Cover not available
Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 37:2 (2014) ► pp.75–100

Dynamic development of complexity and accuracy

A case study in second language academic writing

| Faculty of Education and Social Work, The University of Sydney

This paper reports on the development of complexity and accuracy in English as a Second Language (ESL) academic writing. Although research into complexity and accuracy development in second language (L2) writing has been well established, few studies have assumed the multidimensionality of these two constructs (Norris & Ortega, 2009) or endeavoured to make long-term observations on the course of their development (Vyatkina, 2012). Given that recent research in the field of Second Language Acquisition has moved towards a more holistic perspective on language learning and development (Larsen-Freeman, 2011, 2012), there is a need to consider the potential dynamics of the longitudinal development of these constructs in L2 writing.

This study addresses this issue by exploring the dynamic unfolding of complexity and accuracy development in the academic writing of an advanced L2 learner during her postgraduate study in Australia. The results suggested that both complexity and accuracy displayed the characteristics of a dynamic system and their development was highly variable, non-linear, and idiosyncratic. Their interaction, too, was dynamic and changed over time. The findings in this study confirm and substantiate the Dynamic Systems Theory (DST) proposition of L2 developmental dynamics, including the development of L2 academic writing.

Keywords: complexity, dynamic development, L2 academic writing, accuracy, interaction
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 1 January 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.37.2.01ros
References
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K.
(2011) Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 5–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, R.
(1973) A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byrnes, H., Maxim, H. H., & Norris, J. M.
(2010) Realizing advanced foreign language writing development in collegiate dducation: Curricular design, pedagogy, assessment [Monograph] The Modern Language Journal, 941(Supplement S1), 1–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caspi, T., & Lowie, W.
(2010) A dynamic perspective on L2 lexical development in academic English. In R. Chacón-Beltrán, C. Abello-Contesse, & M. d. M. Torreblanca-López (Eds.), Insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning (pp. 41–60). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooper, T.
(1976) Measuring written syntactic patterns of second language learners of German. Journal of Educational Research, 69(5), 176–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe
(2001) Common European Framework of Reference for language learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cumming, A.
(Ed.) (2006) Goals for academic writing: ESL students and their instructors. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K.
(2008) Introduction: Second language development as a dynamic process. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2),166–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., Chan, H., Lowie, W., Plat, R., & Verspoor, M. H.
(2012) A dynamic perspective on language processing and development. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 188–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., & Larsen-Freeman, D.
(2011) Researching second language development from a dynamic systems theory perspective. In M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic systems approach to second language development (pp. 5–23). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., & Lowie, W.
(2010) On the stability of representations in the multilingual lexicon. In M. Pütz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition (pp. 117–133). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., Thorne, S. L., & Verspoor, M.
(2013) Dynamic Systems Theory as a comprehensive theory of second language development. In M. G. Mayo, M. G. Mangado, & M. M. Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 1991–220). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. H.
(2005) Second language acquisition: An advanced resource book. Oxon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 7–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., Verspoor, M. H., & Lowie, W.
(2005) Dynamic systems theory and applied linguistics: The ultimate “so what”? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(1), 116–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & Barkhuizen, G.
(2005) Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ferrari, S.
(2012) A longitudinal study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency variation in second language development. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 277–297). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flahive, D., & Snow, B.
(1980) Measures of syntactic complexity in evaluating ESL compositions. In J. Oller & K. Perkins (Eds.), Research in language testing (pp. 171–176). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Ho-Peng, L.
(1983) Using T–unit measures to assess writing proficiency of ESL students. RELC Journal, 14(2), 35–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Housen, A. & Kuiken, F.
(2009) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 301(4), 461–473. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp048Google Scholar
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I.
(2012) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency: Definitions, measurement and research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunt, K.
(1965) Grammatical structures written at three grade levels (NCTE Research Report No. 3). Urbana, IL: The National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
(1970) Syntactic maturity in schoolchildren and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35(1), 1–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K.
(2003) Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ingvarsdóttir, H. & Arnbjörnsdóttir, B.
(2013) ELF and academic writing: A perspective from the Expanding Circle. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 2(1), 123–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, W.
