Collaborative Pre-Task Planning Processes and Second Language Task Performance

Abstract

Task-based language teaching research has investigated the impact of planning on task performance, but little has been reported on the processes that take place while planning is undertaken. This study builds on previous planning research by providing a detailed analysis of four Japanese university learners’ collaborative pre-task planning (two dyads) and their performance on a subsequent second language (L2) oral monologue task that required them to express their opinions on a problem and propose a solution to it. Follow-up interviews incorporating stimulated recall were also conducted to gain insight into learners’ perceptions. Results suggest that the note-taking strategies employed, the interpersonal dynamics of the pairs, the L2 proficiency of the participants, and the language of planning (first language [L1] or L2) resulted in important differences in these learners’ planning processes and subsequent task performances. The results are discussed in terms of how pre-task planning processes might be optimized in teaching and research.

The effect of planning time on vocabulary acquisition in a task-based environment: the mediating roles of working memory and field (in)dependence

“…Research in TBLT has explored how planning influences task performance, yet scant attention has been given to the intricacies of the planning processes themselves [ 36 ]. extended prior research by offering a detailed examination of collaborative pre-task planning by four Japanese university learners (two dyads).…”

The relationship between anxiety, enjoyment, and breakdown fluency during second language speaking tasks: An idiodynamic investigation

“…Moreover, breakdown fluency can also vary as a function of the tasks performed ( Tavakoli and Skehan, 2005 ). For example, structured tasks, or tasks that have predictable discourse patterns (e.g., problem-solution tasks, see Leeming et al, 2020 ; Lambert et al, 2021 ; Aubrey, 2022 ; Aubrey and Philpott, 2022 ; Aubrey et al, 2022 ) can aid learners in producing more fluent speech ( Ahmadian and Tavakoli, 2011 ; Ahmadian, 2015 ). These structured tasks might decrease breakdown fluency as they provide learners with multiple “starting points” from which they can gain control over content, which frees attentional resources for conceptualization and formulation processes ( Skehan, 2014 ).…”

“…Participants performed an oral problem-solution task (for the task instructions, see Appendix 1). This task closely followed versions found in recent research (Leeming et al, 2020;Lambert et al, 2021;Aubrey and Philpott, 2022;. Learners were required to individually give a 3min monolog that explained a problem, compared possible solutions, and recommended a solution with reasons.…”

Editorial: What is at the Heart of Teaching and Learning in a Post-pandemic Recovery World?

“…• for Japanese English as a foreign language (EFL) learners at the intermediate level, an output-based shadowing procedure with explicit instruction and feedback improved phonemic discrimination abilities (Hamada, 2022); • native English speaking teachers (NESTs) may not necessarily be ideal English speakers for students to imitate (Kong and Kang, 2022); • some task features such as their nature and purpose, repetition, familiarity, and ease of task topics influence successful engagement (Aubrey et al, 2022); • learners' planning processes and subsequent task performances differed significantly depending on their note-taking strategies, the interpersonal dynamics between pairs, and their second language (L2) proficiency (Leeming et al, 2022); • teacher educators' first language (L1) use may intentionally or incidentally shape the attitudes of student teachers (Werang and Harrington, 2022); • input enhancement, rhythmic priming, and perception-based instruction may be useful in areas other than traditional grammar and pronunciation instruction (Lee, 2022).…”