Task engagement: a potential criterion for quality assessment of language learning tasks
Tóm tắt
Maximizing learning opportunities has long been the focus of research in teaching English as a foreign language. Besides the degree to which learners are engaged with the linguistic aspects, investigating other potential of the tasks is of prime importance for maximizing learning opportunities. The present research investigates the potential of four different task types (translation, dictogloss, text reconstruction and jigsaw) performed by 80 Iranian English as foreign language (EFL) intermediate students in promoting learner engagement. Learner's movement from limited to elaborate behavioral, affective and cognitive engagement at verbal, paralinguistic and functional levels while performing the tasks was studied using conversation analysis techniques. The conversation and episodes were coded using a predetermined template of coding. The conversation and ANOVA (analysis of variance) results show that as mind goes through transformation, it is indicated in the transformation in dialogic discourse (speech). The results also indicated that although task engagement patterns were the same across all tasks, the tasks have different potential in promoting task engagement. The results imply that besides other task characteristics including task utility, naturalness and essentiality which focus on linguistic aspects, task engagement is an equally important criterion for the quality assessment of the tasks and should be taken into account since it not only creates sustained attention on linguistic aspects but also mediates learning as it engages learners behaviorally, affectively and cognitively. The results also shed lights on the concept of interactional authenticity and how it can be operationalized in practice.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aldosari, A. (2008). The Influence of Proficiency Levels, Task Types, and Social Relationships on Pair Interactions: An EFL Context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Melbourne, School of Languages and Linguistics.
Amirkhiz, S. Y. Y., Bakar, K. A., Samad, A. A., Baki, R., & Mahmoudi, L. (2013). EFL/ESL Learners’ Language Related Episodes (LREs) during Performing Collaborative Writing Tasks. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(3), 473–479.
Ansarin, A. A., & Mohamadi, Z. (2013a). Language Engagement at the Level of Syntax: Assessing Metatalk and Task Types in SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 2(4), 142–154.
Ansarin, A. A., & Mohamadi, Z. (2013b). Language Engagement in Task-Based Interaction: Focus on Intonation. The Iranian EFL Journal, 12(2), 152.
Caulfield, J. (2010). Applying graduate student perceptions of task engagement to enhance learning conditions. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(1), 8.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life: Basic Books.
De la Colina, A. A., & Mayo, M.P. (2007). Attention to form across collaborative tasks by low-proficiency learners in an EFL setting. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 91–116). London, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Dembovskaya, S. B. (2009). Task-based instruction: The effect of motivational and cognitive pre-tasks on second language oral French production. Theses and Dissertations, 231.
Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 275–300.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 1–23.
Geldenhuys, C. M. (2011). Task-based course design for campus communication in ISIXHOSA. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch.
Hamedani, S. (2013). The relationship between self-efficacy and self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies, 3(1), 20–31.
Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices. IES Practice Guide. NCEE 2008-4027. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
Lee, H-G. (2011). Exploring a model of ESL motivation and engagement. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Washington State University, Pullman.
Lee, H. G. (2012). ESL learners' motivation and task engagement in technology enhanced language learning contexts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Washington State University Research Exchange.
Lee, L. (2016). Autonomous learning through task-based instruction in fully online language courses. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 81-97
Lutz, S. L., Guthrie, J. T., & Davis, M. H. (2006). Scaffolding for engagement in elementary school reading instruction. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(1), 3–20.
Ma, J. H. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in L2 learners’ task motivation: A self-determination theory perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
Maad, M. R. B. (2012). Interaction effect of task demands and individual differences on L2 learners’ perception of task difficulty and motivation. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 01–14.
Meltzer, J., & Hamann, E. T. (2005). Meeting the Literacy Development Needs of Adolescent English Language Learners Through Content-Area Learning-PART TWO: Focus on Classroom Teaching and Learning Strategies.
Mozgalina, A. (2015). More or less choice? The influence of choice on task motivation and task engagement. System, 49, 120–132.
Nakahama, Y., Tyler, A., & Lier, L. (2001). Negotiation of meaning in conversational and information gap activities: A comparative discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 377–405.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2003). Interactional context and feedback in child ESL classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 519–533.
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101.
Pellettieri, J. (2010). Online chat in the foreign language classroom: From research to pedagogy. Mextesol Journal, 34(1), 41–57.
Platt, E., & Brooks, F. B. (2002). Task engagement: A turning point in foreign language development. Language Learning, 52(2), 365–400.
Polio, C., & Gass, S. M. (1998). The role of interaction in native speaker comprehension of nonnative speaker speech. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 308–319.
Russell, J., Mackay, T. & Jane, G. (2003) Messages from MYRAD: Improving the Middle Years of Schooling . Melbourne, Australia: Incorporated Association of Registered Teachers of Victoria.
Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1994). Student engagement: Views from technology-rich classrooms. Document téléaccessible à l’adresse. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5e1b/3dabf5e2b43b43bdc46711600112910e6035.pdf.
Storch, N. (1998). A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative text reconstruction task. ELT Journal, 52(4), 291–300.
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153–173.
Storch, N. (2008). Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness, 17(2), 95–114.
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Writing tasks: The effects of collaboration. Investigating tasks in formal language learning, 157–177.
Weideman, A. (2006). Assessing academic literacy: A task-based approach.
Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. Handbook of Reading Research, 3, 403–422.