Сложность письменных заданий, условие задачи и эффективность обратной связи
Аннотация
Введение. Обучение языку, основанное на описании задач (ОЯООЗ), по-прежнему привлекает значительный интерес со стороны учителей второго языка и исследователей, отчасти из-за нерешенных проблем последовательности заданий и сложности задач. Более того, несмотря на растущее внимание к письму на современном этапе эволюции ОЯООЗ, взаимодействие сложности задач и корректирующей обратной связи при написании, успеваемость изучающих язык изучена недостаточно хорошо
Цель. Чтобы восполнить этот пробел в исследованиях, целью настоящего исследования было изучение роли сложности задачи и ее условий в получении учащимися корректирующей обратной связи во время письма на втором языке.
Методы. В этом исследовании была принята схема предварительного тестирования - немедленного заключительного тестирования - отложенного заключительного тестирования. Участниками исследования были 114 изучающих английский как иностранный язык, случайным образом распределенных по одной из пяти групп: четыре экспериментальные группы и контрольная группа. Четыре экспериментальные группы различались по (а) выполнению простой или сложной версии задания, (б) выполнению ими письменного задания индивидуально или совместно. Они получили обратную связь о своем написании в ходе трех семестров.
Результаты. Статистический анализ показал, что условие задания играло большую роль, чем сложность задания, в лингвистической успеваемости изучающих язык, которые получали отзывы о своем письме.
Выводы. Полученные результаты подтверждают мнение о том, что выбор соответствующих уровней сложности заданий и подходящих условий их выполнения наряду с предоставлением корректирующей обратной связи улучшает различные аспекты письменной успеваемости изучающих язык.
Скачивания
Литература
Baralt, M. (2013). The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face-to-face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 689-725. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000429
Baralt, M., Gilabert, R., & Robinson, P. (2014). An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed second language learning. In M. Baralt, R. Gilabert, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 1-34). Bloomsbury. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472593665.ch-001
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 102-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
Byrnes, H., & Manchón, R. M. (2014). Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing: An introduction. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 1-23). John Benjamins.
Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task-based performance: Theory and research. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 1-34). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.03ell
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2005). The effects of careful within-task planning on oral and written performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 167-192). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.11ell
Fernández Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002
Givón, T. (1985). Function, structure, and language acquisition. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The cross-linguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 1008-1025). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Halford, G. S., Cowan, N., & Andrews, G. (2007). Separating cognitive capacity from knowledge: A new hypothesis. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 236-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.04.001
Ishikawa, T. (2007). The effect of manipulating task complexity along the [+/-Here-and-Now] dimension on L2 written narrative discourse. In M. P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 157-176). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599286-010
Johnson, M. D. (2017). Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 37, 13-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.06.001
Kang, S., & Lee, J. (2019). Are two heads always better than one? The effects of collaborative planning on L2 writing in relation to task complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 61-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.08.001
Kassim, A., & Luan, N. (2014). The roles of collaborative dialogue in enhancing written corrective feedback efficacy. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 10, 16-30. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168819831406.
Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57-71). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kim, Y., & Emeliyanova, L. (2019). The effects of written corrective feedback on the accuracy of L2 writing: Comparing collaborative and individual revision behavior. Language Teaching Research. 1-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819831406
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, R. (2008). Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(1), 48-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.08.003
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic performance in L2 writing and speaking: The effect of mode. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 91-104). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.09ch4
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (1992). An introduction to second language acquisition research. Longman.
Liu, Q., & Brown, D. (2015). Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Academic Press.
Long, M. H. (2000). Focus on form in task-based language teaching. In R. Lambert & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and pedagogy: Essays in honor of A. Ronald Walton (pp. 179-192). Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.96.11lon
Manchón, R.M. (2014). The internal dimension of tasks: The interaction between task factors and learner factors in bringing about learning through writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 27-53). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.7.02man
Michel, M. (2011). Effects of task complexity and interaction on L2 performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 141-174). John Benjamins.
Mujtaba, S. M., Reynolds, B. L., Parkash, R., & Singh, M. K. M. (2021). Individual and collaborative processing of written corrective feedback affects second language writing accuracy and revision. Assessing Writing, 50, 100566. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100566
Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford University Press.
Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2018). Writing task complexity, students' motivational beliefs, anxiety and their writing production in English as a second language. Reading and Writing, 32(3), 761-786. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9887-9
Révész, A. (2009). Task complexity, focus on form, and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 437-470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109090366
Révész, A., & Han, Z. ( 2006 ). Task content familiarity, task type, and efficacy of recasts. Language Awareness, 3, 160 -179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2167/la401.0
Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Hama, M. (2014). The effects of task complexity and input frequency on the acquisition of the past counterfactual construction through recasts. Language Learning, 64(3), 615-650. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12061
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 285-316). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.1.12tas
Robinson, P. (2003). The cognition hypothesis, task design, and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21(2), 45-105.
Robinson, P. (2007). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. P. Garcia-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language settings (pp. 7-26). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599286-004
Robinson, P. (2009). Syllabus design. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language teaching (pp. 294 -310). Blackwell.
Robinson, P. (2011). Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61(S1), 1-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis, and second language learning and performance.International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 161-176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.007
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
Shehadeh, A. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 286-305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.
Skehan, P. (2009). Modeling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, uency and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
Skehan, P. (2014). The context for researching a processing perspective on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 1-26). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.01ske
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93-120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00071
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students' reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 153-173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms: New perspectives on language and education. Multilingual Matters.
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners' processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 303-334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990532
Swain, M. (1985).Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensive output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Newbury House.
Tavakoli, M., & Rezazadeh, M. (2014). Individual and collaborative planning conditions: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 argumentative writing. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 5(4), 85-110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2014.1857
Vahdat, S., & Daneshkhah, N. (2019).Comparison of the effects of written corrective feedback and task-complexity manipulation on the grammatical accuracy of EFL learners' writing. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 37(4), 167-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2019.33549.2688
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(3), 287-301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009177
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford University Press.
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. Language Testing, 26, 445-466. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0265532209104670.
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2012). What role for collaboration in writing and writing feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 364-374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.005
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. University of Hawaii Press.
Zhan, J., Sun, Q., & Zhang, L. J. (2021). Effects of manipulating writing task complexity on learners' performance in completing vocabulary and syntactic tasks. Language Teaching Research, 1-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211024360
Copyright (c) 2022 Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
Авторы, публикующие статьи в журнале, соглашаются с условиями политики авторских прав.
