The Effect of Strategic Planning Focus and Time on Writing Fluency and Accuracy

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr, Iran

2 English Language Department, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

Abstract

Following previous studies reporting a beneficial effect for pre-task planning on learners' task performance, the present research takes into account the possible effects of directing learners' attention to meaning and form of language on their written production while they have one- and five-minute strategic planning time. The study randomly categorized 48 intermediate learners of English into six groups and asked them to undertake a narrative task under formfocused, meaningfocused, and unguided planning conditions each with one or five minutes of strategic planning time. Their performances were analyzed by a set of fluency and accuracy measures whose results were put into one-way ANOVA. As for the comparison under one-minute planning condition, formfocused planners outperformed the other two groups in both measures. Similar results were obtained under the five-minute planning condition. The results also showed that five-minute planning condition enhanced the learners' fluency of production more than their accuracy, unlike one-minute planning condition. It is proposed that the formfocused planning condition better promotes writing processes than meaningfocused and unguided planning conditions; besides, the longer the planning time is, the more fluency is fostered whereas the shorter the planning time is, the more accurate the learners' production would be.

Keywords


Abdel Latif M.M. (2009). Towards a new processs-based indicator of measuring writing fluency: Evidence from L2 writers’ think-aloud protocols. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(4): 531-58.

Baba, K. (2009). Aspects of lexical proficiency in writing summaries in a foreign language. Journal of Second language Writing, 18 (3), 191-208.

Bygates, M., & Samuda, V. (2005). Integrative planning through the use of task-repetition. In  R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language learning (pp. 37- 76). Amesterdam: Benjamins.

Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language  Acquisition, 11, 367-383.

Chenoweth, N.A., Hayes, J.R. (2001). Fluency in writing: generating texts in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18 (1): 80-98.

Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 1-20.                              

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.                                                   

Ellis, R. (2005a). Planning and task-based performance: Theory

     And research .In R.Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 3-34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 

Ellis, R. (Ed.). (2005b). Planning and task performance in a

 Second language. Amsterdam:John Benjamins.                         

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and, accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 5-84.                                                                                                  

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2005). The effects of careful within task planning on oral and written    task performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language learning (pp. 167-192). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

 Foster, P. (1996). Doing the task better: How planning time influences student’s performance. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 126-135). London: Heinemann.

Foster, P. (2001). Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task-based   language production of native and non-native speakers. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan,   & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning,   teaching, and testing (pp. 75-97). London: Pearson.

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299-323.         

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1999). The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, 3, 215-247.   

Grabe, W. (2001). Notes on a theory of second language writing. In T. Silva & P.  Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 39-57). Mahwa, NJ: Erlbaum.         

Heaton, J. (1975). Beginning composition through pictures. Harlow: Longman.

Johnson, M.D., Mercado, L., Acevedo, A. (2012). The effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3): 264-82  

Kellog, R. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. Levy, & S. Ransdell                            (Eds.), The science of writing (pp. 57-71). Mahwa, NJ: Erlbaum.                             

Knoch, U. (2011). Fluency in writing: the reader’s perspective. Joint Conference of the Australian Association of Applied Linguistics and Association of Applied Linguistics of New Zeland, Canberra, December 2011.    

Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different length of time for planning on second      language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 83-108.        

Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L. (2008). Balancing communication and grammar in beginning level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12, 11-37.                                         

Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in  Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109-148.                                           

Reynolds, D.W. (2005). Linguistic correlates of second language literacy development: Evidence from middle-grade learners’ essay. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(1): 19-45

Robinson, P. (2001). 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.

Sasaki, M. (2002). Towards an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal Second Language Writing, 9 (3), 259-291.      

Sangarun, J. (2005). The effects of focusing on meaning and form in strategic planning.                               In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 111-141). Amsterdam:  John Benjamins.

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction.    Applied Linguistics, 17, 38--62.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences                            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 (1), 93-120.                 

Spelman Miller, K. (2002). Academic writers on-line: investigating pausing in the production of text. Language teaching research, 4 (2), 123-148.  

Storch, N. (2009). The impact of studying in a second language (L2) medium university on the development of L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(2): 103-18                                                              

Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on   oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14, 85-106.                                                  

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.