Impact of methodological differences in task sequencing on second language learning: a multi-level meta-analysis
-
Mahmoud Abdi Tabari
Mahmoud Abdi Tabari is a Teaching Assistant Professor of TESOL and Writing Studies at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR). His research focuses on second language acquisition, second language writing, and task-based language teaching. He has published his work in various top-tier academic journals, including
Applied Linguistics, The Modern Language Journal, Journal of Second Language Writing, Language Teaching Research, System, Reading and Writing, Assessing Writing, and Journal of English for Academic Purposes .
,
Hansol Lee
Hansol Lee is a Professor of English at Korea Military Academy, South Korea. He received his PhD degree in Education from the University of California, Irvine. His research interests include methods and statistics, education, and literacy. His work has been published in
Review of Educational Research, Education Research Review, Child Development, Applied Measurement in Education, Applied Linguistics, Language Learning, The Modern Language Journal, Language Learning & Technology, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , among others.
und
Mahsa Farahanynia
Mahsa Farahanynia is an Assistant Professor at Pishtazan Higher Education Institute, Iran. Her research interests are centered on task-based language teaching, language assessment, and discourse analysis. She has published articles in a number of well-established journals, like
Educational Assessment, The Modern Language Journal, Assessing Writing, and System .
Abstract
Drawing on the SSARC model, TBLT research has investigated the role of task sequencing in L2 production, yielding mixed results. This study conducts a multi-level meta-analysis of methodological practices in task sequencing to provide more transparency. Sixteen studies published up to May 2024 were selected based on inclusion criteria, and each study was coded for analyzed features and contextual variables. Methodological aspects, including study designs, sampling procedures, analyses, and reporting practices, were also coded. Significant methodological variations were identified across studies, including differences in L2 proficiency, learning contexts, task modalities, types, complexities, delivery methods, and constructs. Task complexity emerged as a significant factor influencing L2 performance, with more complex tasks yielding larger effect sizes. Additionally, simple and complex sequencing tasks exhibited a medium effect size in enhancing accuracy, particularly in between-group studies. These findings highlight the importance of balanced learner representation and standardized research practices to improve L2 learning outcomes.
About the authors
Mahmoud Abdi Tabari is a Teaching Assistant Professor of TESOL and Writing Studies at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR). His research focuses on second language acquisition, second language writing, and task-based language teaching. He has published his work in various top-tier academic journals, including Applied Linguistics, The Modern Language Journal, Journal of Second Language Writing, Language Teaching Research, System, Reading and Writing, Assessing Writing, and Journal of English for Academic Purposes.
Hansol Lee is a Professor of English at Korea Military Academy, South Korea. He received his PhD degree in Education from the University of California, Irvine. His research interests include methods and statistics, education, and literacy. His work has been published in Review of Educational Research, Education Research Review, Child Development, Applied Measurement in Education, Applied Linguistics, Language Learning, The Modern Language Journal, Language Learning & Technology, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, among others.
Mahsa Farahanynia is an Assistant Professor at Pishtazan Higher Education Institute, Iran. Her research interests are centered on task-based language teaching, language assessment, and discourse analysis. She has published articles in a number of well-established journals, like Educational Assessment, The Modern Language Journal, Assessing Writing, and System.
-
Research ethics: The study was conducted following the Declaration of University of Nevada, Reno.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Author contributions: The authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.
-
Conflict of interest: All other authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: None declared.
-
Data availability: The raw data can be obtained on request from the corresponding author.
