16.3580, Diss: Applied Linguistics: Reinders: 'The Effects of...'

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-16-3580. Sat Dec 17 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.3580, Diss: Applied Linguistics: Reinders: 'The Effects of...'

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Dooley, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Meredith Valant <meredith at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.


===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 15-Dec-2005
From: Hayo Reinders < email at hayo.nl >
Subject: The Effects of Different Task Types on Intake and Acquisition of Two English Grammatical Structures 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 12:17:05
From: Hayo Reinders < email at hayo.nl >
Subject: The Effects of Different Task Types on Intake and Acquisition of Two English Grammatical Structures 
 


Institution: University of Auckland 
Program: Applied Linguistics 
Dissertation Status: Completed 
Degree Date: 2005 

Author: Hayo Reinders

Dissertation Title: The Effects of Different Task Types on Intake and
Acquisition of Two English Grammatical Structures 

Linguistic Field(s): Applied Linguistics


Dissertation Director(s):
Rod Ellis

Dissertation Abstract:

Recent years have seen a growing interest in the role of tasks in second
language acquisition. A substantial body of research now exists
investigating the effects of different task types and their accompanying
instructions on learning. Less is known about how tasks affect intake and
the relationship between intake and acquisition. 

This study investigated the effects of 1) implicit and explicit inductive
instructions and 2) various task types on both intake and acquisition of
two English grammatical structures. Fifty adult ESL learners enrolled in
private language schools in New Zealand were pretested with the help of a
timed and an untimed grammaticality judgement test for prior knowledge of
negative adverbs and adverb placement and were randomly assigned to either
a dictation, an indvidual reconstruction, or a collaborative reconstruction
treatment. Treatments were accompanied by either implicit instructions
(containing only practical instructions on how to perform the task) or
explicit instructions (drawing participants' attention to the target
structures and giving an example of it). Performance on the treatments was
taken as a measure of intake, and talk-aloud reports were obtained to gauge
participants' awareness during task completion. Gain scores from pretest to
posttest and to delayed posttest were taken as an indication of learning
effects. 

The results show that the explicit instructions of the inductive type used
in this study were unable to affect participants' intake and acquisition in
comparison with the implicit instructions. Also, the three types of
treatments did not have an effect on acquisition in many cases. Where there
was an effect, the treatments differentially affected intake and
acquisition. Dictation led to high intake, but less acquisition, and the
individual reconstruction treatment led to low intake, but greater
acquisition. The collaborative reconstruction treatment was the most
consistent of the three. The cognitively more demanding reconstruction
treatments (i.e. those involving the retention of larger amounts of texts
over longer periods of time) resulted in greater acquisition than the
dictation treatment. 

The main theoretical implications of the results are that the type of
inductive and low-level explicit instructions used in this study were not
sufficient to differentially affect intake and acquisition. Other, more
explicit types of treatments may be necessary. The results also indicate
that task types that are relatively easy, affect intake to a greater extent
than more demanding tasks, but that more demanding tasks are more likely to
affect acquisition. 

On a methodological level, the concept of intake was found to be very
difficult to operationalise, and it is suggested that additional measures
be developed. Finally, the implications for teaching practice are that for
relatively complex structures such as negative adverbs and adverb placement
exposure to the input with minimal pedagogic intervention may not be
sufficient. Teachers may also want to consider the effects of different
task types on both intake and acquisition and both teachers and researchers
need to be careful in drawing conclusion on the basis of immediate task
performance. 




-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-3580