Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:53:21.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Input-based tasks for beginner-level learners: An approximate replication and extension of Erlam & Ellis (2018)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2018

Rosemary Erlam  and
Rod Ellis
Rosemary Erlam*
Affiliation:
University of Auckland, New Zealand
Rod Ellis*
Affiliation:
Curtin University, Perth, Australia
*
r.erlam@auckland.ac.nz
rod.ellis@curtin.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Erlam & Ellis (2018) published, in Canadian Modern Language Review, an experimental study that investigated the effect of input-based tasks on the acquisition of vocabulary and markers of plurality by adolescent near-beginner learners of L2 (second language) French. The present paper reports an approximate replication of the original study with the aim of confirming or disconfirming the results.1 The research questions of both studies addressed the receptive acquisition of new vocabulary and the receptive and productive acquisition of markers of plurality resulting from instruction using input-based tasks. Both studies investigated near-beginner adolescent learners of French. The teacher, the students’ usual classroom teacher, was the same in both studies. In the replication study, a new, larger group of students were investigated, the length of the instruction was increased, involving the development of additional tasks, and productive as well as the receptive knowledge of the vocabulary items was assessed. The results of the replication study confirm and extend those of the original study. The teachers’ views about the role of input-based tasks with near-beginner learners remained constant in the two studies. The paper concludes with a discussion of the contribution that approximate replications can make to instructed second language acquisition research.

Type
Replication Research
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 52 , Issue 4 , October 2019 , pp. 490 - 511
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brown, J. D. (2012). Writing up a replication report. In Porte, G. (ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 173–197.Google Scholar
Brown, R., Waring, R. & Donkaewbua, S. (2008). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from reading, reading-while-listening and listening to stories. Reading in a Foreign Language 20.2, 136–163.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22.2, 499–533.Google Scholar
De la Fuente, M. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction. Language Teaching Research 10, 263–295.Google Scholar
Elley, W. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly 24, 174–187.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2001). Non-reciprocal tasks, comprehension and second language acquisition. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P. & Swain, M. (eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning, teaching and testing. Harlow: Pearson Education, 49–74.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21.2, 285–301.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y. & Yamazaki, A. (1994). Classroom interaction, comprehension and the acquisition of word meanings. Language Learning 44.3, 449–491.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2006). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit knowledge: An empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics 27.3, 464–491.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. & Ellis, R. (2018). Task-based language teaching for beginner-level learners of L2 French: An exploratory study. Canadian Modern Language Review 74.1, 1–26.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1991). Perception and production: The relevance of phonetic input to L2 phonological learning. In Huebner, T. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds.), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 249–289.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 349–381.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Loschky, L. & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. (eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 123–167.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Why (or why not), when, and how to replicate research. In Porte, G. (ed.), Replication in applied linguistics: A practical guide, 21–46.Google Scholar
Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S. & Abugaber, D. (in press). Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field. Language Learning.Google Scholar
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36, 73–97.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. (2014). How Big is ‘Big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning 64.4, 878–912.Google Scholar
Polio, C. & Gass, S. (1997). Replication and reporting: A commentary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 499–508.Google Scholar
Porte, G. (2012). Replication in applied linguistics: A practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Samuda, V. & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review 11, 11–26.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3–32.Google Scholar
Shintani, N. (2016). Input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners. Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Shintani, N. & Ellis, R. (2010). The incidental acquisition of English plural –s by Japanese children in comprehension-based lessons: A process-product study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32.4, 607–637.Google Scholar
Shintani, N., Li, S. & Ellis, R. (2013). Comprehension-based versus production-based grammar instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Language Learning 63, 296–329.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swan, M. (2005). Legislating by hypothesis: The case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics 26, 376–401.Google Scholar
den, Van Branden, K. (ed.) (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2007). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 115–135.Google Scholar
Vidal, K. (2003). Academic listening: A source of vocabulary acquisition? Applied Linguistics 24.1, 56–89.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2016). Learning vocabulary through meaning-focused input: Replication of Elley (1989) and Lie & Nation (1985). Language Teaching 49.1, 129–140.Google Scholar
Winitz, H. (1981). The comprehension approach to foreign language instruction. New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar