Task preparedness and L2 written production: Investigating effects of planning modes on L2 learners’ focus of attention and output
Introduction
Over the past three decades, task planning, and its more recently developed form, task preparedness, has garnered considerable attention in the field of task-based language teaching (TBLT), which is a leading educational framework and pedagogical approach to language teaching with the main purpose of preparing learners to perform real-world tasks closely matching their needs (Norris, 2009). Within the TBLT framework, task planning, operationalized in various forms such as strategic planning and online planning, is considered a means of enhancing learners’ preparedness for task performance (Ellis, 2019). The role of task planning has been probed in conjunction with other mediating variables such as individual characteristics (e.g., working memory, proficiency, and motivation), language assessment, interlanguage variation, task characteristics, and discourse modes. Task planning has been primarily measured in relation to complexity, accuracy, lexis, and fluency (CALF) (Housen, Kuiken, & Vedder, 2012) and shown to foster the CALF of second language (L2) production. This growing interest to choose CALF for exploring the impact of planning time might stem from the fact that these constructs are multi-componential, multi-dimensional, and multi-layered in nature (Michel, 2017), characterize different aspects of language performance (Wolfe-Quintero, Inagaki, & Kim, 1998), and best capture principal components of L2 proficiency (Housen et al., 2012). Additionally, planning research has focused on CALF “to account for how and why language competencies develop for specific learners and target languages, in response to particular tasks, teaching, and other stimuli, and mapped against the details of developmental rate, route, and ultimate outcomes” (Norris & Ortega, 2009, p. 557).
Although task planning increases L2 learners’ preparedness to manage cognitive and communicative pressure (Bui & Teng, 2019), the role of its modes as task preparedness options has remained unexplored. In particular, it is still uncertain how different modes of pre-task planning – written versus oral pre-task planning – influence L2 learners’ focus of attention before and during writing. Whereas a few studies have examined L2 learners’ mental processes and their working memory capacity during pre-task planning time (Guará-Tavares, 2016; Johnson, Mercado, & Acevedo, 2012; Rostamian, Fazilatfar, & Jabbari, 2018), it is unclear how L2 learners using different planning modes distribute their attentional resources during planning and writing. Motivated by the above-mentioned gaps in the TBLT literature, this study, focusing on Bui’s (2014) task-preparedness framework, aims to explore the effects of pre-task planning modes as task preparedness options on the CALF of L2 written production and discover L2 learners’ allocation of attentional resources during planning and writing. Theoretically, the findings of this study may advance current understanding about the role of planning modes as a form of task-preparedness in overcoming limited attentional resources and nurturing different constructs of L2 written production. Pedagogically, the findings may help language teachers identify appropriate task-preparedness conditions to decrease the need for online processing during writing and facilitate the generation of more elaborate ideas, leading to improving one or more constructs of their CALF. Additionally, these results might inform teachers how L2 learners involved in oral and written modes of pre-task planning leverage their attentional resources and improve their writing.
Section snippets
A theoretical framework of task preparedness
Ellis (2005) divided planning into two main types: 1. pre-task planning and 2. within-task (online) planning. Pre-task planning consists of task repetition or rehearsal in which learners perform a task once as preparation for doing the same task later, while strategic planning in which learners plan the content and language they will need to produce and decide how to do so without rehearsing. Within-task planning, in contrast, occurs when a task is carried out under pressured and unpressured
Participants and context
This study included 72 Chinese ESL undergraduates who enrolled in four International Composition (II) classes in the English department at a major American university. These classes met for fifteen weeks, three hours per week. The International Composition (II) course was taught by two different instructors using a communicative-oriented syllabus and similar teaching materials. Descriptive statistics for participants’ demographic information are presented in Table 1, which shows that the
Effects of WP and OP on the syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency of L2 written production
The first and second research questions asked how two pre-task planning modes ‒ WP and OP ‒ affected the CALF of L2 written production as compared to NP. As indicated in Table 4, descriptive statistics revealed that the WP and OP groups obtained higher means for syntactic complexity measures than the NP group. The results from MANOVA showed significant differences across the three groups regarding complexity measures (p < .05): (1) the number of words per T-unit (W/T) [F(1, 58) = 5.74, p < .001
Effects of WP on the CALF of L2 written production
The results suggest overwhelming support for WP for all constructs except lexical complexity. In particular, the beneficial effects of WP on L2 writing complexity corroborate the findings of prior studies (Abdi Tabari, 2016, 2020; Ellis & Yuan, 2004; Farahani & Meraji, 2011; Ghavamnia et al., 2013; Rostamian et al., 2018). This implies that WP could relieve pressure during planning processes, allowing learners to devote additional capacity to translating processes such as grammatical encoding
Conclusion
This study explored the effect of pre-task planning modes on L2 writing and revealed what L2 learners attend to during planning and writing. The main findings can be summarized as follows: First, the beneficial effects of pre-task planning modes on the CALF of L2 written production are partially confirmed by the findings of this study; both OP and WP improve fluency, but the latter fosters complexity and accuracy while the former promotes overall syntactic and lexical complexity. These findings
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Mark D. Johnson and Zsuzsanna Abrams and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and valuable help with this study. However, any shortcomings in the study remain my own.
