Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:09:46.420Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research agenda: Researching grammar teaching and learning in the second language classroom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2021

Laura Collins  and
June Ruivivar
Laura Collins*
Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal, Canada
June Ruivivar
Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal, Canada
*
*Corresponding author: Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We propose five research tasks targeting grammar teaching and learning, focusing on extending previous research and exploring under-studied features and contexts. The first two tasks outline replications and extensions of seminal studies on pedagogical grammar, Toth (2008) and Samuda (2001), designed to advance our understanding of the teacher role in providing rich practice opportunities. Another task examines how features of peer interaction during oral communication might encourage attention to grammar among young second language (L2) classroom learners in school-based foreign language programs, a common yet under-studied context. A fourth task investigates the unique properties of spoken grammar across languages and effective approaches for its teaching and learning, and the fifth explores the (re)design and use of corpus-based tools to enhance accessibility and learner autonomy in data-driven grammar learning. Each task is designed to be feasible across a variety of classroom contexts and target languages. We highlight concrete implications for language pedagogy and include suggestions for capturing both learning outcomes and participants’ perspectives on their learning and teaching, using a range of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. We end with some thoughts on repetitive practice for learning certain features of grammar, and recommendations for collaborative research that would encourage greater replication of future studies.

Type
Thinking Allowed
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 407 - 423
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Allan, R. (2009). Can a graded reader corpus provide ‘authentic’ input? ELT Journal, 63(1), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andringa, S., & Godfroid, A. (2020). SLA for all? Reproducing SLA research in non-academic samples. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MP47BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, N. (2001). Social and stylistic variation in spoken French: A comparative approach. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aski, J. (2005). Alternatives to mechanical drills for the early stages of language practice in foreign language textbooks. Foreign Language Annals, 28(2), 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1995). The interaction of pedagogy and natural sequences in the acquisition of tense and aspect. In Eckman, F., Highland, D., Lee, P., Mileham, J., & Weber, R. (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 151–168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2004). The emergence of grammaticalized future expression in longitudinal production data. In Overstreet, M., Rott, S., VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (Eds.), Form and meaning in second language acquisition (pp. 115–137). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Batstone, R., & Ellis, R. (2009). Principled grammar teaching. System, 37(2), 194–204. doi:10.1016/j.system.2008.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouffard, L. A., & Sarkar, M. (2008). Training 8-year-old French immersion students in metalinguistic analysis: An innovation in form-focused pedagogy. Language Awareness, 17(1), 3–24. doi:10.2167/la424.0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A. (2010). Data-driven learning: Taking the computer out of the equation. Language Learning, 60(3), 534–572. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00566.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A., & Cobb, T. (2017). Corpus use in language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 65(2), 1–46. doi:10.1111/lang.12224Google Scholar
Breen, M. (1989). The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks. In Johnson, R. K. (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 187–206). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bygate, M. (2016). Sources, developments and directions of task-based language teaching. The Language Learning Journal, 44(4), 381–400. doi:10.1080/09571736.2015.1039566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1995). Grammar and the spoken language. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 141–158. doi:10.1093/applin/16.2.141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chavez, M. (2018). The orientation of learner language use in peer work: teacher role, learner role, and individual identity. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 161–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, W., Warren, M., & Xun-feng, X. (2003). The language learner as language researcher: Putting corpus linguistics on the timetable. System, 31(2), 173–186. doi:10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00019-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, L., & Muñoz, C. (2016). The foreign language classroom: Current perspectives and future considerations. Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 133–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, L., & Ruivivar, J. (2019). Form-focused instruction. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.). The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Collins, L., & White, J. (2019). Observing language-related episodes in intact classrooms: Context matters. In DeKeyser, R. & Botana, G. P. (Eds.), (Doing) SLA research with implications for the classroom (Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability) (pp. 9–30). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, L., White, J., Trofimovich, P., Cardoso, W., & Horst, M. (2012). When comprehensible input isn't comprehensive input: An analysis of instructional input in intensive EFL. In Muñoz, C. (Ed.), Intensive exposure in second language learning (pp. 65–87). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Coughlin, P., & Duff, P. (1994). Same task, different activities: Analysis of SLA tasks from an activity theory perspective. In Lantolf, J. P. & Appel, G. (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language learning research (pp. 173–191). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Cullen, R., & Kuo, I. (2007). Spoken grammar and ELT course materials: A missing link? TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 361–386. doi:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00063.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davin, K., & Donato, R. (2013). Student collaboration and teacher-directed classroom dynamic assessment: A complementary pairing. Foreign Language Annals, 46(1), 5–22. doi:10.1111/flan.12012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. 42–63). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Vries, B. P., Cucchiarini, C., Bodnar, S., Strik, H., & van Hout, R. (2015). Spoken grammar practice and feedback in an ASR-based CALL system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(6), 550–576. doi:10.1080/09588221.2014.889713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In Lantolf, J. P. & Appel, G. (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language learning research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2012). The grammar of discourse. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–261). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: a review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, L. (2015). Data-driven learning and language learning theories. In Leńko-Szymańska, A. & Boulton, A. (Eds.), Multiple affordances of language corpora for data-driven learning (pp. 18–36). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/scl.69.02floGoogle Scholar
