The Effect of 4/3/2 Technique on Iranian EFL Learners’ Speaking Fluency: The Moderating Role of Working Memory

محورهای موضوعی : language teaching

Hossein Kargar Behbahani ¹ , Ehsan Namaziandost ² , Malihe YarAhmadi ³

1 - PhD Student in TEFL, Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2 - PhD in Applied Linguistics (TEFL); Department of General Courses, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
3 - PhD Student in TEFL; Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

تاریخ دریافت : 1403/02/30 تاریخ پذیرش : 1403/05/14 تاریخ انتشار : 1403/06/20

کلید واژه: 4/3/2 Technique, Communication Skills, Individual Differences, Speaking Fluency, Working Memory,

چکیده مقاله :

This study examines the effect of the 4/3/2 technique on Iranian EFL learners' speaking fluency while also investigating the moderating role of working memory (WM). The study involved sixty EFL learners attending a language institute in Shiraz. The participants, aged 14 to 18, all shared Persian as their first language and had pre-intermediate proficiency in English. A pretest-posttest control group design was employed, with participants randomized into experimental and control groups. The 4/3/2 technique was implemented in the experimental group (EG), where learners performed a monologue task thrice, each under increasing time constraints. The control group (CG) received teacher-fronted sessions. Pre- and post-test measures of L2 oral fluency were collected using syllables per minute, with WM span assessed using a reading-span test. The results demonstrated a significant improvement in oral fluency in the EG compared to the CG. Furthermore, learners with higher WM demonstrated greater gains in fluency following the intervention. The findings suggest that the 4/3/2 technique holds promise for enhancing speaking fluency in EFL learners, with individual differences in WM span influencing the effectiveness of the intervention. These findings have implications for language teaching pedagogy and underscore the importance of considering cognitive factors in language learning interventions. The implications of this study extend to various stakeholders in language education, including language teachers, learners, materials developers, syllabus designers, policymakers, and teacher educators. By integrating these insights into language instruction and teacher training programs, educators and policymakers can work towards fostering more effective and engaging language learning experiences for learners

چکیده انگلیسی:

منابع و مأخذ:

Abu-Rabia, S. (2003). The influence of working memory on reading and creative writing processes in a second language. Educational Psychology, 23(2), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410303227
Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383329
Andringa, S., Olsthoorn, N., van Beuningen, C., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. (2012). Determinants of success in native and non-native listening comprehension: An individual differences approach. Language Learning, 62(S2), 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00706.x
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556-559. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1736359
Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(10), 829-839. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1201
Baddeley, A. (2017). Modularity, working memory and language acquisition. Second Language Research, 33, 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658317709852
Benati, A. G. (2023). The effects of structured input and working memory on the acquisition of English causative forms. Ampersand, 10, 100113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2023.100113
Boers, F. (2014). A reappraisal of the 4/3/2 activity. RELC Journal, 45(3), 221-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214546964
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H., & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 245-261. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr195oa
Bui, T. N. (2020). Revisiting the impact of 4/3/2 and 3/3/3 tasks on learners’ speaking performance and development: A learner’s perspective. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(4), 1515-1523.
Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Longman.
Bygate, M. & Samuda, V. (2005). Integrative planning through the use of task repetition. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language (pp. 37–74). John Benjamins.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Snow, M. A. (Eds.). (2014). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed.). Heinle Cengage Learning.
Crossley, S. A., & Kim, Y. (2019). Text integration and speaking proficiency: Linguistic, individual differences, and strategy use considerations. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(2), 217-235. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1628239
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(4), 450-466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(4), 422-433. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214546
De Jong, N., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61(2), 533-568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00620.x
Foster, P. (2020). Oral fluency in a second language: A research agenda for the next ten years. Language Teaching, 53(4), 446-461. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482000018X
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M. J., & Fernández-García, M. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49(4), 549–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00102
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100010457
Kargar Behbahani, H., & Rashidi, N. (2023). Incidental vocabulary acquisition through watching subtitled movies: The mediating role of working memory capacity. Eurasian Journal of Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, 3(2).
Kargar Behbahani, H., & Razmjoo, S. A. (2023). The contribution of working memory and language proficiency to lexical gain: Insights from the involvement load hypothesis. Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills), 42(3), 117-146. https://doi.org/10.22099/tesl.2023.48255.3220
Kormos, J., & Trebits, A. (2011). Working memory capacity and narrative task performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 267–289). John Benjamins.
Lambert, C., Kormos, J., & Minn, D. (2016). Task repetition and second language speech processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(1), 167–196. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000085
Leeming, P., & Harris, J. (2020). Expanding on Willis’ TBL framework: The integrated input output framework. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(1), 215-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2020.17. 1.13.215
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press.
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861-883. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2
Mackey, A., Philp, J., Fujii, A., Egi, T., & Tatsumi, T. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 181–208). Benjamins.
Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17(3), 377–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(89)90010-9
Nation, P. (2007). The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 2-13. https://doi.org/10.2167/illt039.0
Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge.
Rossiter, M. J., Derwing, T. M., Manimtim, L. G., & Thomson, R. I. (2010). Oral fluency: The neglected component in the communicative language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(4), 583-606. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.66.4.583
Segalowitz, N. (2010). The cognitive bases of second language fluency (1st ed.). Routledge.
Shahnazari, M. (2013). The development of a Persian reading span test for the measure of L1 Persian EFL learners’ working memory capacity. Applied Research on English Language, 2(2), 107-116. https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2013.15473
Sun, Z., Lin, C. H., You, J., Shen, H. J., Qi, S., & Luo, L. (2017). Improving the English-speaking skills of young learners through mobile social networking. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(3-4), 304-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1308384
Tavakoli, P., & Hunter, A. M. (2018). Is fluency being ‘neglected’ in the classroom? Teacher understanding of fluency and related classroom practices. Language Teaching Research, 22(3), 330-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817708462
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. 239-273). Benjamins.
Tavakoli, P., & Uchihara, T. (2020). To what extent are multiword sequences associated with oral fluency? Language Learning, 70(2), 506-547. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12384
Thai, C., & Boers, F. (2016). Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 369-393. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.232
Tran, M. N., & Saito, K. (2024). Effects of the 4/3/2 activity revisited: Extending Boers (2014) and Thai & Boers (2016). Language Teaching Research, 28(2), 326-345. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168821994136
Tsou, W. (2005). Improving speaking skills through instruction in oral classroom participation. Foreign Language Annals, 38(1), 46-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02452.x
Vandergrift, L., & Baker, S. (2015). Learner variables in second language listening comprehension: An exploratory path analysis. Language Learning, 65, 390–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12105
Wood, D. (2009). Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 39-57. Retrieved from https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19898
Wood, D. (2015). Fundamentals of formulaic language: An introduction. Bloomsbury.

اشتراک گذاری

آدرس مقاله

The Effect of 4/3/2 Technique on Iranian EFL Learners’ Speaking Fluency: The Moderating Role of Working Memory

سکوی نشر دانش

پیوندهای سایت

مراکز مرتبط

پشتیبانی

صفحات رسمی