planning, recasts and learning of l2 morphology

Planning, recasts and learning of L2 morphologyNatalia RomanovaUniversity of [email protected]

This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create action items. Use PowerPoint to keep track of these action items during your presentation

In Slide Show, click on the right mouse buttonSelect Meeting MinderSelect the Action Items tabType in action items as they come upClick OK to dismiss this box

This will automatically create an Action Item slide at the end of your presentation with your points entered.

FocusL2 learningTask Complexity (+/-planning)Focus on Form (Recast)???+

Motivationmuch research of the effects of recasts on interlanguage development (Long, 2007)much research of task complexity variables on learners production (Ellis, 2003)much research on the effect of planning time on learners production (Ellis, 1987; 2003; Mehnert, 1998; Ortega, 1999; Wendel, 1997; Yuan and Ellis, 2003) but pre-task planning was typically conflated with online planning little research of effectiveness of recasts in relation to task complexity (Revesz and Han, 2006; Revesz, 2006; 2009)

Goals of the studyexplores the relationship between task complexity and L2 learning to explore the effects of type of planning on L2 morphological developmentisolates planning time available before and during task performance as an independent variable seeks to determine whether the availability of planning time and type of planning may enhance the salience of corrective feedback, promote the noticing of recasts and facilitate acquisition of complex morphosyntactic forms.

Recasts: impact gaps between their interlanguage and target language forms

facilitation of form-function mapping

destabilization and consequent restructuring of the IL grammar

Recasts: factors of effectiveness

Research to date suggests that recasts can facilitate L2 development, but their efficacy is a function of several internal and external variables.

learners internal factors L1level of L2 proficiencyage working memory capacitydevelopmental readiness

external factors type of linguistic features context

task variables

Planning and language production pre-task planningdirected at the conceptualization stageonline planning engages both conceptualizing and careful formulationmonitoringrapid planninglimited processing time LTM is accessed mainly for lexical material

Task characteristics: attention

Predictions regarding L2 accuracyPromotes accuracyDegrades accuracy

Predictions regarding recastsSingle resource modelless complex tasks encourage focus on form, and may lead to noticing, uptake and retention of input made salient by recasts Cognition Hypothesismore complex tasks along resource-dispersing dimensions will facilitate automatization of, and real-time access to, an already established and developing IL systemmore complex tasks along resource-directing dimensions will direct learners attention to language analysis which will eventually lead to the development of new L2 form-function mappingsmore complex tasks may prompt learners to look for more and more help in the input, attending to facilitative forms made salient by recastsmore complex tasks along resource-directing, and in general, too, along resource dispersing dimensions promote noticing, uptake and retention of input made salient by recasts.

Studies exploring the effect of task complexity on L2 learningRevesz (2007; 2009): examined how the task variable +/ contextual support combined with recasting affects L2 morphosyntactic development. Learners who received recasts but were not receiving contextual support outperformed learners who received both recasts and contextual support. Nuevo (2006): did not detect an effect for task complexity;focused on a resource-directing dimension

Research QuestionsDoes the availability of planning time before or during the task have a differential effect on the acquisition of morphological forms made salient in the input by recasts?A. Do learners who are exposed to focused recasts on their L2 output in the pre-task planning (PP) condition show greater short-term L2 development than learners who are exposed to recasts in the no planning (NP) condition?B. Do learners who are exposed to focused recasts on their L2 output during online task planning (OP condition) show greater short-term L2 development than learners who do not have an opportunity for online planning (NP condition)?2. Does type of planning (when planning takes place) have a differential effect on the acquisition of morphological forms made salient in the input by recasts?Do learners who are exposed to focused recasts on their L2 output during online planning (OP) condition and learners who engage in pre-task planning (PP) condition show similar short-term L2 development?

Hypotheses1. A. The PP group will show greater improvement than the NP group.B. The OP group will show greater improvement than the NP group.2. The OP group will show greater improvement than the PP group.

Design Pre-test-posttest-delayed posttest design

2 (time: pre-test, post-test) x 3 (planning type: pre-task, online, no planning) factorial repeated measures ANOVAtime as a within-subjects factor and type of planning as a between-subject factorDV: learners accuracy of the target forms

Treatment: recasts of deviant verb forms during online story-telling task.

DV: accuracy in the use the target form.

Participants 3 groupsPP group (N=13)OP group (N=13)NP group (N=13)

Homogeneous language backgroundNative speakers of EnglishMean age: 21.2F=23, M=16Two-five semesters of Russian Similar instructional background (the same two-volume, introductory Russian-language textbook Golosa)No study abroad experienceNo or minimal exposure to Russian outside the classroomDevelopmentally ready

Random assignment to conditions to control for possible covariates

Target form Russian: 3d person singular form of the present tense verbs of the unproductive a- class low perceptual saliencelow frequency morphologically complex (it has an automatic truncation at the juncture of the stem and the ending, mutation of the root-final consonant and a stress shift) has no communicative valueInvolves learning a probabilistic rule, or concrete co-occurrence patterns which favors implicit learning as opposed to learning abstract categorical rules that seem to be best learned explicitly (DeKeyser, 1998) is difficult to acquire solely from exposure to input (Long and Robinson, 1998): typical errors are the use of a different conjugation pattern in place of a- pattern, errors in consonant mutation, missing mutation or incorrect mutation (Gor and Chernigovskaya, 2003; 2004; Gor, 2007; Romanova, 2004; 2008).