Ford, C., & Mori, J. (1994). Causal markers in Japanese and English conversations: A cross-linguistic study of interactional grammar. Pragmatics, 4(1), 31–61. doi:10.1075/prag.4.1.03forCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friginal, E., & Hardy, J. (2014). Corpus-based sociolinguistics: A guide for students. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203114827Google Scholar
Gagné, N., & Parks, S. (2013). Cooperative learning tasks in a Grade 6 intensive ESL class: Role of scaffolding. Language Teaching Research, 17(2), 188–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., & Imaz Agirre, A. (2019). Task modality and pair formation method: Their impact on patterns of interaction and attention to form among EFL primary school children. System, 80, 165–175. doi:10.1016/j.system.2018.11.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Creative automatization: Principles for promoting fluency within a communicative framework. TESOL Quarterly, 22(3), 473–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geluso, J., & Yamaguchi, A. (2014). Discovering formulaic language through data-driven learning: Student attitudes and efficacy. ReCALL, 26(2), 225–242. doi:10.1017/S095834401400004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, C. (2009). Perspectives on spoken grammar. ELT Journal, 63(4), 303–312. doi:10.1093/elt/ccp004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschneider, J., & DeKeyser, R. (2001). Explaining the “natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition” in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51(1), 1–50. doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grieve, J. (2009). A corpus-based regional dialect survey of grammatical variation in written standard American English. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2018). Task-based learning in task-based teaching: Training teachers of Chinese as a foreign language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 162–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, B. (1998). The role of form-focused tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 156–174). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Izquierdo, J., & Kihlstedt, M. (2019). L2 imperfective functions with verb types in written narratives: A cross–sectional study with instructed Hispanophone learners of French. Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 291–307. doi:10.1111/modl.12539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, T. (1991). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. CALL Austria, 10, 14–34.Google Scholar
Jones, C., & Carter, R. (2014). Teaching spoken discourse markers explicitly: A comparison of III and PPP. International Journal of English Studies, 13(1), 37–54.Google Scholar
Jones, C., & Waller, D. (2011). If only it were true: The problem with the four conditionals. ELT Journal, 65(1), 24–32. doi:10.1093/elt/ccp101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1979). A functional approach to child language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Y. (2013). Effects of pretask modeling on attention to form and question development. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 8–35. doi:10.1002/tesq.52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2011). Using pretask modelling to encourage collaborative learning opportunities. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 183–199. doi:10.1177/1362168810388711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ko, S. (2014). The nature of multiple responses to teachers’ questions. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 48–62. doi:10.1093/applin/amt005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunitz, S. (2018). Collaborative attention work on gender agreement in Italian as a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 102(S1), 64–81. doi:10.1111/modl.12458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1967). The social stratification of English in New York City. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33. doi:10.1177/1362168810383328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). The grammar of choice. In Hinkel, E. & Fotos, S. (Eds.), New perspectives in grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 104–118). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). On the roles of repetition in language teaching and learning. Applied Linguistics Review, 3(2), 195–210. doi:10.1515/applirev-2012-0009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar. In Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., & Snow, M. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed., pp. 256–270). Boston, MA: Heinle/Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Lichtman, K. (2013). Developmental comparisons of implicit and explicit language learning. Language Acquisition, 20(2), 93–108. doi:10.1080/10489223.2013.766740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (1983). Exploring relationships between developmental and instructional sequences in L2 acquisition. In Seliger, H. W. & Long, M. (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 217–245). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (2019). Perfecting practice. Modern Language Journal, 103(3), 703–712.Google Scholar
Lin, M. H., & Lee, J.-Y. (2015). Data-driven learning: Changing the teaching of grammar in EFL classes. ELT Journal, 69(3), 264–274. doi:10.1093/elt/ccv010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, A., & Fieldsend, T. (2018). Teaching the passive through semantically enhanced input. TESOL Journal, 9(1), 138–159. doi:10.1002/tesj.313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 123–167). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2016). Second language research: Methodology and design. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D. (2018). Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 68(2), 321–391. doi:10.1111/lang.12286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, S., & Oh, S.