Mahmoud Abdi Tabari is a lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the University of Virginia. He has been teaching ESL and EAP courses to international and multilingual students in EFL/ESL contexts for more than 16 years. His research interests include second language acquisition, second language writing, and task-based language teaching.
References (58)
- et al.
Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2014) - et al.
Comparing perspectives on L2 writing: Multiple analyses of a common corpus: Introduction
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2014) - et al.
The effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2012) - et al.
Planning conditions (strategic planning, task repetition, and joint planning), cognitive task complexity, and task type: Effects on L2 oral performance
System
(2020) - et al.
Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2010) - et al.
Another look at accuracy in second language writing development
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2014) The effects of planning time on complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexical variety in L2 descriptive writing
Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education
(2016)Differential effects of strategic planning and task structure on L2 writing outcomes
Reading and Writing Quarterly
(2020)Oxford placement test 2: Test pack
(2004)- et al.
Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in the argumentative writing of ESL and EFL learners
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
(2019)
Task readiness: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence from topic familiarity, strategic planning, and proficiency levels
Task-readiness and L2 task performance across proficiency levels
Task planning and task‐readiness
Defining and operationalizing L2 complexity
The effects of planning with writing on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy of L2 oral narratives
Stimulated recall interviews in Ethnography
Qualitative Sociology
Planning and task performance in a second language
The differential effects of three types of task planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production
Applied Linguistics
Task-preparedness
The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Cognitive task complexity and L2 narrative writing performance
Journal of Language Teaching and Research
Stimulated recall methodology in applied linguistics and second language research
The effect of pre-task and online planning conditions on complexity, accuracy and fluency on EFL learners’ written production
Porta Linguarum
Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language
Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers
Learners’ processes during pre-task planning and working memory capacity
IIha do Desterro A journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies
Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency. Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA
Planning in second language writing
The effect of task repetition and corrective feedback in L2 writing: A pilot study
MSU Working Papers in SLS
The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate L2 proficiency
Cited by (18)
A measure of EFL argumentative writing cognitive load: Scale development and validation
2024, Journal of Second Language WritingAuthorial voice in source-based and opinion-based argumentative writing: Patterns of voice across task types and proficiency levels
2023, Journal of English for Academic PurposesInvestigating the interactions between L2 writing processes and products under different task planning time conditions
2022, Journal of Second Language WritingCitation Excerpt :Likewise, Roca de Larios, Manchόn, Murphy, and Marín (2008) pointed out that “another area for future research is the analysis of the relationship between the interaction of writing processes and quality of writing” (p. 44). More recently, Abdi Tabari (2021) mentioned that the effects of cognitive mechanisms underlying writing processes and writing behaviors warrant more rigorous explorations because little is known about how the mental activities L2 learners engage in before and during writing affect their production. To bridge this gap, following past studies (Abdi Tabari, 2021; Ellis & Yuan, 2004; Révész, Kourtali, & Mazgutova, 2017), we adopted Kellogg’s writing model (1996) as a theoretical basis of the present study to address the process and product relationship under different planning conditions.
Exploring feedback and regulation in online writing classes with keystroke logging
2022, Computers and CompositionVerb argument construction complexity indices and L2 written production: effects of task complexity and task repetition
2024, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching
Mahmoud Abdi Tabari is a lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the University of Virginia. He has been teaching ESL and EAP courses to international and multilingual students in EFL/ESL contexts for more than 16 years. His research interests include second language acquisition, second language writing, and task-based language teaching.