أثار تعقيد المهام والتخطيط الاستراتيجي وعدم التخطيط على أداء طلاب شعبة اللغة الإنجليزية کلغة أجنبية في الکتابة السردية | ||||
| التربية (الأزهر): مجلة علمية محکمة للبحوث التربوية والنفسية والاجتماعية) | ||||
| Article 16, Volume 37, 178 جزء 1, April 2018, Page 681-701 PDF (393.56 K) | ||||
| Document Type: بحوث فی مجال المناهج وطرق التدریس | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/jsrep.2018.40155 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| عبد الرحيم سعد الدين الهلالي1; حنان جمال محمد عبيدي2 | ||||
| 1مناهج وطرق تدريس اللغة الإنجليزية، کلية التربية جامعة الأزهر | ||||
| 2مناهج وطرق تدريس اللغة الإنجليزية، معهد المعارف العالي للغات والترجمة | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| هدفت الدراسة الحالية إلى استقصاء أثار تعقيد المهام والتخطيط الاستراتيجي وعدم التخطيط على أداء الطلاب في الکتابة السردية باللغة الإنجليزية تحت مستويات متنوعة لتعقيد المهام، ولقد تکونت عينة الدراسة من 120 طالب من المقيدين بالفرقة الثانية بقسم اللغة الإنجليزية بمعهد المعارف العالي للغات والترجمة، ولقد اعتمد البحث على أبعاد نموذج روبنسون (2001b) لتعقيد المهام؛ حيث تمثل "هنا والآن" المستوى (البسيط)، في مقابل "هناک وعندئذ" والتي تمثل المستوى (المعقد)، کما تم الاعتماد على ثلاثة محددات للکتابة السردية، التعقيد، والدقة، والطلاقة، أيضاً تم الاعتماد على مستويين في التخطيط : تخطيط المهام، وعدم التخطيط؛ ومن ثم تم تصنيف طلاب عينة البحث إلى أربع مجموعات، "التخطيط في مرحلة ما قبل المهمة ومن هنا والآن"، "والتخطيط في مرحلة ما قبل المهمة وهناک وعندئذ"، "وعدم التخطيط، وهنا والآن" و "عدم التخطيط وهناک وعندئذ"، ولقد أوضحت نتائج الدراسة أن تعقيد المهمة والتخطيط لهما أثر فعال على الدقة والطلاقة، کما أثبتت نتائج الدراسة أن المهام المعقدة مع الاعتماد على التخطيط تعطي نتائج أفضل في التعقيد والدقة والطلاقة، أيضًا کشفت النتائج أن إعطاء الطلاب الوقت للتخطيط قبل البدء في أداء المهمة قد يؤدي إلى أداء کتابي أفضل، تم مناقشة النتائج وثيقة الصلة بتعقيد المهمة وظروف التخطيط، وجودة الکتابة. This study examined the effects of task complexity and strategic planning and no planning on written narrative production under different task complexity conditions by 120 second-year English major students from AL-Ma’aref High Institute for Languages and Translation. Task complexity was manipulated along Robinson’s (2001b) proposed task complexity dimension of Here-and-Now (simple) vs. There-and-Then (complex) in. Accordingly, three specific measures of the written narratives were targeted, i.e. complexity, accuracy and fluency (CAF). Planning was operationalized at two levels: pretask planning (PTP) and no planning (NP). Participants of this study were four groups, the pre-task planning (PTP) and Here-and-Now (HN), pre-task planning (PTP) and There-and-Then (TT), no planning (NP) and Here-and-Now (HN), or no planning (NP) and There-and-Then (TT) groups. The findings of the study indicated that with respect to complexity, accuracy and fluency, the effects of both task complexity and planning conditions were found significant. More complexity, accuracy, and fluency were found in the complex task with the participants under planned condition. Also, the findings revealed that giving students time to plan before commencing the task led them to better performance. Results are discussed with relevance to task complexity and planning conditions on writing quality. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| تعقيد المهمة; التخطيط; الکتابة السرديّة. Task complexity؛ Planning Condition؛ Narrative Writing | ||||
| References | ||||
|
Ahmadi, S.(2008).The effects of strategic planning on the improvement of Iranian EFL learners' writing skills in TBLT. M.A. Thesis, GuilanUniversity.
Bae, J.,& Bachman, L. (2010). An investigation of four writing traits and two tasks across two languages. Language Testing, 27(2), 213-234.
Benevento, C., &Storch, N. (2011). Investigating writing development in secondary school learners of French. Assessing Writing, 16, 97-110.
Bygate, M. (1999a). Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners’ language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research, 3(3), 185-214.
Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan& M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23-48). London: Longman.
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., &Swain, M. (eds.)(2001). Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Ellis, R.(2003). Task-based language learning and teaching.Oxford, Oxford University Press. Ellis,R.(2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamin’s Publishing Company.
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. SSLA, 26, 59-84.
Errasti, M. (2003). Acquiring writing skills in a third language: The positive effects of bilingualism.International Journal of Bilingualism. 7 (1), 27- 42.
Foster, P. &Skehan, P.(1996). The influence of planning onperformance in task-based learning.Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299-324.
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. AppliedLinguistics. 21(3), 354- 375.
Franken, M., & Haslett, S.(2002). When and why talking can make writing harder. In S. Ransdell& M. L. Barbier(Eds.), New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 208-229). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Gilabert, R. (2004). Task complexity and L2 narrative oral production. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Barcelona, Spain.
Gilabert, R. (2005). Task complexity and L2 narrative oral performance. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of Barcelona, Spain.
Gilabert, R. (2007). Effects of manipulating task complexity on self-repairs during L2 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 45(3), 215-240.
Ishikawa, T. (2006). The effect of manipulating task complexity along the (- Here-and-Now) dimension on L2 written narrative discourse. In C. M. Garcı´a-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 136-156). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Kawauchi, C. (2005). The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate L2 proficiency. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 143-164). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kellog, R. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. Lery and S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kim, Y., Payant, C., &Pearson, P. (2015). The intersection of task-based interaction, task complexity, and working memory: L2 question development through recasts in a laboratory setting. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(3), 549–581.
Kormos, J. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 148-161.
Kuiken, F., Mos, M., &Vedder, I. (2005). Cognitive task complexity and second language writing performance. In S. Foster-Cohen, M.P. García-Mayo, & J. Cenoz (Eds.), Eurosla Yearbook, 5 (pp. 195-222). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kuiken, F., &Vedder, I. (2007). Task complexity and measures of linguistics performance in L2 writing. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 261-284.
Kuiken, F.,&Vedder, I. (2008). Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 48-60.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619.
Ojima, M. (2006). Concept mapping as pre-task planning: A case study of three Japanese ESL writers. System, 34, 566-585.
Ong, J., & Zhang, L. (2010). Effects of task complexity on fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 218-233.
Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A.(2006). The impact of planning time on children's task-based interactions.System, 34, 547-565.
Rahimpour, M., 2007. Task complexity and variation in L2 learners' oral discourse. The University of Queensland Working papers in Linguistics, Australia., 1, 1-9.
Rahimpour, M., (2008). Implementation of task-based approaches to language teaching .Pajohesh-e- Zabanhay-e- Khareji, Special English Issue, Tehran University, 41, 45-61.
Révész, A. (2014). Towards a fuller assessment of cognitive models of task-based learning: Investigating task-generated cognitive demands and processes. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 87–92.
Rezazadeh, M., Tavakoli, M.,&Eslami-Rasekh, A.(2011). The Role of task type in foreign language written production: Focusing on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. Department of English Language, Faculty of Foreign Languages.University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
Richards, J., &Renandya, W. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, P. (1995). Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45(1), 99-140.
Robinson, P. (2001a). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, P. (2001b). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27-57.
Robinson, P. (2003). The cognition hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21(2), 45-105.
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1-33.
Robinson, P. (2007a). Criteria for grading and sequencing pedagogical tasks. In M. P. G. Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 7-27). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Robinson, P. (2007b). Task Complexity, Theory of Mind, and Intentional Reasoning: Effects on L2 Speech Production, Interaction, Uptake and Perceptions of Task Difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 45(3), 193-213.
Robinson, P. (2011). Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61, 1-36.
Robinson, P., Chi-chien Ting, S., &Urwin, J. (1995). Investigating second language task complexity. RELC, 26, 62-78.
Salimi, A., Dadaspour, S., Asadollahfam, H.(2011). The Effect of Task Complexity on EFL learners' Written performance.
Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan& M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 119-141). New York: Longman.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(01), 1-14.
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532.
Skehan, P.,& Foster, P.(1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influence on foreign language performance. Language teaching Research, 1, 185-211.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93-120.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183-205). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Slimani-Rolls, A.(2005).Rethinking task-based language learning: What we can learn from the learners. Language Teaching Research, 9(2), 195-218.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P. (2011). Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 61, 37-72.
Tavakoli, P., &Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second languages (pp. 239-277). Amesterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to content and form in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287-301.
Wigglesworth, G., &Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445-466.
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. (1998). Second language development in writing. Hawaii: Hawaii University Press.
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1 27. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 277 PDF Download: 260 |
||||