References
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud & Michol Miller. 2021. Unraveling the effects of task sequencing on the syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency of L2 written production. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 24. 1–29. https://doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2021.31306.Suche in Google Scholar
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud & Minyoung Cho. 2022. Task sequencing and L2 writing development: Exploring the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221090922.Suche in Google Scholar
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud, Mark D. Johnson & Mahsa Farahanynia. 2023. Automated analysis of cohesive features in L2 writing: Examining effects of task complexity and task repetition. Assessing Writing 58. 100783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100783.Suche in Google Scholar
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud, Yizhou Wang & Michol Miller. 2024a. Understanding the SSARC model of task sequencing: Assessing L2 writing development. Assessing Writing 62. 100893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2024.100893.Suche in Google Scholar
Abdi Tabari, Mahmoud, Mark D. Johnson & Mahsa Farahanynia. 2024b. Task sequencing and L2 production: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12670.Suche in Google Scholar
Alexopoulou, Theodora, Marije Michel, Akira Murakami & Detmar Meurers. 2017. Task effects on linguistic complexity and accuracy: A large-scale learner corpus analysis employing natural language processing techniques. Language Learning 67. 180–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12232.Suche in Google Scholar
Allaw, Elissa. 2017. The effect of the SSARC model of task sequencing on L2 written production. Canada: Concordia University Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Allaw, Elissa & Kim McDonough. 2019. The effect of task sequencing on second language written lexical complexity, accuracy, and fluency. System 85. 102014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.06.008.Suche in Google Scholar
Awwad, Anas & Parvaneh Tavakoli. 2019. Task complexity, language proficiency, and working memory: Interaction effects on second language speech performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 60. 169–196. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0378.Suche in Google Scholar
Baralt, Melissa. 2014. Task complexity and task sequencing in traditional versus online language classes. In Melissa Baralt, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson (eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning, 95–122. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
Baralt, Melissa, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson. 2014. An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed second language learning. In Melissa Baralt, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson (eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning, 1–37. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
Barrot, Jessie & Mari K. Gabinete. 2019. Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in the argumentative writing of ESL and EFL learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 59. 209–232. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0012.Suche in Google Scholar
Bryfonski, Lara & Todd H. McKay. 2017. TBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research 23(5). 603–632.10.1177/1362168817744389Suche in Google Scholar
Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Suche in Google Scholar
Crossley, Scot A., Tom Salsbury & Danielle S. Mcnamara. 2015. Assessing lexical proficiency using analytic ratings: A case for collocation accuracy. Applied Linguistics 36. 570–590. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt056.Suche in Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod. 2008. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod. 2017. Position paper: Moving task-based language teaching forward. Language Teaching 50(4). 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444817000179.Suche in Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod, Peter Skehan, Shaofeng Li, Natsuko Shintani & Craig Lambert. 2020. Task-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108643689Suche in Google Scholar
Farahanynia, Mahsa. 2019. The impact of task complexity and task sequencing on L2 written performance: Examining the SSARC model of task sequencing. In The 17th International Teaching English Language and Literature Society of Iran Conference. Tabriz, Iran: Tabriz Islamic University.Suche in Google Scholar
Faruji, Laleh F. & Farid Ghaemi. 2017. Task complexity manipulation and accuracy in writing performance. Journal of Teaching Language Skills 35. 103–132.Suche in Google Scholar
Granfeldt, Jonas. 2007. Speaking and writing in L2 French: Exploring effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. In Siska van Daele, Alex Housen, Folkert Kuiken, Michel Pierrard & Inneke Vedder (eds.), Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language use, learning & teaching, 87–98. Brussels: University of Brussels.Suche in Google Scholar
Hedges, Larry V. 2019. The statistics of replication. Methodology 15. 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000173.Suche in Google Scholar
Jackson, Daniel O. & Sakol Suethanapornkul. 2013. The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning 63. 330–367. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12008.Suche in Google Scholar
Jin, Chaoyang & Jing Yan. 2024. The effects of task complexity and task sequencing on L2 performance: A systematic review. The Language Learning Journal 53(1). 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2024.2345911.Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark D. 2017. Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, lexical complexity, accuracy, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing 37. 13–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.06.001.Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark D. & Mahmoud Abdi Tabari. 2022. Task planning and oral L2 production: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics 43. 1143–1164. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amac026.Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark D. & Mahmoud Abdi Tabari. 2023. Planning in L2 writing: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. System 118. 103152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103152.Suche in Google Scholar
Kellogg, Ronald T. 1996. A model of working memory in writing. In C. Michael Levy & Sara Ransdell (eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and application, 57–71. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Nayoung. 2023. The effects of different task sequences on novice L2 learners’ oral performance in the classroom. Language Teaching Research 27. 415–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820937548.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Hyunwoo & Haerim Hwang. 2022. Assessing verb-construction integration in young learners of English as a foreign language: Analyses of written and spoken production. Language Learning 72. 497–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12480.Suche in Google Scholar
Kormos, Judit. 2023. The role of cognitive factors in second language writing and writing to learn a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 45. 622–646. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263122000481.Suche in Google Scholar
Korvesi, Evgenia & Marije Michel. 2022. Chatting with your peers across modalities: Effects of performing increasingly complex written computer-mediated tasks on oral L2 development. Languages 7. 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7040276.Suche in Google Scholar
