Investigating the effect of task modality on the written and oral production of young EFL learners
-
M. Juncal Gutierrez-Mangado
und
María Basterrechea
Abstract
Research on task-based interaction examines learner-initiated attention to formal aspects of language (i.e., language-related episodes or LREs) and how task modality (oral or written) impacts on their incidence, nature (meaning- or form- focused), and resolution. In the light of studies attesting a relationship between LREs and L2 development (LaPierre 1994. Language output in a cooperative learning setting: Determining its effects on second language learning (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Swain and Lapkin 1998. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal 82(3). 320–337; Williams 2001. The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System 29. 325–340), it has been claimed that LREs represent second language learning in progress (Gass and Mackey 2007. Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In Bill VanPatten & Jessica Williams (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, 175–199. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum). This study compared the incidence, nature, resolution and reflection of LREs produced by 59 child learners of L3 English aged 10–12, where students in the written and oral tasks were instructed to focus on accuracy and were given the chance to edit their final production. The study also examined the correspondence between the resolution of each LRE and its occurrence on the written and oral tasks. The main results showed that while the incidence of form- and meaning-focused LREs was indeed higher in the written task, it was also the case that in the written task more non-target-like resolved LREs were reflected in the written final output than in the oral final output. This finding leads us to caution researchers and teachers in promoting the use of written collaborative tasks over oral tasks until we are in a better position to understand the effect that the reflection of non-target-like LREs in the final output may have for second-language (L2) development.
Funding source: Eusko Jaurlaritza
Award Identifier / Grant number: IT904-16
Funding source: Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
Award Identifier / Grant number: FFI2016-74950-P
Funding source: National Research Agency and European Regional Development Fund
Award Identifier / Grant number: AEI/FEDER/EU
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the school, the teachers and, more particularly, the students who took part in the project.
-
Research ethics: The Research Committee of the University of the Basque Country (CEISH-UPV/EHU) gave its approval to the project within which the research described in the present paper was carried out (see attached document).
-
Author contributions: The authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: This work was supported by grants FFI2016-74950-P (Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness), AEI/FEDER/EU (National Research Agency and European Regional Development Fund) and IT904-16 (Basque Government).
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
Instructions in tasks
Task 3 A
INV: Look, here you have some pictures describing a story. You have to work together to do two things: (1) think about a story which tells what happened in the pictures and (2) tell the story so that it can be recorded. The recording of the story will enter a competition and the best narration will win a set of glossy felt tip pens!!
It is important that you pay attention to the way you tell the story because only the best story can win the prize. So, in order to make sure that there are no mistakes, you can record the story sentence by sentence: so you describe what is happening in picture one and then you can stop the recorder yourselves, rewind it and listen to the recording. If you think there is something wrong with it, you can record it again.
Task 3B
INV: Look, here you have some pictures telling a story. You have to work together to do two things: (1) think about a story which tells what happened in the pictures and (2) write the story together. One of you will be in charge of the writing. The story will enter a competition and the best narration will win a set of glossy felt tip pens!! Make sure that there are no mistakes.
References
Adams, Rebecca. 2003. L2 output, reformulation and noticing: Implications for IL development. Language Teaching Research 7(3). 347–376. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168803LR127OA.Suche in Google Scholar
Adams, Rebecca & Lauren Ross-Feldman. 2008. Does writing influence learner attention to form? In Diane Belcher & Alan R. Hirvela (eds.), The oral-literate connection: Perspectives on L2 speaking, writing and other media interactions, 243–266. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Available at: https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/9780472032327-toc.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
Azkarai, Agurtzane. 2015. L1 use in EFL task-based interaction: A matter of gender? European Journal of Applied Linguistics 3(2). 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2014-9911.Suche in Google Scholar
Butler, Yuko Goto & Wei Zeng. 2015. Young foreign language learners’ interactional development in task-based paired assessment in their first and foreign languages: A case of English learners in China. Education 44(3). 292–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2013.813955.Suche in Google Scholar
Calzada, Asier & María del Pilar García Mayo. 2021. Effects of proficiency and collaborative work on child EFL individual dictogloss writing. Language Teaching for Young Learners 3(2). 247–275.10.1075/ltyl.20003.calSuche in Google Scholar
Cambridge University Press. 2008. Key English test. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Collins, Laura & Carmen Muñoz. 2016. The foreign language classroom: Current perspectives and future considerations. The Modern Language Journal. Special Centenary Volume 100. 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12305.Suche in Google Scholar
Cumming, Alister. 1989. Writing expertise and second language proficiency. Language Learning 39. 81–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1989.tb00592.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Cumming, Alister. 1990. Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication 7. 482–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088390007004003.Suche in Google Scholar
Donato, Richard. 1994. A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of mediation. Modern Language Journal 78(4). 453–464. https://doi.org/10.2307/328584.Suche in Google Scholar
