Keywords
task complexity
oral task design
peer interaction
an idiodynamic method
task engagement
How to Cite
Number of views: 2453
Number of downloads: 750
Abstract
Despite evidence on the interaction between cognitive individual differences (IDs) and task complexity, our knowledge of how affective IDs, such as foreign language enjoyment (FLE), interact with task complexity and other factors is limited. Since tasks and activities were found by Dewaele and MacIntyre (2014) to be most relevant to FLE, and since task complexity might interact with learners’ perceptions of task difficulty, it is important to investigate how task complexity impacts FLE changes. Informed by the complex dynamic systems theory, this study employed a mixed-methods multiple case study design to study patterns and causes of high and low FLE arousals. The participants were four pairs of Taiwanese high-intermediate EFL university students who were engaged in simple or complex storytelling tasks with speech acts of refusals. The speakers’ interactions were triangulated with an individual learner’s rating of FLE on a per-second scale and stimulated recalls. Results revealed idiosyncratic patterns of FLE fluctuations of peer interlocutors and a high degree of overlap in sources of low and high FLE in both groups. Speakers reported high FLE as a result of interesting storylines inherent in task design and created by peers, the use of picture prompts, peer collaboration, and task performance. Performance problems, failure to retrieve appropriate vocabulary, task design, and lack of ideas led to low FLE arousals. The findings suggest that task complexity combined with other task-induced, social, and individual factors to affect the fluctuations of FLE. Implications for task design and oral communication instruction to promote FLE are discussed.
References
Allwright, D., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the language classroom: An introduction to classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
Baralt, M., Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Engagement with the language: How examining learners’ affective and social engagement ex-plains successful learner-generated attention to form. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and L2 learning (pp. 209-239). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.09bar
Botes, E., Dewaele, J. M., & Greiff, S. (2022). Taking stock: A meta-analysis of the effects of Foreign Language Enjoyment. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(2), 205-232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.2.3
Boudreau, C., MacIntyre, P. D., & Dewaele, J. M. (2018). Enjoyment and anxiety in second language communication: An idiodynamic approach. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 149-170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.1.7
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085
Butler, Y. G. (2017). The role of affect in intraindividual variability in task per-formance for young learners. TESOL Quarterly, 51(3), 728-737. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.385
Bygate, M. (2017). Dynamic systems theory and the issue of predictability in task-based language: Some implications for research and practice in TBLT. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. D. P. García Mayo (Eds.), Recent perspec-tives on task-based language learning and teaching (pp. 145-166). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503399-008
Carver, C., Jung, D., & Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2021). Examining learner engagement in relationship to learning and communication mode. In P. Hiver, A. H. Al-Hoorie, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Student engagement in the language classroom (pp.120-142). Multilingual Matters.
Chen, T.-H., McDonough, K., & Trofimovich, P. (2020, October 23-25). The relationship between interactional fluency features and L2 speakers’ perceptions of peer fluency [paper presentation]. The 39th Second Language Research Forum, Vanderbilt University, Tennessee, United States.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Flow and the foundations of positive psychology. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 7-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002732
Dewaele, J. M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and en-joyment in the foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4(2), 237-274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2014.4.2.5
Dewaele, J.M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2016). Foreign language enjoyment and foreign language classroom anxiety: The right and left feet of FL learning? In P. D. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Positive psychology in SLA (pp. 215-236). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783095360-010
Dewaele, J.-M., Witney, J., Saito, K., & Dewaele, L. (2018). Foreign language enjoyment and anxiety: The effect of teacher and learner variables. Language Teaching Research, 22, 676-697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817692161
Dewaele, J. M., Magdalena, A. F., & Saito, K. (2019). The effect of perception of teacher characteristics on Spanish EFL learners’ anxiety and enjoyment. Modern Language Journal, 103(2), 412-427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12555
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2019). Task motivation: What makes an L2 task engaging? In Z. Wen & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honour of Peter Skehan (pp. 53-66). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.13.04dor
Elahi Shirvan, M., & Taherian, T. (2021). Longitudinal examination of university students’ foreign language enjoyment and foreign language classroom anxiety in the course of general English: Latent growth curve modeling. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(1), 31-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1441804
Elahi Shirvan, M., & Talebzadeh, N. (2018). Exploring the fluctuations of foreign language enjoyment in conversation: An idiodynamic perspective. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 47(1), 21-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2017.1400458
Elahi Shirvan, M., & Talebzadeh, N. (2020). Tracing the signature dynamics of foreign language classroom anxiety and foreign language enjoyment: A retrodictive qualitative modeling. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 23-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.710194
Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 221-246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00231.x
Ellis, R. (2018). Reflections on task-based language teaching. Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/ELLIS0131
Faez, F., & Tavakoli, P. (2019). Task-based language teaching. TESOL Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0687
Gilabert, R., Barón, J., & Llanes, À. (2009). Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners’ interaction during oral performance. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(3-4), 367-395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.016
González-Lloret, M. (2019). Task-based language teaching and L2 pragmatics. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisi-tion and pragmatics (pp. 338-352). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351164085-22
Gregersen, T., Macintyre, P. D., & Meza, M. D. (2014). The motion of emotion: Idiodynamic case studies of learners’ foreign language anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 98(2), 574-588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12084
Griffiths, E., & Slavkov, N. (2021). Linguistic risk-taking: A bridge between the classroom and the outside world. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguis-tics, 24(2), 127-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2021.31308
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (Ed.). (2020). Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.53
Hiver, P., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2020). Research methods for complexity theory in applied linguistics. Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788925754
Kim, Y. (2022). The interface between instructed L2 pragmatics and TBLT research: A review of instructional materials. Applied Pragmatics, 4(2), 159-177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00007.kim
Kim, Y., & Taguchi, N. (2015). Promoting task-based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom contexts: The role of task complexity. Modern Language Journal, 99, 656-677. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12273
Lambert, C. (2017). Task, affect, second language performance. Language Teaching Research, 21(6), 657-664. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817736644
Lambert, C. (2023). Psychophysiological methods. In C. Lambert, S. Aubrey, & G. Bui (Eds.), The role of the learner in task-based language teaching: Theory and research (pp.156-176). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003227267-13
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141-165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/18.2.141
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2020). Complex Theory: Relational systems in interaction and in interlocutor differences in second language development. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences (pp.189-208). John Benjamins.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Research methodology on language development from a complex theory perspective. Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 200-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00714.x
Li, C., Jiang, G., & Dewaele, J. M. (2018). Understanding Chinese high school students’ foreign language enjoyment: Validation of the Chinese version of the foreign language enjoyment scale. System, 76, 183-196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.06.004
Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley Blackwell.
