Abstraction:Thispapergivesareportofthefindingsofapilotstudyontaskfrequencyeffectsofinput-outputcyclesonEFLlearners'oralproficiency.Theresultsshowedthattheexperimentalgroupmadegreaterprogressincomplexityandaccuracythancontrolgroups.Wemaycometotheconclusionthatcircularinput-outbenefitslearnersmost.Thestudymaygivesomeinsightsforforeignlanguageteacherstogivesecondlanguagelearnersappropriatetasksinlisteningandspeakingclasses.
Keywords:taskfrequencyinput-outputcyclesoralproficiency
1.Introduction
AccordingtoEllis’opinion,learners’acquisitionofasecondlanguage(L2)dependsontheirexperienceofthislanguageandonwhattheycanmakeofit(Ellis2009).Thelearners’experience(taskfrequency)playsaroleinlanguagelearning(HarrintonandDennis2002).Thisstudyusedthemicrogeneticanalysismethodandexperimentalmethodtoexplorethetaskfrequencyeffectsofinput-outputcyclesonthesecondlanguagelearners'oralproficiencythroughstoryretelling.Previousstudiesusuallyinvestigatedinputfrequencyoroutputfrequencyseparatelybasedoninputhypothesis,outputhypothesisorusage-basedmodelwithexperimentalmethodsorcorpus-basedmethods(Ellis2002;EllisCollins2009;EllisFerreira-junior2009;Rohde2009;Rott2007;DuyckandVanderelistetal.2008;Toth2006).Thosestudiesprovedthatinputfrequencyandoutputfrequencyplayeddifferentrolesinthecreationofthelearners'linguisticsystem.However,thosestudiesdidn'treflectwhatsecondlanguagelearnersreallydoinnaturallearningsituation.Untilnow,thereareonlyafewstudiesthathavedoneonthecombinedeffectsofinputandoutput(e.g.Rott,WilliamsandCameron2002;Gu,2005;Erlam,2003).Thisstudymaydeepenourunderstandingofthelearningprocessinwhichinputfrequencyandoutputfrequencyarebothintegrativeparts,ratherthanseparateones.Itmayalsoprovidesomeevidenceforinputhypothesis,outputhypothesis,connectionism,constructiongrammarandsocioculturaltheory(SCT).Thestudymaygivesomeinsightsforforeignlanguageteacherstogivesecondlanguagelearnersappropriatetasksinlisteningandspeakingclasses.
2.LiteratureReview
(1)Researchdoneoninputfrequencyandoutputfrequency
Nation(1989)examinedtheimprovementoffluencyafterlearnersofEnglishrepeatedthesameunrehearsedtalkemploying4/3/2technique.The4/3/2techniqueinvolvesfoursteps.First,alearnerspendsafewminutespreparingatalkonagiventopic,justthinkingofwhatheorshewilltalkaboutanddoesnotmakenotes.Second,
thelearnerpairsupwithanotherleanerandtalksonthattopicforfourminutes.Thelistenerdoesnotinterruptoraskquestions.Third,thelearnertalksagaintoanewpartneronthetopicforonlythreeminutes.Fourth,thelearnergivesthesametopicforathirdtimetoanothernewpartnerforonlytwominutes.Sotheleanerproducethesametalk(output)toadifferentpartnerwithlesstimetodoiteachtime.Inhisstudy,fluencywasmeasuredbycalculatingthenumberofwordsperminutespokenduringeachofthethreedeliveriesofthetalk,andbycalculatingthenumberofhesitations,repetitionsand1startsper100wordsforeachdelivery.Nationfoundthatthetechniqueincreasedthefluencywithwhichthespeakerdeliveredthetalk.Butthereisaprobleminusingwordsperminuteasameasureoffluencyinsuchatechnique,asindicatedbyNation,thatis,itmaybeameasureofpressureratherskill.Also,thetechniquemainlyusedasaspeakingactivityinlanguageclassroomsisn'tsuitabletosituationwhenoneislearningbyoneself.