Doughty, Catherine. 2001. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In Peter Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction, 206–257. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010Suche in Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod. 2003. Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Enever, Janet. 2018. Policy and politics in global primary English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Foster, Pauline & Peter Skehan. 1996. The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18(3). 293–323. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100015047.Suche in Google Scholar
Gallardo-del-Puerto, Francisco & María Martínez-Adrián. 2022a. Task-modality effects on young learners’ language-related episodes in collaborative dialogue. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 35(2). 480–512. https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.20020.gal.Suche in Google Scholar
Gallardo-del-Puerto, Francisco & María Martínez-Adrián. 2022b. Task modality effects on the production and elaboration of language-related episodes: A study on school children’s interactions in a foreign language. Languages 7(4). 306–321. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7040306.Suche in Google Scholar
García Mayo, María del Pilar & Agurtzane Azkarai. 2016. EFL task-based interaction: Does task modality impact on language-related episodes? In Masatoshi Sato & Susan Ballinger (eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Research agenda and pedagogical potential, 241–266. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.45.10garSuche in Google Scholar
García Mayo, María del Pilar & Ainara Imaz Agirre. 2019. Task modality and pair formation method: Their impact on patterns of interaction and LREs among EFL primary school children. System 80. 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1185799.Suche in Google Scholar
Gass, Susan & Alison Mackey. 2007. Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In Bill VanPatten & Jessica Williams (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, 175–199. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Suche in Google Scholar
Gilabert, Roger, Júlia Barón & Angels Llanes. 2009. Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners’ interaction during oral performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics 47(3–4). 367–395. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.016.Suche in Google Scholar
Granfeldt, Jonas. 2007. Speaking and writing on L2 French: Exploring effect on fluency, accuracy and complexity. In Siska Van Daele, Alex Housen, Folkert Kuiken, Michel Pierrard & Inekke Vedder (eds.), Complexity, Accuracy and fluency in second language use, learning and teaching, 87–98. Wetteren, Belgium: KVAB.Suche in Google Scholar
Hanaoka, Osamu. 2007. Output, noticing, and learning: An investigation into the role of spontaneous attention to form in a four-stage writing task. Language Teaching Research 11(4). 459–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807080963.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Youjin. 2008. The contribution of collaborative and individual tasks to the acquisition of L2 vocabulary. The Modern Language Journal 92. 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00690.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Youjin & Kim McDonough. 2008. The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research 12(2). 211–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807086288.Suche in Google Scholar
Kuiken, Folkert & Ineke Vedder. 2012. Speaking and writing tasks and their effects on second language performance. In Alison Mackey & Susan Gass (eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition, 364–377. New York: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
LaPierre, Donna. 1994. Language output in a cooperative learning setting: Determining its effects on second language learning (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Suche in Google Scholar
Leeser, Michael. 2004. Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research 8(1). 55–81. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168804lr11340a.Suche in Google Scholar
Loewen, Shawn & Masatoshi Sato. 2018. Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching 51(3). 285–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000125.Suche in Google Scholar
Long, Michael. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In William C. Ritchie & Tej K. Bhatia (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition, 413–468. New York: Academic Press.10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3Suche in Google Scholar
Long, Michael & Peter Robinson. 1998. Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In Catherine Doughty & Jessica Williams (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 15–41. New York: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Luquin, María & María del Pilar García Mayo. 2021. Exploring the use of models as a written corrective feedback technique among EFL children. System 98. 102465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102465.Suche in Google Scholar
Lyster, Roy. 2001. Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language and learning 15(Suppl. 1). 265–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.2001.tb00019.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Mackey, Alison (ed.). 2007. Conversational interaction in second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Mackey, Alison & Jaemyung Goo. 2007. Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Alison Mackey (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies, 407–449. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Bryan. 2000. The CHILDES project: Tools for analysing talk, 3rd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Suche in Google Scholar
Martínez-Adrián, María & Francisco Gallardo-del-Puerto. 2021. Task modality and language-related episodes in young learners: An attempt to manage accuracy and editing. Language Teaching Research 28(6). 2300–2325. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211052808.Suche in Google Scholar
McDonough, Kim & Wichian Sunitham. 2009. Collaborative dialogue between Thai EFL learners during self-access computer activities. Tesol Quarterly 43. 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00166.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Mozaffari, Seyedeh Hamideh. 2017. Comparing student-selected and teacher-assigned pairs on collaborative writing. Language Teaching Research 21(4). 496–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816641703.Suche in Google Scholar
Nassaji, Hossein. 2013. Participation structure and incidental focus on form in adult ESL classrooms. Language Learning 63(4). 835–869. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12020.Suche in Google Scholar