Lai, Chun & Guofang Li. 2011. Technology and task-based language teaching: A critical review. CALICO Journal 28. 498–521. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.28.2.498-521.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, Jiyong. 2021. Task sequencing and task complexity effects on L2 Writing: Does task order really matter? The Journal of Asia TEFL 18. 1088–1107. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.4.2.1088.Suche in Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.7551/mitpress/6393.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Levkina, Mayya. 2013. The role of task sequencing in L2 development as mediated by working memory capacity. Spain: Universität de Barcelona Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Levkina, Mayya & Roger Gilabert. 2014. Task sequencing in the L2 development of spatial expressions. In Melissa Baralt, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson (eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning, 37–70. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
Mackey, Alison & Susan M. Gass. 2016. Second language research: Methodology and design, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Malicka, Aleksandra. 2014a. The role of task and task sequencing in L2 monologic oral performance. Spain: Universität de Barcelona Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Malicka, Aleksandra. 2014b. The role of task sequencing in L2 oral production. In Melissa Baralt, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson (eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning, 71–95. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
Malicka, Aleksandra. 2018. The role of task sequencing in fluency, accuracy, and complexity: Investigating the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. Language Teaching Research 24(5). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168818813668.10.1177/1362168818813668Suche in Google Scholar
Malicka, Aleksandra & Shoko Sasayama. 2017. The importance of learning from the accumulated knowledge: Findings from a research synthesis on task complexity. In The 7th Biennial International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching. Spain: Universität de Barcelona.Suche in Google Scholar
Norouzian, Reza & Gavin Bui. 2023. Meta-analysis of second language research with complex research designs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 46(1). 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263123000311.Suche in Google Scholar
Ortega, Lourdes. 2009. Studying writing across EFL contexts: Looking back and moving forward. In Rosa Manchón (ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research, 209–231. Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691859-013Suche in Google Scholar
Page, Matthew J., Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy C. Hoffmann, Cynthia D. Mulrow, David Moher, Jennifer M. Tetzlaff, Elie A. Akl, Sue E. Brennan, Roger Chou, Julie Glanville, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Manoj M. Lalu, Tianjing Li, Elizabeth W. Loder, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Steve McDonald, Luke A. McGuinness, Lesley A. Stewart, James Thomas, Andrea C. Tricco, Vivian A. Welch & Penny Whiting. 2021. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372. S312–S313. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71.Suche in Google Scholar
Pang, Francine & Peter Skehan. 2014. Self-reported planning behaviour and second language performance in narrative retelling. In Peter Skehan (ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance, 95–128. London: John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.5.04panSuche in Google Scholar
Plonsky, Luke. 2017. Quantitative research methods in instructed SLA. In Shawn Loewen & Masatoshi Sato (eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition, 505–521. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315676968-28Suche in Google Scholar
Plonsky, Luke & You J. Kim. 2016. Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36. 73–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190516000015.Suche in Google Scholar
Plonsky, Luke & Frederick L. Oswald. 2014. How big is ‘big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning 64. 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079.Suche in Google Scholar
Robinson, Peter. 2001. Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22(1). 27–57.10.1093/applin/22.1.27Suche in Google Scholar
Robinson, Peter. 2005. Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 43. 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1.Suche in Google Scholar
Robinson, Peter. 2010. Situating and distributing cognition across task demands: The SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. In Martin Pütz & Laura Sicola (eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition: Inside the learner’s mind, 243–268. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/celcr.13.17robSuche in Google Scholar
Rose, Heath, Jim McKinley & Nicola Galloway. 2021. Global Englishes and language teaching: A review of pedagogical research. Language Teaching 54(2). 157–189. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444820000518.Suche in Google Scholar
Skehan, Peter. 1998. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1177/003368829802900209Suche in Google Scholar
Skehan, Peter. 2016. Tasks vs. conditions: Two perspectives on task research and its implications for pedagogy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36. 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190515000100.Suche in Google Scholar
Skehan, Peter, Gavin Bui, Zhan Wang & Sabrina Shum. 2024. Re-examining accuracy measures in second language task-based spoken performance. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 3(1). 100098. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4648364.Suche in Google Scholar
StataCorp. 2020. Stata statistical software: Release 16.1. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC.Suche in Google Scholar
Thompson, Colin. 2014a. Guided planning, task complexity, and second language oral development. England: University of Central Lancashire Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Thompson, Colin. 2014b. The effects of guided planning, task complexity, and task sequencing on L2 oral production. In Melissa Baralt, Roger Gilabert & Peter Robinson (eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning, 123–148. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Vercellotti, Mary L. 2017. The development of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language performance: A longitudinal study. Applied Linguistics 38(1). 90–111. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv002.Suche in Google Scholar
Viechtbauer, Wolfgang. 2010. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software 36. 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03.Suche in Google Scholar
Vuogan, A. & S. Li. 2023. A systematic review of meta-analyses in second language research: Current practices, issues, and recommendations. Applied Linguistics Review 15(4). 1621–1644. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2022-0192.Suche in Google Scholar
Weissgerber, Sophia C., Matthias Brunmair & Ralf Rummer. 2021. Null and void? Errors in meta-analysis on perceptual disfluency and recommendations to improve meta-analytical reproducibility. Educational Psychology Review 33(3). 1221–1247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09579-1.Suche in Google Scholar
Yoo, Hyunbin & Hyunwoo Kim. 2023. A cross-modal analysis of lexical sophistication: EFL and ESL learners in written and spoken production. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2023-0204.Suche in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
This article contains supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2024-0219).
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