Target form piS-a+ et= pisAu= piSHet

piSa+ tInfinitive3rd person, singular, Present

Data collectionOrally About 60 minutes per participant Language background questionnaireLanguage proficiency testPre-test: answer the questions task and picture description task Treatment session: picture description taskExit questionnaire (what they planned, focused on and noticed)Post-test given immediately after the treatment, Delayed post-test two weeks later (N=22).

StimuliReal verbs: 12 Nonce verbs: 24 (12 X2) created by manipulating one or two initial consonants. Each set has verbs representing 3 mutation types:4 verbs with root final t-, 4 verbs with root final -, both mutating to ch-, and 4 verbs with root final bilabial b-, -p-,-m- that add l-. Examples: xnykat (on) xnych+et, dremat (on) drem+l+et. Paired real and nonce verbs were not used in the same task, The same real verbs were not used in the same test, andThe same nonce verbs were not used in the pre- and post-tests.

Pre-/post-testsA story narrative tasktwo sets of 12 pictures6 real verbs (different for each set) and 6 distracters provided with the pictures.An answer-the-questions task two lists of 36 questions counterbalanced across the tests12 questions require the use of the target verbs (6 real verbs and 6 nonce verbs), and 24 distracters require the use of nouns in oblique cases, adjectives and adverbs. The order of the tasks is counterbalanced across the participants.

Answer the questions taskPlease give short one-word responses (if appropriate) to the following questions.

Examples:

Q: . ?A: .

Q: . ?A: .

Q: . ? A: .

Picture description task

2. (to descend on)

3. A (to jump up and down)

4. A (to mumble)

6. A (to make a scarecrow)

5. A (to get on someones nerves)

1. co to ripen

10. A - to pluck

11. A - to cry

8. A - to point

7. A - to smile

9. - to climb

Treatment task24 pictures, 24 words/expressions, 12 target real verbsPlanning conditions NP condition: no pre-task planning20 sec. to describe each picturePP condition: 5-10 minutes of pre-task planning20 sec. to describe each picture OP condition: no pre-task planningno time pressure to describe each picture

Method treatment task

Data coding and analysis1 point for the correct use of the verb form (-a- class conjugational pattern + correct mutation) and 0 points for an incorrect use of the a- class pattern (including incorrect mutation). Analysis of interlanguage development: all instances of attempted use of the a- class pattern were counted.

Treatment2number of correct forms during treatment *accuracy score at the immediate posttest (r=.684, p=0.00), number of attempted forms during treatment * number of attempted forms at the posttest (r=.422, p=0.01).

Chart4

11.384615384660.61538461541.6153846154

10.53846153856.69230769231.46153846150.6153846154

10.23076923087.84615384621.76923076921.4615384615

Number of recasts

Modified

Correct

Attempted

Descriptives

Gender

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Age

19538.5

20323.1

21215.4

2217.7

2317.7

2617.7

13100.0

Prof. group

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Gender

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Age

1817.7

19430.8

20215.4

2117.7

22215.4

2317.7

2617.7

2817.7

13100.0

Prof. group

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Gender

969.2

430.8

13100.0

Age

1817.7

19430.8

20215.4

22215.4

26323.1

2717.7

13100.0

Prof. group

646.2

753.8

13100.0

.2500.462918

.4286.786807

.1667.408256

.2857.5606121

1.25001.752558

4.71433.903607

6.50003.674236

3.90483.7537321

1.37502.774248

3.57145.472887

5.50004.888766

3.28574.5403021

Means

.3077.4803813

.53851.1982913

.69231.3155913

.51281.0481039

.6154.7679513

.4615.9674213

.3077.6304313

.4615.7896139

6.00003.4156513

6.69232.4284613

7.84623.0780413

6.84623.0221939

.61541.1929313

1.46151.8536213

1.76921.9215413

1.28211.7160039

1.61541.5021413

.6154.7679513

1.46151.4500213

1.23081.3270839

1.23081.8327513

5.38465.2525913

5.69234.6972413

4.10264.5814039

2.23082.7432913

1.53851.7614113

3.76922.3149513

2.51282.4373439

.3077.5385.6923.5128.6154.4615.3077.46156.00006.69237.84626.8462.61541.46151.76921.28211.6154.61541.46151.23081.23085.38465.69234.10262.23081.53853.76922.5128

.480381.198291.315591.04810.76795.96742.63043.789613.415652.428463.078043.022191.192931.853621.921541.716001.50214.767951.450021.327081.832755.252594.697244.581402.743291.761412.314952.43734

Condition

Pretest correct.3077.5385.6923

Pretest attempted.6154.4615.3077

Posttest correct1.23085.38465.69236.00006.69237.8462

Posttest attempted2.23081.53853.7692.61541.46151.7692

1.6154.61541.4615

Means

NP

PP

OP

attempted

PretestPosttest

0.62.2

0.51.5

0.33.8

Number of recastsModifiedCorrectAttempted

11.46.00.61.6

10.56.71.50.6

10.27.81.81.5

attempted

0.61538461542.2307692308

0.46153846151.5384615385

0.30769230773.7692307692

Pretest

Posttest

Multivariate tests

Number of recasts

Modified

Correct

Attempted

.6007.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

.4007.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

1.5017.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

1.5017.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

.3277.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.6737.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.4857.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.4857.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.6422.02714.00060.000.030.32128.382.908

