Narrative Task-Type Repetition and Changes in Second Language Use in a Classroom Environment: A Case Study

Second language researchers have investigated into how aspects of learner language are affected by particular tasks under particular conditions. However, most of the previous studies were limited in the sense that they only looked at one snapshot of a learner’s performance. This study attempts to gain insights into second language development that may have resulted from task-based learning over an extended period of time. Changes in the productive skills of one learner are reported that were brought about by repetitive use of the narration task over three weeks in a classroom environment. The learner gained in accuracy and certain aspects of fluency not only in the familiar narrative task but also in his impromptu speech, though his language did not become more complex. When these results were compared with the performance in the same narration and speech tasks by another learner who had repeated decision-making tasks, several interesting contrasts were identified. The results may suggest that there are aspects of learner language that are upgraded by the repetition of specific types of tasks. Task-based language teaching (TBLT) has been the center of attention in second language (L2) pedagogy as a methodological innovation, and also as a target of research among L2 researchers. In its essence, a task is a classroom activity that requires learners to use a second language in a meaningful context in order to attain a (nonlinguistic) goal, during which the learners are supposed to be involved in the same cognitive processes as in natural language use (cf., Ellis, 2003). TBLT is expected to provide the learners with a rich “holistic second-language experience” (Willis, 1996, p. 135) in the sense that they are provided with opportunities to be exposed to as well as to produce the target language, and also have opportunities for grammatical consciousness-raising as a post-task activity in many TBLT options. Part of the recent academic interest in task-based instruction may have grown, as Ellis (2003) points out, out of the expectation that the task is the “shared construct” (p. 34) on which the interests of L2 researchers and practitioners meet. This is noteworthy especially when we look back on the history of disconnection between L2 research and L2 teaching practices. The ultimate goal of the joint endeavor of practitioners and researchers who are interested in tasks and task-related learning/teaching should be to design a task-based syllabus in which tasks are sequenced according to their difficulty, complexity, and expected developmental gains. In order for this goal to be attained, information has to be obtained as to what type of task has what effect and how the conditions for task implementation affect the process. Previous task-related research may be categorized into two broad types. One is the study of interaction among learners, or between learners and the instructor, when they are engaged in a particular type of task. Most of the studies in this tradition are heavily influenced by Long’s Interaction Hypothesis (e.g., Long, 1981, 1996), and have been carried out with the assumption that input of good quality and/or corrective 126 Masanori Matsumura, Kazuyo Kawamura, Armand Affricano feedback (i.e., clarification request, confirmation check, recast, etc.) given in the course of negotiation of meaning should promote L2 acquisition. In those studies, learners’ task performance has been analyzed in terms of how much meaning negotiation and corrective feedback is generated in their completion of a particular task under a particular condition (e.g., Berwick, 1991; Duff, 1986; Newton, 1991) and how it results in better comprehension and/or acquisition (e.g., Mackey, 1999). The second type of task-related research is the study of task-generated language production. The precursor to this line of research may be found in the study of variation in the 1980s (e.g., Tarone, 1983), which showed that the language produced by L2 learners varies according to the amount of attention paid during speech to formal features of the target language, exactly as revealed by sociolinguists such as Labov (e.g., 1972) in regard to first language production. Recently, many researchers have been vigorously investigating how L2 learners’ performance varies according to the type of task (e.g., narrative, decision-making, opinion-exchange, etc.) they are engaged in and the conditions for task implementation (e.g., with or without chances for planning time), in terms of such dimensions as fluency, accuracy, and complexity of their language. The present study may be located among this second group of studies, but tries to go further into a relatively unexplored research area, i.e., the potential for TBLT to develop the productive skills of the learners in the long run, rather than the influence of task type or task condition on a one-time learner performance. Specifically, we attempt to gain insights into how a repetitive use of the narrative task causes changes in the fluency, accuracy, and complexity levels of learner language. Before reporting the design and the results of the present study, in the next section, we will review relevant previous studies on task-based production. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES As noted above, the study of task-based production has been trying to uncover how the conditions for task implementation and the design features of the tasks themselves influence aspects of learner language. Many studies dealing with implementational variables have addressed the effect of planning. It has been reported in the literature that when learners are afforded extra time prior to a task activity, the complexity and fluency of their language increase (e.g., Ortega, 1999). On the other hand, if they are allowed to plan on-line (i.e., to take as much time as they need for task completion) the learners use the opportunity mainly for increasing the accuracy of their language (Yuan & Ellis, 2003). Skehan and Foster (1999) reported that in the narration task, it is only when the storyline was structured (i.e., has a basic predictable sequence of events) that a chance for on-line planning made the learner language more accurate. Mehnert (1998) found that different lengths of pre-task planning had different effects on learner’s L2 production. A short (one minute) preparation time helped learners to increase accuracy, with little further improvement with the provision of additional time. Fluency increased proportionally as a function of the length of the time given. Complexity increased only when a considerable length of planning time (ten minutes) was available. Other studies dealing with implementational variables have investigated the effects of the introduction of a surprise element (Foster & Skehan, 1997), the effects of the organization and management of the time for pre-task planning (Foster & Skehan, 1999). See Ellis (2003) for an excellent review of these and related studies. The research on task design variables has examined how inherent characteristics of a task influence learner performance. For example, in their papers in the 1990’s, Skehan and Foster (e.g., Foster & Skehan, 1996) looked at learner performance in three different types of tasks: the personal (information conveying) task, the narrative task, and the decision-making task. More recently, developing Skehan’s (1992) theorizing, Skehan (2001) abstracted out five task features (i.e., familiarity of information, dialogic vs. monologic task, Narrative Task-Type Repetition 127 degree of structure, complexity of outcome, and transformations) and analyzed how each of these parameters determine L2 production by the learner. In many of the studies in this tradition, the design of the experiment is notably complex with many variables processed simultaneously, so that the results are often considerably difficult to interpret. However, it may be possible to list several of the major findings to date: The monologic narrative task lowers the levels of complexity and accuracy of learner language, particularly in the condition of telling while watching a video as opposed to telling after watching. (Skehan & Foster, 1999). Learner language tends to be accurate and complex in the decision-making task (e.g., Duff, 1986; Newton & Kennedy, 1996). Closed tasks (i.e., the tasks that have but single solutions) do not motivate learners toward complex language use (e.g., Brown, 1991; Tong-Fredericks, 1984). Among open tasks that allow multiple solutions, learners’ utterances are more complex in divergent tasks than in convergent tasks (Duff, 1986). Tasks that have a firm structure invite fluent language use (Skehan & Foster, 1999). Tasks that require a complex outcome motivate learners to produce complex language. (Skehan, 2001) Thus, there is now a collection of significant findings on how a learner’s performance is affected by inherent task characteristics and conditions for task completion. Importantly, however, a developmental perspective is missing in the previous discussion: A majority of studies have been concerned only with performance, or one-time language use, rather than the development of performance skills over time. Arguably, a one-time good performance and continued, consistent progress in the long run are two different things. The fact that the accuracy, complexity or fluency level is low in a one-time performance of a particular task by no means predicts what will happen regarding the learner’s language when the same type of task is repeated over an extended period of time. It would not be surprising if repeated struggles with a task of the proper level of difficulty for a given learner helps them develop the skills necessary for its completion, just as athletes increase their physical capacities by working out under adequately overloaded conditions, even though the performance level is low on the first trial. Thus, it would be important to inquire into the long-term poten