The Impact of Mixed Planning on the Accuracy of Iranian Learners’ Oral Performance

Seifoori, Zohreh; Birjandi, Parviz

|
|
|
How to cite
RIS EndNote BibTeX APA MLA Harvard Vancouver
|
Share

	The Impact of Mixed Planning on the Accuracy of Iranian Learners’ Oral Performance
Article 9, Volume 1, Issue 3, Summer and Autumn 2008, Page 177-203 PDF (497.63 K)
Document Type: Research Paper
Authors
Zohreh Seifoori; Parviz Birjandi
Islamic Azad University-Science and Research Branch
Abstract
This study set out to explore the impact of three levels of task planning on the accuracy of task-based oral performance with narrative task types among sixty Iranian sophomores majoring in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) at Islamic Azad University – Tabriz Branch. It was hypothesized that simultaneous pre-task/on-line planning would lead to more accurate performance. To test the research hypothesis, a quasi experimental design was used with three levels of planning (pre-task planning (PTP), on-line task planning (OLP), pre/on-line task planning (POLP). The participants in the study included 60 pre-intermediate TEFL sophomores at Islamic Azad University-Tabriz Branch who were selected out of a population of 200 TEFL sophomores on the basis of their scores on a proficiency test and an oral pre-test. One-way ANOVA run on the post-test data indicated statistically significant effects on the accuracy of the participants' task-based oral performance under POLP planning condition. However, there was no significant effect on accuracy as a result of PTP and OLP planning. The independent samples t-test analysis revealed significant accuracy gains in the POLP groups whereas the same improvements were not observed in the PTP and OLP planners.
Keywords
Pre-Task Planning; On-Line Planning; Pre/On-Line Planning; Oral performance; Accuracy


References
Anderson, J. (1983). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum. Bygate, M. (1996). Effects of task repetition: Appraising the development of second language learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136-146). London: Macmillan. Bygate, M. (1999a). Task as the context for the framing, re-framing and un-framing of Language. System 27, 33-48. Bygate, M. (1999b). Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners' language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research 3, 185-214. Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11, 367-383. 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. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Philadelphia: John Benjamins B.V. Publication. Ellis, R. (2007). Educational settings and second language learning. Asian EFL Journal 9(4), 12-18. 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 planning and focus of planning on task- based performance. Language Teaching Research 3, 215-247. Heaton, J. B. (1975). Beginning composition through pictures. London: Longman Group Limited. Levelt, W.J.M. (1989). Speaking: from intention to articulation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Lantolf, J. (2000). Second language learning as a mediated process. Language Teaching 33, 79-96. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.). Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego: Academic Press. Lynch, T. & Maclean, J. (2000). Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recycling for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research 4(3), 221-250. McLaughlin, B. (1990). Restructuring. Applied Linguistics 11, 113-128. Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 83-108. Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories (2^nd Ed.). London: Hodder Arnold. Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 108-148. Richards, J. C. (1997). Expanding tactics for listening. New York: Oxford University Press. Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of Task-based Instruction. Applied Linguistics 17(1), 38-62. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 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 condition on narrative retellings. Language Learning 49, 93-120. Wenden, A. L. (2002). Learner development in language learning. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 32-55. Wigglesworth, G. (1977). And investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14, 85-106. Willis, J. (1996). A flexible framework for task-based learning. In J. Willis, & D. Willis (Eds.). Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 52-62). Oxford: Heinemann. Wingglesworth, 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 oral production. Applied Linguistics 24(1), 1-27 Yule, G. (1996). Referential communication tasks. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Statistics Article View: 378 PDF Download: 563