.45614.00058.000.035.32427.858.900

.9751.95014.00056.000.040.32827.307.890

.6357.00030.000.026.38819.048.827

3.896.803.500.0642.410.205

3.210.319.812.027.957.106

320.0552.446.080.1737.339.559

38.1743.274.032.2199.823.700

32.5261.490.234.1134.469.359

397.0606.708.001.36520.125.959

311.8492.181.108.1576.542.507

.0501.050.045.833.001.045.055

.6381.638.969.332.027.969.160

376.3011376.30145.904.000.56745.9041.000

1.33811.338.536.469.015.536.110

6.91816.9184.080.051.1044.080.502

7.05917.059.488.489.014.488.104

14.208114.2082.615.115.0702.615.349

1.71511.7151.537.223.0421.537.226

.0151.015.023.880.001.023.053

37.548137.5484.580.039.1164.580.548

15.241115.2416.105.018.1496.105.671

.0391.039.023.880.001.023.053

129.7441129.7448.967.005.2048.967.829

1.65111.651.304.585.009.304.084

.8302.415.372.692.021.744.105

.6252.313.474.626.026.949.121

26.626213.3131.624.212.0853.248.320

8.12324.0611.627.211.0853.254.320

7.56223.7812.230.123.1134.460.424

150.288275.1445.193.011.22910.387.795

32.713216.3563.010.062.1476.020.547

39.054351.116

23.06235.659

286.913358.198

87.375352.496

59.346351.696

506.4103514.469

190.195355.434

52.00039

32.00039

2175.00039

176.00039

126.00039

1454.00039

472.00039

41.74438

23.69238

347.07738

111.89738

66.92338

797.59038

225.74438

Resultsaccuracy has improved overall from 0.51 to 4.1there is a difference between how the treatment affected the groups: a dramatic increase in accuracy on the posttest for the OP and PP groups but not for the NP group. no difference between the groups on the pretesta difference between the performance of the NP group and the two planning groups on the posttest.

ResultsThe main effect for time in the tests of within-subjects effects: F(1, 36)=37.028; p=.000, Eta-squared= .507, observed power=1; The effect for time * condition interaction:F(1, 36)=5.114; p=.011, Eta-squared=.211, observed power= .8The main effect for planning in the tests of between-subjects effects:F(1, 36)=3.869, p=.03, Eta-squared=.177, observed power=.663.Pairwise comparisons: OP and NP are significantly different (p=.042)PP and OP and PP and NP difference is not significantperformance on the immediate posttest is significantly different from the pretest p

Results2

ResultsThe main effect for time in the tests of within-subjects effects: F(1, 18)=15.07; p=.001, Eta-squared= .456, observed power=.956 (pretest-posttest-delayed posttest scores);The effect for time * condition interaction:F(1, 18)=2.846; p=.083,The main effect for planning in the tests of between-subjects effects:F(1, 18)=3.2849, p=.060Pairwise comparisons: OP and NP are significantly different (p=.023)PP and OP or PP and NP are not significantly differentperformance on both posttests is significantly different from pretest (p=.000 for pretest-immediate posttest comparison) and p=.003 for pretest-delayed posttest comparison)performance on posttest and delayed post test was not significantly different.

Interlanguage development attempted target forms2Effects of:time: F(1,36)=36.641, p=.000, Eta squared= .504, power=1time*condition: F(1, 36)=4.540, p=.017, Eta squared=.201, power=.737

Chart5

0.61538461542.2307692308

0.46153846151.5384615385

0.30769230773.7692307692

Pretest

Posttest

Descriptives

Gender

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Age

19538.5

20323.1

21215.4

2217.7

2317.7

2617.7

13100.0

Prof. group

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Gender

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Age

1817.7

19430.8

20215.4

2117.7

22215.4

2317.7

2617.7

2817.7

13100.0

Prof. group

753.8

646.2

13100.0

Gender

969.2

430.8

13100.0

Age

1817.7

19430.8

20215.4

22215.4

26323.1

2717.7

13100.0

Prof. group

646.2

753.8

13100.0

.2500.462918

.4286.786807

.1667.408256

.2857.5606121

1.25001.752558

4.71433.903607

6.50003.674236

3.90483.7537321

1.37502.774248

3.57145.472887

5.50004.888766

3.28574.5403021

Means

.3077.4803813

.53851.1982913

.69231.3155913

.51281.0481039

.6154.7679513

.4615.9674213

.3077.6304313

.4615.7896139

6.00003.4156513

6.69232.4284613

7.84623.0780413

6.84623.0221939

.61541.1929313

1.46151.8536213

1.76921.9215413

1.28211.7160039

1.61541.5021413

.6154.7679513

1.46151.4500213

1.23081.3270839

1.23081.8327513

5.38465.2525913

5.69234.6972413

4.10264.5814039

2.23082.7432913

1.53851.7614113

3.76922.3149513

2.51282.4373439

.3077.5385.6923.5128.6154.4615.3077.46156.00006.69237.84626.8462.61541.46151.76921.28211.6154.61541.46151.23081.23085.38465.69234.10262.23081.53853.76922.5128

.480381.198291.315591.04810.76795.96742.63043.789613.415652.428463.078043.022191.192931.853621.921541.716001.50214.767951.450021.327081.832755.252594.697244.581402.743291.761412.314952.43734

Condition

Pretest correct.3077.5385.6923

Pretest attempted.6154.4615.3077

Posttest correct1.23085.38465.69236.00006.69237.8462

Posttest attempted2.23081.53853.7692.61541.46151.7692

1.6154.61541.4615

Means

NP

PP

OP

attempted

PretestPosttest

0.62.2

0.51.5

0.33.8

Number of recastsModifiedCorrectAttempted

11.46.00.61.6

10.56.71.50.6

10.27.81.81.5

attempted

Pretest

Posttest

Multivariate tests

Number of recasts

Modified

Correct

Attempted

.6007.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

.4007.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

1.5017.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

1.5017.00029.000.000.60043.539.997

.3277.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.6737.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.4857.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.4857.00029.000.088.32714.063.673