Niu, Ruiying. 2009. Effect of task-inherent production modes on EFL learners’ focus on form. Language Awareness 18(3-4). 384–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410903197256.Suche in Google Scholar
Oliver, Rhonda & Tatiana Bogachenko. 2018. Teacher perceptions and use of tasks in school ESL classrooms. In Virginia Samuda, Kris Van den Branden & Martin Bygate (eds.), TBLT as a researched pedagogy, 72–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.12.04oliSuche in Google Scholar
Payant, Caroline & YouJin Kim. 2019. Impact of task modality on collaborative dialogue among plurilingual learners: A classroom-based study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22(5). 614–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1292999.Suche in Google Scholar
Pica, Teresa, Ruth Kanagy & Joseph Falodun. 1993. Choosing and using communication tasks for second language research and instruction. In Graham Crookes & Susan Gass (eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice, 9–34. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Suche in Google Scholar
Pinter, Annamaria. 2007. Some benefits of peer-peer interaction: 10-year-old children practicing with a communication task. Language Teaching Research 11. 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074604.Suche in Google Scholar
Plonsky, Luke & Frederick Oswald. 2014. How bis is “big”? Interpreting effect size in L2 research. Language Learning 64(4). 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190516000015.Suche in Google Scholar
Robinson, Peter. 2001. Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22(1). 27–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27.Suche in Google Scholar
Ross-Feldman, Lauren. 2007. Interaction in the L2 classroom: Does gender influence learning opportunities? In Alison Mackey (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies, 52–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Shintani, Natsuko. 2014. Using tasks with young beginner learners: The role of the teacher. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 8. 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2013.861466.Suche in Google Scholar
Shoonen, Rob, Patrick Snellings, Marie Stevenson & Amos van Gelderen. 2009. Towards a blueprint of the foreign language writer: The linguistic and cognitive demands of foreign language writing. In Rosa María Manchón (ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching and research, 77–101. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.2307/jj.27195487.9Suche in Google Scholar
Solon, Megan, Avizia Yim Long & Laura Gurzynski-Weiss. 2017. Task complexity, language-related episodes, and production of l2 Spanish vowels. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 39. 347–380. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000425.Suche in Google Scholar
Song, Mi-Jeong & Bo-Ram Suh. 2008. The effects of output task types on noticing and learning of the English past counterfactual conditional. System 36. 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.09.006.Suche in Google Scholar
Storch, Neomy. 2008. Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness 17(2). 96–114. https://doi.org/10.2167/la431.0.Suche in Google Scholar
Storch, Neomy. 2016. Collaborative writing. In Rosa María Manchón & Paul Matsuda (eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing, 387–406. Berlin, Germany, & Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781614511335-021Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill. 1998. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Catherine Doughty & Jessica Williams (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 64–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill. 2000. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In James P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural Theory and second language learning, 97–114. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill & Sharon Lapkin. 1998. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal 82(3). 320–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01209.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill & Sharon Lapkin. 2001. Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In Martin Bygate, Peter Skehan & Merrill Swain (eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing, 99–118. Harlow: Pearson Education.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill & Sharon Lapkin. 2002. Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research 37(3–4). 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00006-5..Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill & Yuko Watanabe. 2013. Languaging: Collaborative dialogue as a source of second language learning. In Carol Chapelle (ed.), The Encyclopedia of applied linguistics, 3218–3225. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0664Suche in Google Scholar
Tellier, Angela & Karen Roehr-Brackin. 2017. Raising children’s metalinguistic awareness to enhance classroom second language learning. In María del Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights, 22–48. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.2307/jj.22730589.6Suche in Google Scholar
Tognini, Rita. 2008. Interaction in languages other than English classes in Western Australian primary and secondary schools. Theory, practice and perceptions. Perth: Edith Cowan University, Western Australia.Suche in Google Scholar
Van den Branden, Kris, Martin Bygate & John M. Norris. 2009. Task-based language teaching: A reader. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/748226.10.1075/tblt.1Suche in Google Scholar
Villarreal, Izaskun & Miren Munarriz-Ibarrola. 2021. ‘Together we do better’: The effect of pair and group on young EFL learners’ written texts and attitudes. In María del Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning, 89–116. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501511318-005Suche in Google Scholar
Watanabe, Yuko & Merrill Swain. 2007. Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research 11. 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880607074599.Suche in Google Scholar
Williams, Jessica. 2001. The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System 29. 325–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00022-7.Suche in Google Scholar
Williams, Jessica. 2008. The speaking-writing connection in second language and academic literacy development. In Diane Belcher & Alan R. Hirvela (eds.), The oral-literate connection: Perspectives on L2 speaking, writing and other media interactions, 10–25. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
This article contains supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2024-0206).
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