Inacasestudy,Bygate(1996)askedalearnertonarrateavideoextractontwoseparateoccasionsimmediatelyafterviewingitwiththreedayapart.Thevideoextractwasidentical,asweretheinterlocutor,theroomandtheconditions.Thelearnerhadnopracticeoropportunitytoprepareherselfforthetaskbeforeeitheroccasion.Thekeydifferencebetweentherecordingswasthatonthesecondoccasionthelearnerwasfamiliarwiththestoryfromthepreviousencounter.TheresearcherfoundthatthelearnerseemedtoperformbetteratTime2intermsofaccuracy,repertoireandfluency.Apatternseemedtoemergewhichwouldsupporttheideathatwhenfirstcarryingoutthetask,thelearnerwouldbemoreconcernedwithplanningthecontentofthemessage,andunderpressureoftimewithfindingtheresourcessufficienttocommunicateit.Onthesecondoccasion,thelearnerwouldbemoreconcernedwithpayingattentiontotheformulationaspectofthetask,thatis,withtheselectionofwordsandphrases,withtheircorrectgrammaticalproduction,andwherenecessarywithcorrectingmistakesastheyoccur.However,thematerialchosenforthestudywasa2'50extractfromaTomandJerrycartoonwithnodialoguecontained.Thelearnercouldn'treceiveandformofthetargetlanguageandlosttheopportunityoflearningfromit.
Gassetal(1999)exploredeffectsoftaskrepetitiononsecondlanguagelearners'overallproficiency,morphosyntax,andlexicalsophisticationofSpanish.Thoselearnerswatchvideosegments4timeswhilerecordingtheirownon-linerenditioninSpanish.Onegroupwatchedthesamevideo3timesandtheothergroupwatchdifferentvideoseachtime.ATime4,bothgroupssawanewvideo.AcontrolgroupsawvideosonlyatTime1andTime4.Theresultsprovidelimitedsupportfortheimprovementovertimeforthegroupthatsawthesamevideo,butnosupportfora\"carryover\"effectwhenthecontentchanged.JustasBygate'sstudy,thesnippetsinthisstudywerechosenfromMr.Beanvideosinwhichtherewasnoaudioorinwhichtheaudiocouldberemovedwithoutinterferingwiththeoverallcontinuityorcomprehensionoftheepisode.Thelearnershadnoopportunitytolearnfromthetargetlanguage.
Zhou(2006)didastudyontheeffectsofinputfrequencyandoutputfrequency.Herarticlereportsastudythatexploredtheeffectsofinputandoutputfrequencyontheoralstoryretellingdonebytertiary-levelEnglishmajorsinChina.Itwasfoundthatasinputfrequencyincreased,thenumberofideaunitsofthestoryretellingincreased.Inputfrequencyalsohelpedimprovefluencyandcomplexitytosomeextent,butitdidnotaffectaccuracy.Bycontrast,asoutputfrequencyincreased,thenumberofideaunitsremainedunchanged.Further,outputfrequencyhelpedimprovefluencyandaccuracyanddidnotaffectcomplexitymuch.Undertheinfluenceofinputandoutputfrequency,theoveralloralperformanceachievedoptimaldevelopmentatthethirdtrialofthetask.Theresultsofthestudysupportaviewoffrequencyasasignificantvariableaffectinglanguagelearning.Balanceddevelopmentoforalperformancecanbeachievedthroughhigh-frequencypractice.Buthertreatmentwasone-shot.Thatis,thefirstgrouplearnerscouldonlylistenedtothestoryforonce,withoutfurtherchancestolearnfromit.Theotherthreegroupsonlyretellthestoryforonetime.Thethreefunctionsofoutputdidn'tplayaroleintheirlearning.
Basedonpreviousresearch,wemaythinkaboutthefollowingquestions:canEFLlearnersbenefitfromthecombinedinput-outputfrequency?Willtheiroralproficiencyimprovebetterintermsoffluency,accuracyandcomplexity?Towhatwillthelearnerspayattentionwhentheylistentotheinputforasecondtimeandathirdtime?
(2)Operationaldefinitionofaccuracy,complexityandfluency
Thereareanumberofdifferentmeasuresofthosevariablesbydifferenceresearchers.Accuracycanbemeasuredwiththenumberofself-corrections,percentageoferror-freeclauses,errorsper100words,percentageoftarget-likeverbalmorphology,percentageoftarget-likeuseofpluralsandtarget-likeuseofvocabulary(e.g.,Wigglesworth,F(xiàn)osterSkehan,Mehnert,Crookes,etc.).Inthisstudy,itwillbemeasuredastheincidenceoferrorsperAS-unit.Bygate(2002)suggeststhatthismightproduceamoresensitivemeasureofaccuracyasittakesaccountofalltheerrorsproduced.