.6422.02714.00060.000.030.32128.382.908

.45614.00058.000.035.32427.858.900

.9751.95014.00056.000.040.32827.307.890

.6357.00030.000.026.38819.048.827

3.896.803.500.0642.410.205

3.210.319.812.027.957.106

320.0552.446.080.1737.339.559

38.1743.274.032.2199.823.700

32.5261.490.234.1134.469.359

397.0606.708.001.36520.125.959

311.8492.181.108.1576.542.507

.0501.050.045.833.001.045.055

.6381.638.969.332.027.969.160

376.3011376.30145.904.000.56745.9041.000

1.33811.338.536.469.015.536.110

6.91816.9184.080.051.1044.080.502

7.05917.059.488.489.014.488.104

14.208114.2082.615.115.0702.615.349

1.71511.7151.537.223.0421.537.226

.0151.015.023.880.001.023.053

37.548137.5484.580.039.1164.580.548

15.241115.2416.105.018.1496.105.671

.0391.039.023.880.001.023.053

129.7441129.7448.967.005.2048.967.829

1.65111.651.304.585.009.304.084

.8302.415.372.692.021.744.105

.6252.313.474.626.026.949.121

26.626213.3131.624.212.0853.248.320

8.12324.0611.627.211.0853.254.320

7.56223.7812.230.123.1134.460.424

150.288275.1445.193.011.22910.387.795

32.713216.3563.010.062.1476.020.547

39.054351.116

23.06235.659

286.913358.198

87.375352.496

59.346351.696

506.4103514.469

190.195355.434

52.00039

32.00039

2175.00039

176.00039

126.00039

1454.00039

472.00039

41.74438

23.69238

347.07738

111.89738

66.92338

797.59038

225.74438

Exit questionnaire2Focusfocus* treatment accuracy: Spearman r= .327 (sig)focus* posttest accuracy: Spearman r=.400 (sig)

Chart1

38.461538461523.076923076930.7692307692

38.461538461530.769230769253.8461538462

23.076923076923.07692307697.6923076923

023.07692307697.6923076923

NP

PP

OP

low and high

Descriptive Statisticsa

NP pretest lowSDNP posttest lowSDNP low delayed posttestSDNP pretest highSDNP posttest highSDNP high delayed posttestSDPP pretest lowStd. DeviationPP posttest lowSDPP low delayedSDPP pretest highSDPP posttest highSDPP high delayedSDOP pretest lowSDOP low delayedSDOP posttest lowSDOP low delayedSDOP pretest highSDOP posttest highSDOP high delayedSD

AQ Real correct000.42857142860.78679579250.51.22474487140.16666666670.40824829050.50.5477225575000.14285714290.3779644731.14285714291.8644544715120.50.83666002652.66666666672.42212028331.66666666672.08166599950.16666666670.408248290511.41421356241011.41421356240.42857142860.78679579253.85714285712.19306265523.252.2173557826

AQ Real attempted0.28571428570.48795003651.14285714291.86445447151.16666666671.8348478593000.83333333330.983192080311.41421356240.28571428570.7559289460.42857142860.786795792511.41421356240.33333333330.51639777950.83333333330.98319208030.33333333330.57735026920011.41421356240.66666666670.816496580911.41421356240.42857142860.78679579251.57142857140.786795792511.1547005384

AQ Nonce correct000.28571428570.7559289460.83333333331.6020819788000.33333333330.816496580900000.85714285711.2149857926120.16666666670.4082482905221.66666666672.081665999500000.16666666670.4082482905000.14285714290.3779644732.14285714291.676163419721.8257418584

AQ Nonce attempted0011.41421356240.83333333331.6020819788000.16666666670.408248290511.414213562400000.751.50.16666666670.40824829050.66666666671.21106014160000001.16666666671.169045194500001.42857142861.3972762621.751.2583057392

AQ total correct000.71428571431.49602648310.33333333330.51639777950.16666666670.40824829050.83333333331.16904519450.50.70710678120.14285714290.37796447323.05505046330.751.50.66666666671.21106014164.66666666674.27395211331.33333333332.30940107680.16666666670.408248290511.41421356241.16666666670.408248290511.41421356240.57142857141.13389341963.651483716722.4494897428

AQ total attempted0.28571428570.48795003652.14285714292.7945525241.16666666672.04124145230011.264911064111.41421356240.28571428570.7559289460.42857142860.7867957925120.50.83666002651.51.97484176580.66666666670.577350269200001.83333333331.4719601444000.42857142860.7867957925321.51.2909944487

PD correct0.28571428570.48795003650.42857142860.78679579250.33333333330.51639777950.16666666670.40824829050.50.83666002650.50.70710678120.14285714290.3779644731.42857142861.81265393430.751.50.16666666670.408248290531.89736659611.33333333332.30940107680.16666666670.408248290511.414213562410.89442719111.41421356240.42857142860.78679579252.71428571431.380131118722.4494897428

PD attempted0.57142857140.78679579250.85714285710.89973541081.16666666672.04124145230.33333333330.51639777950.33333333330.516397779511.41421356240.14285714290.3779644730.71428571430.75592894612000.50.54772255750.66666666670.577350269200000.83333333330.9831920803000.14285714290.3779644731.71428571431.60356745151.51.2909944487

NP low pretestNP low posttestNP low delayed posttestNP high pretestNP high posttestNP high delayed posttestPP low pretestPP low posttestPP low delayedPP high pretestPP high posttestPP high delayedOP low pretestOP low posttestOP low delayedOP high pretestOP high posttestOP high delayed