-Y. (2018). Unlearning overgenerated be through data-driven learning in the secondary EFL classroom. ReCALL, 30(1), 48–67. doi:10.1017/S0958344017000246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2013). Participation structure and incidental focus on form in adult EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 63(4), 835–869. doi:10.1111/lang.12020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2016). Research timeline: Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 49, 35–62. doi:10.1017/S0261444815000403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nava, A., & Pedrazzini, L. (2018). Second language acquisition in action: Principles from practice. London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Ohta, A. S. (2000). Rethinking recasts: A learner-centered examination of corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom. In Hall, J. K. & Verplaeste, L. (Eds.), The construction of second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 47–71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L. (2007). Meaningful practice in foreign language classrooms: A cognitive-interactionist SLA perspective. In DeKeyser, R. (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 180–207). New York, NY: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payant, C., & Reagan, D. (2018). Manipulating task implementation variables with incipient Spanish language learners: A classroom-based study. Language Teaching Research, 22(2), 169–188. doi:10.1177/1362168816669742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P., Sánchez-Tornel, M., Alcaraz Calero, J. M., & Aguado Jiménez, P. (2011). Tracking learners’ actual uses of corpora: Guided vs non-guided corpus consultation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(3), 233–253. doi:10.1080/09588221.2010.539978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philp, J., Walter, S., & Basturkmen, H. (2010). Peer interaction in the foreign language classroom: What factors foster a focus on form? Language Awareness, 19(4), 261–279. doi:10.1080/09658416.2010.516831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2017). Quantitative research methods in instructed SLA. In Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 505–521). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porte, G., & McManus, K. (2019). Doing replication research in applied linguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ruivivar, J. (2020). Engagement, social networks, and the sociolinguistic performance of Quebec French learners. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 76(3), 243–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruivivar, J., & Collins, L. (2019). Nonnative accent and the perceived grammaticality of spoken grammar forms. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 5(2), 269–293. doi:10.1075/jslp.17039.ruiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruivivar, J., & Lapierre, C. (2018). Learning outcomes and learners’ impressions of parallel and monolingual concordancers. In Taalas, P., Jalkanen, J., Bradley, L., & Thouësny, S. (Eds.), Future-proof CALL: Language learning as exploration and encounters – short papers from EUROCALL 2018 (pp. 278–283). Research-publishing.net. doi:10.14705/rpnet.2018.26.850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp. 119–140). Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591–626. doi:10.1017/S0272263112000356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savignon, S. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign-language teaching. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
Schmidt, T., & Wörner, K. (2009). EXMARaLDA: Creating, analysing and sharing spoken language corpora for pragmatic research. Pragmatics, 19(4), 565–582. doi:10.1075/prag.19.4.06schCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shintani, N. (2014). Using tasks with young beginner learners: The role of the teacher. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 8(3), 279–294. doi:10.1080/17501229.2013.861466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sippel, L., & Jackson, C. N. (2015). Teacher vs. peer oral corrective feedback in the German language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 688–705. doi:10.1111/flan.12164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. (2014). The role of guided induction in paper-based data-driven learning. ReCALL, 26(2), 184–201. doi:10.1017/S0958344014000081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soruç, A., & Griffiths, C. (2015). Identity and the spoken grammar dilemma. System, 50, 32–42. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), 181–207. doi:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springer, S., & Collins, L. (2008). Interacting inside and outside of the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 39–60. doi:10.1177/1362168807084493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, N. (2008). Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for langauge development. Language Awareness, 17(2), 95–114. doi:10.1080/09658410802146644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. & Seidlhofer, B. (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64–81). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01209.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Knouzi, I., Suzuki, W., & Brooks, L. (2009). Languaging: University students learn the grammatical concept of voice in French. Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 5–29. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00825.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmis, I. (2002). Native-speaker norms and international English: A classroom view. ELT Journal, 56(3), 240–249. doi:10.1093/elt/56.3.240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmis, I. (2005). Towards a framework for teaching spoken grammar. ELT Journal, 59(2), 117–125. doi:10.1093/eltj/cci025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toth, P. D. (2004). When grammar instruction undermines cohesion in L2 Spanish classroom discourse. Modern Language Journal, 88(1), 14–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toth, P. D. (2008). Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning, 58(2), 237–283. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00441.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toth, P. D. (2011). Social and cognitive factors in making teacher-led classroom discourse relevant for L2 grammatical development. Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toth, P., & Moranski, K. (2018). Why haven't we solved instructed SLA? A sociocognitive account. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1), 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valdman, A. (2000). Comment gérer la variation dans l'enseignement du français langue étrangère aux États-Unis? The French Review, 73(4), 648–666.Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. (2013). Concept appropriation and the emergence of L2 sociostylistic variation. Language Teaching Research, 17(3), 343–362. doi:10.1177/1362168813482937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A., & Henery, A. (2014). Instructed concept appropriation and L2 pragmatic development in the classroom. Language Learning, 64(3), 549–578. doi:10.1111/lang.12054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (2016). The role of teachers in task-based language education. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 164–181. doi:10.1017/S0267190515000070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29(3), 325–340. doi:10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00022-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winke, P. (2013). The effectiveness of interactive group orals for placement testing. In McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 246–268). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/lllt.34.18ch13Google Scholar
Wong, W., & VanPatten, B. (2003). The evidence is in: Drills are out. Foreign Language Annals, 36(3), 403–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, Z., & Zhang, R. (2018). Investigating longitudinal pragmatic development of complaints made by Chinese EFL learners. Applied Linguistics Review, 9(1), 63–87. doi:10.1515/applirev-2016-1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar