Impact of Task Repetition on Comprehension, Recall, and Retention of Tense Accuracy of Different Levels of Proficiency: Adults and Children
محورهای موضوعی : Applied Linguistics
1 - Kerrman Ministry of Education, Department of English Language, Kahnooj, Kerman, Iran
کلید واژه: comprehension, task repetition, retention, recall, Tense Accuracy,
چکیده مقاله :
The present study investigated the effect of task repetition as a type of task planning on the comprehension, recall and retention of the target English tenses among the EFL learners. In addition, this study aimed at exploring the defining roles of learners' age and proficiency level with regard to the results of task repetition. To do this, two age groups of female participants (37 adult learners and 38 young learners) which were selected according to purposive sampling procedure took part in this study. The instruments which were employed included proficiency test and grammar test. A researcher made test of grammar which was piloted and whose reliability was confirmed via KR-21 (.81), used as the pretest and posttest of the study. Finally, the data were analyzed using SPSS software and interpreted by the researcher. The obtained results revealed that the treatment adopted in this study could significantly help the learners in the young group to raise their mastery over using the English tenses. This was statistically demonstrated to be true regarding the scores obtained by the learners on the posttest. In the same line, learners' proficiency level was also found to be a determining factor regarding the effectiveness of the method. The results of the study mostly demonstrate that language learning is better achieved when new interesting topics are brought into students’ class to be taught with their class materials.
The present study investigated the effect of task repetition as a type of task planning on the comprehension, recall and retention of the target English tenses among the EFL learners. In addition, this study aimed at exploring the defining roles of learners' age and proficiency level with regard to the results of task repetition. To do this, two age groups of female participants (37 adult learners and 38 young learners) which were selected according to purposive sampling procedure took part in this study. The instruments which were employed included proficiency test and grammar test. A researcher made test of grammar which was piloted and whose reliability was confirmed via KR-21 (.81), used as the pretest and posttest of the study. Finally, the data were analyzed using SPSS software and interpreted by the researcher. The obtained results revealed that the treatment adopted in this study could significantly help the learners in the young group to raise their mastery over using the English tenses. This was statistically demonstrated to be true regarding the scores obtained by the learners on the posttest. In the same line, learners' proficiency level was also found to be a determining factor regarding the effectiveness of the method. The results of the study mostly demonstrate that language learning is better achieved when new interesting topics are brought into students’ class to be taught with their class materials.
Agurtzane, A. (2015). Task-modality and L1 use in EFL oral interaction. Language Teaching Research 2015, 19(5) 550 –571.
Ahmadian, M. & Tavakoli, M. (2011). The effects of simultaneous use of careful planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners‟ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35-59.
Ahmadian, M., Tavakoli, M., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2015). The combined effects of online planning and task structure on complexity, accuracy and fluency of L2 speech. The Language Learning Journal, 43(1), 41-56.
Al-Mekhlafi, A. & Nagaratgam, R. (2011). Difficulties in teaching grammar in an EFL context. International Journal of Instruction, Vol.4, e-ISSN: 1308-1470.
Amiryousefi, M. (2016). The differential effects of two types of task repetition on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency in computer-mediated L2 written production: a focus on computer anxiety. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29, 1050-1066.
Anderson, J. (1993). Is a communicative approach practical for teaching English in China? Pros and cons. System, 21, 471-480.
Asgari, M. (2012). Integrating Current Issues of Interest into Class Materials in Teaching Reading Comprehension. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2 (5)5299-5308.
Berardo, S. A. (2006). The use of authentic materials in the teaching of reading. The Reading Matrix, 6(2).
Bui, G., Skehan, P., & Wang, Z. (2018). Task condition effects on advanced level foreign language performance. The handbook of advanced proficiency in second language acquisition, 219-237.
Burgess, J. and Etherington, S. (2002). Focus on grammatical form: explicit or implicit? System, 30, 433-458.
Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language in M. Bygate, P.Skehan, and M. Swain (Eds.). Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Harlow: Longman.
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing. Harlow: 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. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. pp: 37-74.
Bygate, M. (2007). Linking empirical research to the development of language pedagogy: Case of task repetition. Paper Presented at the Language Learning Pedagogy Research Group, Lancaster University, UK.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Techniques and Resources in Teaching Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Research methods in applied linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Eisenstein_ Ebsworth, M. and Schweers, C. (1997). What researchers say and practitioners do: Perspectives on conscious grammar instruction in ESL classroom. Applied language learning, 8, 237-260.
Ellis, R. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjaming.
Ellis, R., (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gass, M., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M., & Ferndandez-Garcia, M. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49, 549-581.
Hawkes, M. L. (2011). Effects of task repetition on learner motivation. In A. M. Stoke (Ed.), JALT 2009 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.
Hunter, A. M. (2017). Fluency development in the ESL classroom: The impact of immediate task repetition and procedural repetition on learners’ oral fluency. Ann-Marie Hunter.
Jung, S. (2013). The effect of task repetition and corrective feedback in L2 writing: a pilot study. MSU Working Papers in SLS, 4, 24-38.
Kafipour. R., Mahmoudi, E. & Khojasteh, L. (2018). The effect of task-based language teaching on analytic writing in EFL classrooms. Cogent Education, 5, 1496627.
Knox, J. (2007). Foreign Eyes on Thailand: An ESP Project for EFL Learners. Planning a Teaching Creatively Within a Required Curriculum. TESOL Inc.
Laniro, S (2007). Authentic Materials Final. Professional Development Fact Sheet, No. 1. Retrieved www.calpro online.org/documents/AuthenticMaterialsFinal.pdf/. On September 1, 2011.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1992). A nonhierarchical relationship between grammar and communication. Part I: Theoretical and methodological considerations.
Leaver, B. L., & Willis, J. R. (2004). Task-based instruction in foreign language education: practices and programs. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press.
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In de Bot, K., R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch (Eds.), foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp.39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Oura, G.K. (2001). Authentic Task-Based Materials: Bringing the Real World into the Classroom. Sophia Junior College Faculty Bulletin 21, 65-84.
Rao, Z. (2002). Chinese students’ perceptions of communicative and non-communicative activities in EFL classroom. System, 30, 85-105.
Richard, J.C. & Theodore, S.R. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sakui, K., & Gaies, S. J. (1999). Investigating Japanese learners’ beliefs about language learning. System, 27, 473-492.
Sample, E., & Michel, M. (2015). An exploratory study into trade-off effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on young learners’ oral task repetition. TESL Canada Journal, 31, 23.
Sarac, H. (2018). Completing the Task Procedure or Focusing on Form: Contextualizing Grammar Instruction via Task-Based Teaching. Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology.
Sato, K., & Kleinsasser, R. C. (1999). Communicative language teaching (CLT): Practical understanding. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 494-517.
Savignon, S. J., & Wang, C. (2003). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts: Learner attitudes and perceptions. IRAL, 41, 223-249.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and Options in English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass, & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Van de Guchte, M., Braaksma, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Bimmel, P. (2016). Focus on form through task repetition in TBLT. Language Teaching Research, 20 (3), 300-320.
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Grammar and nonsense and learning. In H. G. Widdowson, Aspects of language teaching, pp. 79-98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yildiz, M. & Senel, M. (2017). Teaching Grammar through Task-Based Language Teaching to Young EFL Learners. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal Volume 17, Number 2, September 2017.