AQ Real correct00.42857142860.50.16666666670.500.14285714291.142857142910.52.66666666671.66666666670.1666666667110.42857142863.85714285713.25

AQ Real attempted0.28571428571.14285714291.166666666700.833333333310.28571428570.428571428610.33333333330.83333333330.333333333300.666666666710.42857142861.57142857141

AQ Nonce correct00.28571428570.833333333300.3333333333000.857142857110.166666666721.666666666700.166666666700.14285714292.14285714292

AQ Nonce attempted010.833333333300.16666666671000.750.16666666670.6666666667001.1666666667001.42857142861.75

AQ total correct00.71428571430.33333333330.16666666670.83333333330.50.142857142920.750.66666666674.66666666671.33333333330.16666666671.166666666710.571428571462

AQ total attempted0.28571428572.14285714291.16666666670110.28571428570.428571428610.51.50.666666666701.833333333300.428571428631.5

PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.33333333330.16666666670.50.50.14285714291.42857142860.750.166666666731.33333333330.1666666667110.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.16666666670.33333333330.333333333310.14285714290.7142857143100.50.666666666700.833333333300.14285714291.71428571431.5

NP low pretestNP low posttestNP low delayed posttestPP low pretestPP low posttestPP low delayedOP low pretestOP low posttestOP low delayed

AQ total correct00.71428571430.33333333330.142857142920.750.16666666671.16666666671

AQ total attempted0.28571428572.14285714291.16666666670.28571428570.4285714286101.83333333330

PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.33333333330.14285714291.42857142860.750.166666666711

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.16666666670.14285714290.7142857143100.83333333330

NP high pretestNP high posttestNP high delayed posttestPP high pretestPP high posttestPP high delayedOP high pretestOP high posttestOP high delayed

AQ total correct0.16666666670.83333333330.50.66666666674.66666666671.33333333330.571428571462

AQ total attempted0110.51.50.66666666670.428571428631.5

PD correct0.16666666670.50.50.166666666731.33333333330.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.33333333330.3333333333100.50.66666666670.14285714291.71428571431.5


AQ total correct00.71428571430.3333333333AQ total correct0.142857142920.75AQ total correct0.16666666671.16666666671

AQ total attempted0.28571428572.14285714291.1666666667AQ total attempted0.28571428570.42857142861AQ total attempted01.83333333330

PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.3333333333PD correct0.14285714291.42857142860.75PD correct0.166666666711

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.1666666667PD attempted0.14285714290.71428571431PD attempted00.83333333330


AQ total correct0.16666666670.83333333330.5AQ total correct0.66666666674.66666666671.3333333333AQ total correct0.571428571462

AQ total attempted011AQ total attempted0.51.50.6666666667AQ total attempted0.428571428631.5

PD correct0.16666666670.50.5PD correct0.166666666731.3333333333PD correct0.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.33333333330.33333333331PD attempted00.50.6666666667PD attempted0.14285714291.71428571431.5


NP lowNP highPP lowPP highOP lowOP high

Pretest: Total correct0.28571428570.33333333330.28571428570.83333333330.33333333331

Pretest: Total attempted0.85714285710.33333333330.42857142860.500.5714285714

Posttest: Total correct1.14285714291.33333333333.42857142867.66666666672.16666666678.7142857143

Posttest: Total attempted31.33333333331.142857142922.66666666674.7142857143

Delayed posttest:total correct1.66666666670.52.754.666666666727.25

Delayed posttest: total attempted3.166666666732.75114.25

Valid N (listwise)









correlations

Correlations

123456Correlations

1. Proficiency score1234567

1.Exit: notice

2. Pretest: Total correct.497**

0.00128435252. Exit: focus-0.0703783387

390.6702962598

3. Treatment: correct.539**.649**39

0.00040326050.00000784053. Pretest: Total attempted0.04262877710.0562826735

39390.79665989970.7336160192

4. Exit: notice0.0534461813-0.0246217117-0.07584609463939

0.74658697830.88172548340.64629878644. Treatment: repaired output-.419**0.0042014334-0.0135725071

3939390.00796959470.97974838660.9346417478

5. Exit: focus.577**.327*0.2269169105-0.0703783387393939

0.00011929830.04209642710.16477547660.67029625985. Treatment: attempted0.1775483523-0.2009285737.373*0.238735481

393939390.27954861660.21999985280.01940695760.143288343

6. Posttest: Total correct.683**.581**.790**-0.1501260285.400*39393939

0.00000168610.00010652290.00000000230.36165384720.01152371726. Posttest: Total attempted-0.2080731409-0.0963772149.325*0.0645808753.467**

39393939390.20369123510.55945272990.04350152610.69609748930.0027334012

3939393939

7. Exit: learn-0.3049186992-0.21056276560.30076529630.12035851360.31033941110.1492388767

proficiency score * pretest accuracy: r= .4970.05909477220.19821181680.06281389810.46548597860.05450677690.3645305033

proficiency score * treatment accuracy: r= .539 (sig)393939393939

proficiency score * posttest accuracy: r= .683 (sig)

treatment repaired * notice: r= .'-419 (sig)

pretest accuracy * treatment accuracy: r=.649 (sig)treatment attempted * posttest accuracy: r= .467 (sig)

pretest accuracy * posttest accuracy: r = .581 (sig)

treatment accuracy* posttest accuracy: r= .790 (sig)

focus* proficiency: r= .577 (sig)

focus* treatment accuracy: r= .327 (sig)

focus* posttest accuracy: r=.400 (sig)