Lowie, W. M., & Verspoor, M. H. (2019). Individual differences and the ergodicity problem. Language Learning, 69, 184-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12324
MacIntyre, P., & Ducker, N. (2022). The idiodynamic method: A practical guide for researchers. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 100007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100007
MacIntyre, P. D., & Legatto, J. J. (2011). A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Applied Linguistics, 32(2), 149-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq037
MacIntyre, P. D., Gregersen, T., & Mercer, S. (2019). Setting an agenda for positive psychology in SLA: Theory, practice, and research. Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 262-274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12544
MacIntyre, P. D., Mercer, S., & Gregersen, T. (2021). Reflections on researching dynamics in language learning psychology. In R. Sampson & R. Pinner (Eds.), Complexity perspectives on researching language learner and teacher psychology (pp. 15-34). Multilingual Matters.
McDonough, K. (2015). Perceived benefits and challenges with the use of collaborative tasks in EFL contexts. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp. 225-245). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.8.08mcd
Mercer, S. (2011). The self as a complex dynamic system. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 57-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2011.1.1.4
Nakamura, S., Phung, L., & Reinders, H. (2021). The effect of learner choice on L2 task engagement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(2), 428-441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226312000042X
Oxford, R. L., & Gkonou, C. (2021). Working with the complexity of language learners’ emotions and emotion regulation strategies. In R. J. Sampson & R. S. Pinner (Eds.), Complexity perspectives on researching language learner and teacher psychology (pp. 52-67). Multilingual Matters.
Pawlak, M. (2017). Overview of learner individual differences and their mediating effects on the process and outcome of interaction. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Expanding individual difference research in the interaction approach: Investigating learners, instructors, and other interlocutors (pp. 19-40). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.16.02paw
Phung, L. (2017). Task preference, affective response, and engagement in L2 use in a US university context. Language Teaching Research, 21(6), 751-766. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816683561
Phung, L., Nakamura, S., & Reinders, H. (2020). The effect of choice on affective engagement: Implications for task design. In P. Hiver, A. Al-Hoorie, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Student engagement in the language classroom (pp.163-183). Multilingual Matters.
Révész, A. (2011). Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom‐based study. Modern Language Journal, 95, 162-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01241.x
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27-57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43, 1-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1
Robinson, P. (2010). Situating and distributing cognition across task demands: The SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing. In M. Putz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition: Inside the learner’s mind (pp. 243-268). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.13.17rob
Robinson, P. (2022). The cognition hypothesis, the triadic componential framework and the SSARC model: An instructional design theory of pedagogic task sequencing. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of task-based language teaching (pp. 205-225). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108868327.013
Saito, K., Dewaele, J. M., Abe, M., & In’nami, Y. (2018). Motivation, emotion, learning experience, and second language comprehensibility development in classroom settings: A cross‐sectional and longitudinal study. Language Learning, 68(3), 709-743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12297
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (2016). Understanding peer interaction: Research synthesis and directions. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 209-239). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45
Tekin, O., Trofimovich, P., Chen, T.-H., & McDonough, K. (2022). Alignment in second language speakers’ perceptions of interaction and its relationship to perceived communicative success. System, 108, 102848. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102848
Tsang, A., & Dewaele, J. M. (2023). The relationships between young FL learners’ classroom emotions (anxiety, boredom, & enjoyment), engagement, and FL proficiency. Applied Linguistics Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2022-0077
Van Batenburg, E. S., Oostdam, R. J., Van Gelderen, A. J., Fukkink, R. G., & De Jong, N. H. (2019). Oral interaction in the EFL classroom: The effects of instructional focus and task type on learner affect. Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 308-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12545
White, C. J. (2018). The emotional turn in applied linguistics and TESOL: Significance, challenges and prospects. In J. M. Agudo (Ed.), Emotions in second language teaching (pp. 19-34). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75438-3_2
Youn, S. J. (2018). Task-based needs analysis of L2 pragmatics in an EAP con-text. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 86-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.10.005
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Tzu-Hua Chen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.