Complexitycanbemeasuredaccordingtonumberofturns,meanturnlength(inconversationalinteractions),numberofideaunitsencoded,frequencyofsomespecificlanguagefunction,amountofsubordination,useofsomespecificlinguisticfeature,themeannumberofverbarguments,andtype-tokenratio.Inthisstudy,EFLlearnerwilllistentoanarrativestory,thustheresearcherwillcalculatethenumberofideaunitsinit,whichwillprovideameasureofpropositionalcompletenessandthusmayprovideameasureoftheextenttowhichlearnershaveengagedin\"conceptualization\"(Levelt,1989).Anideaunitisdefinedasamessagesegmentconsistingofatopicandcommentthatisseparatedfromcontiguousunitssyntacticallyand/orintonationally.AsEllis(2005)saysthatthismeasureworksbestwhenelicitationtaskrequireslearnerstocommunicateapre-specificcontent,asforexamplewhentheyareaskedtotellastorybasedonpictures.
Measuresoffluencyhavebeenoftwoprinciplekinds:temporalvariablesandhesitationphenomena.Inthisstudy,itwillbemeasuredwiththelengthofrun,themeannumberofsyllablesbetweentwopausesofapre-determinedlength(e.g.1second).Itmayreflecttheextenttowhichlearnersaccessready-madechunksoflanguage(Ellis2005).
3.Researchdesign
Researchquestions:
Whatarethetaskfrequencyeffectsofinput-outputcyclesonEFLlearners'oralproficiencyintermsofaccuracy,fluencyandcomplexity?
Participants:3intermediatesophomorestudentsofEnglishmajorsfromoneNormalUniversitywerechosenbasedonaproficiencytest.Theyweredividedintoexperimentalgroupandtwocontrolgroupsrandomly.
Materials:astorywithmp3
Treatment:ExperimentalGrouplistenedtothestoryforonetimeandretoldthestory,listenedagainandretoldthestory,listenedforathirdtimeandretoldit.Controlgroup1listenedtothestoryforonlyonetimeandretolditforthreetimes.Controlgroup2listenedtothestoryforthreetimesandretoldthestoryforonlyonetime.
Table1:treatmentofthestudy
Datacollection:1.Learners'retellingswererecorded,transcribedandcodedintermsofcontentandforms.Thecontentwillbecheckedbasedontheideaunitsandtheformwillbecheckedonaccuracy,fluencyandcomplexity.
Dataanalysis:Thestoryusedinthestudycanbedividedinto40ideaunits.Ifasubjectcanproduceonecorrectly,onepointwillbegiven.
Table2:theoutcomeofoutput3ofexperimentalgroupandcontrolgroup1andoutcome1ofcontrolgroup2
4.Resultsanddiscussion:
Theresultsshowedthattheexperimentalgroupshowedgreaterprogressincomplexityandaccuracythancontrolgroups,butcontrolgroup1showedsimilarresultsinfluencyandcontrolgroup2showedsimilaraccuracycomparedwiththeoutcomes.Fromtheresultswemaycometotheconclusionthatcircularinput-outbenefitslearnersmost.
References:
[1]Bley-Vroman,R.Frequencyinproduction,comprehension,andacquisition.SSLA24,2002.209-213.
[2]Bygate,M.Effectsoftaskrepetition:appraisingthedevelopinglanguageoflearners.InJ.WillisD.Willis(eds.).Challengeandchangeinlanguageteaching.London:Heinemann,1996.136-146.
[3]Bygate,M.Effectsoftaskrepetitiononthestructureandcontroloforallanguage.InM.Bygate,P.SkehanandM.Swain.(eds.).Researchingpedagogictasks,secondlanguagelearning,teachingandtesting.Harlow:Longman,2001.
[4]Duyck,W.,Vanderelist,D.,Desmet,T.,Hartsuiker,R.Thefrequencyeffectinsecond-languagevisualwordrecognition.PsychonomicBulletinReview,2008,15(4):850-855.
[5]Elbers,L.Anoutput-as-inputhypothesisinlanguageacquisition.InP.BroederJ.Murre(eds.).Modelsoflanguageacquisition.Oxford:OxfordUniersityPress,2000.244-278.
[6]Ellis,N.C.Reflectionsonfrequencyeffectsinlanguageprocessing.SSLA24,2002.223-236.