Sheet3

PlanningPlanning

NPPPOP

nothing100.00.084.6

content0.084.67.7

form0.015.47.7

Focus

NPPPOP

content38.523.130.8

form38.530.853.8

both23.123.17.7

other0.023.17.7

Notice

NPPPOPFocus

nothing7.70.015.4

form38.592.376.9

other53.87.77.7


Learnfocus* posttest accuracy: r=.400 (sig)

NPPPOP

nothing30.80.00.0

mutations23.138.561.5

other46.261.538.5

Purpose

NPPPOP

grammar46.246.253.8

speaking23.123.123.1

other30.830.823.1Notice

Learn

Purpose

Cumulative Percent

84.6

92.3

100.0

Valid Percent

Exit:planningaFrequencyPercent84.6

no11.084.67.7

Validcontent1.07.77.7Cumulative Percent

both1.07.7100.030.8

Total13.0100.084.6

92.3

100.0

Valid Percent

Exit: focusaFrequencyPercent30.8

content4.030.853.8

Validform7.053.87.7

both1.07.77.7Cumulative Percent

other1.07.7100.015.4

Total13.0100.092.3

100.0

Valid Percent

Exit: noticeaFrequencyPercent15.4

no2.015.476.9

Validform/corrections10.076.97.7Cumulative Percent

other1.07.7100.061.5

Total13.0100.0100.0

Valid Percent

Exit: learnaFrequencyPercent61.5

mutations/patterns8.061.538.5Cumulative Percent

Validother5.038.5100.053.8

Total13.0100.076.9

100.0

Valid Percent

Exit: purposeaFrequencyPercent53.8

grammar7.053.823.1

Validspeaking3.023.123.1

other3.023.1100.0

Total13.0100.0

Sheet3

NP

PP

OP

Exit questionnaire2Noticingnoticing* modified output: Spearman r =. 365, p=0.02.

Chart2

7.6923076923015.3846153846

38.461538461592.307692307776.9230769231

53.84615384627.69230769237.6923076923

NP

PP

OP

low and high



AQ Real correct000.42857142860.78679579250.51.22474487140.16666666670.40824829050.50.5477225575000.14285714290.3779644731.14285714291.8644544715120.50.83666002652.66666666672.42212028331.66666666672.08166599950.16666666670.408248290511.41421356241011.41421356240.42857142860.78679579253.85714285712.19306265523.252.2173557826


AQ Nonce correct000.28571428570.7559289460.83333333331.6020819788000.33333333330.816496580900000.85714285711.2149857926120.16666666670.4082482905221.66666666672.081665999500000.16666666670.4082482905000.14285714290.3779644732.14285714291.676163419721.8257418584


AQ total correct000.71428571431.49602648310.33333333330.51639777950.16666666670.40824829050.83333333331.16904519450.50.70710678120.14285714290.37796447323.05505046330.751.50.66666666671.21106014164.66666666674.27395211331.33333333332.30940107680.16666666670.408248290511.41421356241.16666666670.408248290511.41421356240.57142857141.13389341963.651483716722.4494897428


PD correct0.28571428570.48795003650.42857142860.78679579250.33333333330.51639777950.16666666670.40824829050.50.83666002650.50.70710678120.14285714290.3779644731.42857142861.81265393430.751.50.16666666670.408248290531.89736659611.33333333332.30940107680.16666666670.408248290511.414213562410.89442719111.41421356240.42857142860.78679579252.71428571431.380131118722.4494897428

PD attempted0.57142857140.78679579250.85714285710.89973541081.16666666672.04124145230.33333333330.51639777950.33333333330.516397779511.41421356240.14285714290.3779644730.71428571430.75592894612000.50.54772255750.66666666670.577350269200000.83333333330.9831920803000.14285714290.3779644731.71428571431.60356745151.51.2909944487


AQ Real correct00.42857142860.50.16666666670.500.14285714291.142857142910.52.66666666671.66666666670.1666666667110.42857142863.85714285713.25


AQ Nonce correct00.28571428570.833333333300.3333333333000.857142857110.166666666721.666666666700.166666666700.14285714292.14285714292


AQ total correct00.71428571430.33333333330.16666666670.83333333330.50.142857142920.750.66666666674.66666666671.33333333330.16666666671.166666666710.571428571462


PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.33333333330.16666666670.50.50.14285714291.42857142860.750.166666666731.33333333330.1666666667110.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.16666666670.33333333330.333333333310.14285714290.7142857143100.50.666666666700.833333333300.14285714291.71428571431.5


AQ total correct00.71428571430.33333333330.142857142920.750.16666666671.16666666671


PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.33333333330.14285714291.42857142860.750.166666666711

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.16666666670.14285714290.7142857143100.83333333330


AQ total correct0.16666666670.83333333330.50.66666666674.66666666671.33333333330.571428571462


PD correct0.16666666670.50.50.166666666731.33333333330.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.33333333330.3333333333100.50.66666666670.14285714291.71428571431.5



















