Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:53:16.239Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14A - Comparing the Effectiveness of Task-Based Language Teaching and Presentation-Practice-Production on Second Language Grammar Learning

A Pilot Study with Chinese Students of Italian as a Second Language

from Part VII - Task-Based Assessment and Program Evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2021

By
Ilaria Borro
Edited by
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian  and
Michael H. Long
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Michael H. Long
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access

Summary

This case study reports a comparison of the relative effectiveness of explicit focus on forms (FonFS) and reactive, incidental focus on form (FonF) on second language grammar learning on both explicit and implicit knowledge. Using a between-groups, pretest-posttest design, Chinese students of Italian were randomly assigned to form two experimental groups, which were exposed either to a TBLT or a PPP module. Both offline (untimed grammaticality judgment) and online (self-paced reading) measures were employed, and students’ performance role-playing the target tasks was assessed. Subjects in the TBLT condition showed a similar improvement in grammatical knowledge to those in the PPP group, while outperforming them on real-life tasks.

Keywords

Focus on Formimplicit knowledgeonline assessmentself-paced readinggrammar acquisitionfunctional adequacy
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching , pp. 549 - 565
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Further Reading

Ellis, N. C. (2001). Memory for language. In Robinson, P., ed. Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 33–68.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A. and Kim, M. (2021). The contributions of statistical-implicit learning aptitude to implicit-second language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–29.Google Scholar
Kang, E. Y., Sok, S., and Han, Z-H. (2018). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 428–53.Google Scholar

References

Beretta, A. and Davies, A. (1985). Evaluation of the Bangalore Project. English Language Teaching Journal, 39, 121–27.Google Scholar
Burwell, G., Gonzalez-Lloret, M., and Nielsen, K. (2009). Evaluating a TBLT Spanish immersion program. Paper presented in the colloquium: Evaluating task-based language programs. Third biannual conference on TBLT. University of Lancaster, September 13–16.Google Scholar
De la Fuente, M. J. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction. Language Teaching Research, 10, 263–95.Google Scholar
De Ridder, I., Vangehuchten, L., and Sesena Gomez, M. (2007). Enhancing automaticity through task-based language learning. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 263–95.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., and Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gass, S., Spinner, P., and Behney, J. (2018), eds. Salience in second language acquisition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A. and Kim, K.M. (2019). Not aptitude but aptitudeS: examining the relationship between implicit- explicit learning aptitudes and implicit-explicit knowledge. Paper presented at the 29th conference of the European Second Language Association. Lund University, August 28- 31.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Lloret, M. and Nielson, K. (2014). Evaluating TBLT: The case of a task-based Spanish program. Language Teaching Research 19(5),525–49.Google Scholar
Granena, G. (2013). Individual differences in sequence learning ability and second language acquisition in early childhood and adulthood. Language Learning 63(4),665–703.Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2012). Conducting reaction time research in second language studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Keating, G. D. and Jegerski, J. (2015). Experimental designs in sentence processing research. A methodological review and user’s guide. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 1–32.Google Scholar
Kuiken, F., Vedder, I., and Gilabert, R. (2010). Communicative adequacy and linguistic complexity in L2 writing. In Bartning, I., Martin, M., Vedder, I., eds. Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research. Eurosla Monographs Series, pp. 81–100.Google Scholar
Kuiken, F. and Vedder, I. (2014). Rating written performance: What do raters do and why? Language Testing, 31(3), 329–48.Google Scholar
Kuiken, F. and Vedder, I. (2016). Functional adequacy in L2 writing: towards a new rating scale. Language Testing, 34(3), 321–36.Google Scholar
Li, S., Ellis, R., and Zhu, Y. (2016). Task-based versus task-supported language instruction. An experimental study. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 205–29.Google Scholar
Loewen, S., Erlam, R., and Ellis, R. (2009). Implicit and explicit knowledge and second language learning: testing and teaching. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2017). Instructed second language acquisition (ISLA): Geopolitics, methodological issues, and some major research questions. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 1, 7–44.Google Scholar
Marsden, E., Thomson, S., and Plonsky, L. (2018). A methodological synthesis of self-paced reading in second language research. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(5),861–904.Google Scholar
Pallotti, G. (2009). CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 590–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M. (1994). Neurolinguistic aspects of implicit and explicit memory: Implications for bilingualism and SLA. In Ellis, N., ed. Implicit and explicit language learning. London: Academic Press, pp. 393–419.Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (2004). Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rebuschat, P. (2013). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge in second language research. Language Learning 63(3),595–626.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–79.Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics 2, 159–68.Google Scholar
Shintani, N. and Ellis, R. (2010). The incidental acquisition of English plural -s by Japanese children in comprehension-based and production-based lessons: A process-product study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(4),607–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrout, P. and Fleiss, J. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2),420–28Google Scholar
Suzuki, Y. (2017). Validity of new measures of implicit knowledge: distinguishing implicit knowledge from automatized explicit knowledge. Applied Psycholinguistics, 38, 1229–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whong, M., Gil, H.-G., and Marsden, E. (2014). Beyond paradigm: The ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of classroom research. Second Language Research, 30(4),551–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×