key ideas, and then collaboratively reconstructed the text, which was then compared to the original. The

51

author found that text reconstruction generated eight times as many LREs as dictogloss (96 versus 12), and that almost all the LREs observed were grammatical. The author suggests that the large difference in LREs produced may be a result of the difference in task stimulus and task demands. In dictogloss, the auditory stimulus meant that there was an initial task of understanding the spoken input, followed by an attempt to produce a cohesive extended text. Learners may therefore have focussed on discourse features beyond the sentence level rather than issues of form that typically arise in grammatical and lexical LREs. In text reconstruction, on the other hand, the stimulus was written down, and this written input appeared to allow learners to discuss issues of form while completing the task. The tasks also practised different linguistic features: LREs produced in text reconstruction were related to the language features targeted by the task, whereas in dictogloss, LREs focussed on aspects of constructing a coherent paragraph.

A separate study (García Mayo 2002b) again found dictogloss to produce the lowest number of LREs when compared with four other tasks: cloze, multiple choice, text reconstruction and text editing. While the rest of the activities generated learner talk and reflection on language, and involved learners in hypothesis testing, dictogloss again appeared to suffer from the oral stimulus (the stimuli for the other four tasks were written down), together with learners’ lack of familiarity with the task.

Storch 1998 compared the number and nature of LREs produced in four tasks (multiple choice, cloze, text reconstruction and written composition), finding that while in all tasks the number of turns was high, only the first three of these produced a high proportion (over 70%) of LRE turns compared to the total number of turns. The composition task, on the other hand, did not produce as many LREs (constituting just 28% of turns), but instead generated talk about the elaboration of ideas and planning. In a later review of LRE studies, Storch (2013) notes that meaning-focussed tasks – of which composition is an example – tend to generate fewer LREs than language- focussed tasks, and LREs in meaning-focussed tasks tend to be lexical, compared to more grammatical LREs dealing with morphosyntaxis in language-focussed tasks. However, she also notes that in meaning-focussed tasks, more LREs are correctly resolved, since they usually arise from gaps that learners themselves recognise, rather

52

than seeded forms. Solutions therefore tend to be within learners’ linguistic capabilities.

The claim that language-focussed tasks – that is, communicative tasks that provide practice in specific grammatical or lexical features –areassociated with fewer correctly resolved LREs than meaning-focussed tasks – that is, tasks that provide general communicative language practice without focussing on a specific linguistic feature – is supported by findings from Alegría de la Colina & García Mayo (2007), who compared the number and nature of LREs across three tasks (text reconstruction, a pictorial jigsaw and dictogloss). The tasks produced a high number of LREs (206, 165 and 92 respectively), and many of these were correctly resolved, from which it may be interpreted that all three task types were effective at drawing attention to form. However, while the text reconstruction produced the highest number of LREs, it also produced the highest percentage of unresolved LREs. The authors claim that text reconstruction tasks, while successful at stimulating discussion about form, may force learners to topicalise items that are beyond their ability level. In the meaning- focussed jigsaw, conversely, focus on form derived from learners’ own communicative needs, and therefore resolutions to LREs were more often within learners’ ability.

Alegría de la Colina & García Mayo (2007) also found that task type, and in particular the nature of language input in the task, conditioned LREs focus. Text reconstruction involved written input and therefore elicited LREs focused on the forms that the teacher / researcher chose to delete in the original text, a pictorial jigsaw elicited LREs focused on a wide range of linguistic features as there was no linguistic input, and dictogloss elicited LREs focused on connectors and spelling, again as there was no written input. Additionally, the number and nature of LREs may depend on the nature of the text, when input is a text. For this reason the authors advocate the use of texts on topics that are familiar to learners (maritime texts, for example, were used with maritime students) rather than the “episodic” texts used in Wajnryb (1990), the content of which EFL students may, they claim, find more difficult to retain and reconstruct.

Little research has so far explored the appropriateness of tasks to different delivery modes, although findings from Baralt (2013) suggest that differences in task complexity may make certain tasks more effective in certain modes. In her study,

53

FTF and SCMC learners were assigned one of two versions of a story retell task, one more complex than the other in that learners had to express hypotheses regarding the actions that were carried out in the story. For FTF learners, the more complex task led to more learning, as measured by multiple-choice post-tests; for SCMC learners, conversely, the less complex task led to more learning. The results therefore suggest that less complex tasks are better suited to online interaction, and the reported facilitative effects on learning of increasing task complexity (Révesz 2011; Kim 2012; Baralt 2014) may not necessarily translate from one mode to another.

To summarise, the evidence that task type affects languaging and learning in different ways has informed the decision in the present study to employ two tasks rather than one:

i) passage editing, a language-focussed task that has been claimed to draw learners’ attention to a range of language forms (Storch 1997) and lead learners to discuss and reflect on language choices and test hypotheses (García Mayo 2002b); and

ii) written composition, a meaning-focussed task that, when produced collaboratively, is effective at eliciting metatalk because it is communication-focussed but provides opportunities for emerging FonF (Swain & Lapkin 1995).

Rubrics will be written rather than spoken, given the positive impact this appears to have on task performance. The design of these tasks and further reasons for their selection will be discussed in Chapter III: Methodology.