Valid N (listwise)









correlations

Correlations

123456Correlations


1.Exit: notice


0.00128435252. Exit: focus-0.0703783387

390.6702962598



39390.79665989970.7336160192

4. Exit: notice0.0534461813-0.0246217117-0.07584609463939


3939390.00796959470.97974838660.9346417478

5. Exit: focus.577**.327*0.2269169105-0.0703783387393939


393939390.27954861660.21999985280.01940695760.143288343



39393939390.20369123510.55945272990.04350152610.69609748930.0027334012

3939393939

7. Exit: learn-0.3049186992-0.21056276560.30076529630.12035851360.31033941110.1492388767











Sheet3

PlanningPlanning

NPPPOP

nothing100.00.084.6

content0.084.67.7

form0.015.47.7

Focus

NPPPOP

content38.523.130.8

form38.530.853.8

both23.123.17.7

other0.023.17.7

Notice

NPPPOPFocus

nothing7.70.015.4

form38.592.376.9

other53.87.77.7



NPPPOP

nothing30.80.00.0


other46.261.538.5

Purpose

NPPPOP

grammar46.246.253.8



Learn

Purpose

Cumulative Percent

84.6

92.3

100.0

Valid Percent


no11.084.67.7


both1.07.7100.030.8

Total13.0100.084.6

92.3

100.0

Valid Percent


content4.030.853.8

Validform7.053.87.7


other1.07.7100.015.4

Total13.0100.092.3

100.0

Valid Percent


no2.015.476.9


other1.07.7100.061.5

Total13.0100.0100.0

Valid Percent



Validother5.038.5100.053.8

Total13.0100.076.9

100.0

Valid Percent


grammar7.053.823.1


other3.023.1100.0

Total13.0100.0

Sheet3

NP

PP

OP

NP

PP

OP

Exit questionnaire2Learninglearning * number of correct forms produced during the treatment (Spearman r=.340, p=0.03) and at the posttest (r=.360, p=0.02).

Chart3

30.769230769200

23.076923076938.461538461561.5384615385

46.153846153861.538461538538.4615384615

NP

PP

OP

low and high



AQ Real correct000.42857142860.78679579250.51.22474487140.16666666670.40824829050.50.5477225575000.14285714290.3779644731.14285714291.8644544715120.50.83666002652.66666666672.42212028331.66666666672.08166599950.16666666670.408248290511.41421356241011.41421356240.42857142860.78679579253.85714285712.19306265523.252.2173557826


AQ Nonce correct000.28571428570.7559289460.83333333331.6020819788000.33333333330.816496580900000.85714285711.2149857926120.16666666670.4082482905221.66666666672.081665999500000.16666666670.4082482905000.14285714290.3779644732.14285714291.676163419721.8257418584


AQ total correct000.71428571431.49602648310.33333333330.51639777950.16666666670.40824829050.83333333331.16904519450.50.70710678120.14285714290.37796447323.05505046330.751.50.66666666671.21106014164.66666666674.27395211331.33333333332.30940107680.16666666670.408248290511.41421356241.16666666670.408248290511.41421356240.57142857141.13389341963.651483716722.4494897428


PD correct0.28571428570.48795003650.42857142860.78679579250.33333333330.51639777950.16666666670.40824829050.50.83666002650.50.70710678120.14285714290.3779644731.42857142861.81265393430.751.50.16666666670.408248290531.89736659611.33333333332.30940107680.16666666670.408248290511.414213562410.89442719111.41421356240.42857142860.78679579252.71428571431.380131118722.4494897428

PD attempted0.57142857140.78679579250.85714285710.89973541081.16666666672.04124145230.33333333330.51639777950.33333333330.516397779511.41421356240.14285714290.3779644730.71428571430.75592894612000.50.54772255750.66666666670.577350269200000.83333333330.9831920803000.14285714290.3779644731.71428571431.60356745151.51.2909944487


AQ Real correct00.42857142860.50.16666666670.500.14285714291.142857142910.52.66666666671.66666666670.1666666667110.42857142863.85714285713.25


AQ Nonce correct00.28571428570.833333333300.3333333333000.857142857110.166666666721.666666666700.166666666700.14285714292.14285714292


AQ total correct00.71428571430.33333333330.16666666670.83333333330.50.142857142920.750.66666666674.66666666671.33333333330.16666666671.166666666710.571428571462


PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.33333333330.16666666670.50.50.14285714291.42857142860.750.166666666731.33333333330.1666666667110.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.16666666670.33333333330.333333333310.14285714290.7142857143100.50.666666666700.833333333300.14285714291.71428571431.5


AQ total correct00.71428571430.33333333330.142857142920.750.16666666671.16666666671


PD correct0.28571428570.42857142860.33333333330.14285714291.42857142860.750.166666666711

PD attempted0.57142857140.85714285711.16666666670.14285714290.7142857143100.83333333330


AQ total correct0.16666666670.83333333330.50.66666666674.66666666671.33333333330.571428571462


PD correct0.16666666670.50.50.166666666731.33333333330.42857142862.71428571432

PD attempted0.33333333330.3333333333100.50.66666666670.14285714291.71428571431.5



















Valid N (listwise)









correlations

Correlations

123456Correlations


1.Exit: notice


0.00128435252. Exit: focus-0.0703783387

390.6702962598



39390.79665989970.7336160192

4. Exit: notice0.0534461813-0.0246217117-0.07584609463939


3939390.00796959470.97974838660.9346417478

5. Exit: focus.577**.327*0.2269169105-0.0703783387393939


393939390.27954861660.21999985280.01940695760.143288343



39393939390.20369123510.55945272990.04350152610.69609748930.0027334012

3939393939

7. Exit: learn-0.3049186992-0.21056276560.30076529630.12035851360.31033941110.1492388767











Sheet3

PlanningPlanning

NPPPOP

nothing100.00.084.6

content0.084.67.7

form0.015.47.7

Focus

NPPPOP

content38.523.130.8

form38.530.853.8

both23.123.17.7

other0.023.17.7

Notice

NPPPOPFocus

nothing7.70.015.4

form38.592.376.9

other53.87.77.7



NPPPOP

nothing30.80.00.0


other46.261.538.5

Purpose

NPPPOP

grammar46.246.253.8



Learn

Purpose

Cumulative Percent

84.6

92.3

100.0

Valid Percent


no11.084.67.7


both1.07.7100.030.8

Total13.0100.084.6

92.3

100.0

Valid Percent


content4.030.853.8

Validform7.053.87.7


other1.07.7100.015.4

Total13.0100.092.3

100.0

Valid Percent


no2.015.476.9


other1.07.7100.061.5

Total13.0100.0100.0

Valid Percent



Validother5.038.5100.053.8

Total13.0100.076.9

100.0

Valid Percent


grammar7.053.823.1


other3.023.1100.0

Total13.0100.0

Sheet3

NP

PP

OP

NP

PP

OP

NP

PP

OP

ConclusionsThe availability of planning regardless of whether it was before or during the task decreases cognitive load and task complexity, releases attentional resources and predispose learners to monitor the accuracy of production and notice recasts in the input, which leads to the restructuring of IL grammar and facilitates the learning of target forms.

The unavailability of planning time depletes the attentional resources, dispersing the attention available, and results in poor learning of morphological forms targeted by recasts.

ConclusionsThese results are in line with the single resource model and contrary to predictions of the Cognition Hypothesis.

Online planning that engages both conceptualizing and careful formulation and monitoring may better assist learners in noticing gaps in their L2 knowledge than the availability of pretask planning time directed primarily at conceptualizing.

Limitations and next stepsNo control groupNo recast groupFocus during task performance mattersResults may have been modulated by group responses to feedback working memory limitationslanguage proficiency

REFERENCES

DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 42-63. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.Gor, K. and Chernigovskaya, T. (2003). Generation of complex verbal morphology in first and second language acquisition: Evidence from Russian. Nordlyd.Gor, K. and Chernigovskaya, T. (2004). Formal Instruction and the Mental Lexicon: The Acquisition of Verbal Morphology. In: Current Issues in Instructed Second Language Learning, Mouton De Gruyter, Berlin. Gor, K. (2007). Experimental study of first and second language morphological processing. In Methods in Cognitive Linguistics, Gonzalez-Marquez, M., Mittelberg, I., Coulson, S. and M. J. Spivey (eds.), 367398.Levelt, W.J.M. (1989). Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, D. Coste, C. Kramsch and R.Ginsberg (Eds.). Foreign Language Research in a Cross-Cultural Perspective (pp.39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & B. K. Bahtia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.Long, M. H. (2007). Recasts: the story thus far. In M. H. Long (Ed.), Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109-148. Rvsz, A., & Han, Z. (2006 ). Task content familiarity, task type, and efficacy of recasts Language Awareness, 3, 160 179.Robinson, P. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18 (1), 27-68.

Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: a triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287-318). New York: Cambridge University Press. Robinson, P. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631-678). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1-32.Robinson, P. (2007). Criteria for grading and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. del Pilar Garca-Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning, pp. 7 27. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters .Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis and second language learning and performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 161 176.Romanova, N. (2004). Verbal morphology processing by Russian heritage speakers: native or nonnative. OSU Working Papers in Slavic Studies. Ohio State University, 4.Romanova, N. (2008). Mechanisms of Verbal Morphology Processing in Heritage Speakers of Russian. Heritage Language Journal, vol. 6, 1. (http://www.heritagelanguages.org/)Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17, 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. and Foster, P. (2000). The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance, Language Learning.Skehan, P. & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Townsend C.E. (1975). Russian word formation. Slavica Publishers.Yuan, F. and Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics 24: 1-27.

*****************To understand the morphological processes better, I would like to give you an example: the infinitives of these two Russian verbs look exactly the same, with only the locus of stress different; yet, they belong to different classes with different conjugational patterns. One belongs to the -aj- class, and its stem ends in a consonant. In the non-past tense, vocalic endings are simply added to the stemThe verb pisAt belongs to the -a- class, with its stem ending in a vowel, and in the non-past tense, two processes take place: vowel truncation and consonant mutation throughout the paradigm. ********The marginal means for accuracy and the four cell means representing the pre- and post-test total scores of the three groups show that accuracy has improved overall from 0.51 to 4.1, and that there is a difference between how the treatment affected the groups with planning time and the no planning group.It can be seen in the figure that the effect of the treatment (represented by the time variable) depended on the planning condition in which the treatment took place. Looking at the three lines, we see that although the groups started out at the same level of not knowing the target form on the pretest, there is a dramatic increase in accuracy on the posttest for the OP and PP groups from time 1 to time 2, and not much of a change in the accuracy scores of the NP group. Further, looking between the lines, we can see that while there is no difference between the group scores on the pretest, there is a difference between the NP group both the PP and the OP groups on the posttest. So, the availability of planning regardless of whether it was before or during the task facilitated the learning of the target forms, whereas time the unavailability of planning time depleted the attentional resources and resulted in poor or no learning. ***The marginal means for accuracy and the four cell means representing the pre- and post-test total scores of the three groups show that accuracy has improved overall from 0.51 to 4.1, and that there is a difference between how the treatment affected the groups with planning time and the no planning group.It can be seen in the figure that the effect of the treatment (represented by the time variable) depended on the planning condition in which the treatment took place. Looking at the three lines, we see that although the groups started out at the same level of not knowing the target form on the pretest, there is a dramatic increase in accuracy on the posttest for the OP and PP groups from time 1 to time 2, and not much of a change in the accuracy scores of the NP group. Further, looking between the lines, we can see that while there is no difference between the group scores on the pretest, there is a difference between the NP group both the PP and the OP groups on the posttest. So, the availability of planning regardless of whether it was before or during the task facilitated the learning of the target forms, whereas time the unavailability of planning time depleted the attentional resources and resulted in poor or no learning. *********

planning, recasts and learning of l2 morphology

Documents