(2013) Measurements of development in L2 written production: The case of L2 Chinese. Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, M. & Sankey, D.
(2009) Towards a Dynamic Systems Approach to moral development and moral education: A response to the JME special issue, September 2008 Journal of Moral Education, 38(3), 283–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) The dynamics of emergent self–organization: Reconceptualizing child development in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4), 79–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D.
(1976) Evidence of the need for a second language acquisition index of development. In W. Ritchie (Ed.), Second language acquisition research: Issues and implications (pp. 127–136). New York: Academic Press, Inc.Google Scholar
(1978) An ESL index of development. TESOL Quarterly, 12(4), 439–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1997) Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Language acquisition and language use from a Chaos/Complexity theory perspective. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Language acquisition and language socialization (pp. 33–46). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2006) The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Adjusting expectations: The study of complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 579–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) The dynamic co–adaptation of cognitive and social views: A complexity thoery perspective. In R. Batstone (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning (pp. 40–53). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2011) A complexity theory approach to second language development/acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 48–72). London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2012) Complex, dynamic systems: A new transdisciplinary theme for applied linguistics. Language Teaching, 45(2), 202–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L.
(2008) Research methodology on language development from a complex systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 200–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Storm, V.
(1977) The construction of a second language acquisition index of development. Language Learning, 27(1), 123–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leki, I.
(2011) Learning to write in a second language: Multilingual graduates and undergraduates expanding genre repertoires. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 85–110). Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T.
(2008) A synthesis of research on second language writing in English (Vol. Routledge): New York.Google Scholar
Levkina, M., & Gilabert, R.
(2012) The effects of cognitive task complexity on L2 oral production. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 171–197). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J.
(2006) Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, 26(1) 3–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M.
(2014, March). Variability and learning mechanisms. In K. de Bot & D. Larsen-Freeman (Chair), From universality to variability in second language development. Colloquium conducted at the meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics 2014, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
Lowie, W., Verspoor, M., & de Bot, K.
(2009) A dynamic view of second language development across the lifespan. In K. de Bot & R. W. Schrauf (Eds.), Language development over the lifespan (pp. 125–145). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lu, X.
(2011) A corpus–based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 445(1), 36–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M.
(Ed.) (2012) L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives. Boston/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mercer, S., Ryan, S., & Williams, M.
(2012) Conclusion: Final Remarks. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory, and practice (pp. 239–247). Hamsphire: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myles, F.
(2012) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency: The role played by formulaic sequences in early interlanguage development. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 71–93). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
(2009) Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L.
(2003) Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college‐level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Overton, W. F., & Lerner, R. M.
(2014) Fundamental concepts and methods in Developmental Science: A relational perspective. Research in Human Development, 11(1), 63–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pallotti, G.
(2009) CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 590–601. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S.
(2007) Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors. Oxon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polat, B., & Kim, Y.
(2013) Dynamics of complexity and accuracy: A longitudinal case study of advanced untutored development. Applied Linguistics, 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richard, J. C., & Renandya, W. A.
(2002) Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva, T.
(1997) Differences in ESL and Native–English–Speaker writing: The research and its implications. In C. Severino, J. Guena & J. Butler (Eds.), Writing in multicultural settings (pp. 209–219). New York: Modern Language Association of America.Google Scholar
Silva, T., & Reichelt, M.
(2003) Second language writing up close and personal: some success stories. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 93–114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P.
(1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2009) Modeling second language development: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P., & Foster, P.
(1999) The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task–based performances: A meta–analysis of the Ealing research. In S. V. Daele, A. Housen, F. Kuiken, M. Pierrard & I. Vedder (Eds.), Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language use, learning and teaching (pp. 207–226). Brussels: Contactforum.Google Scholar
(2012) Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task–based performance: A synthesis of the Ealing research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in SLA (pp. 199–220). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, N. V.
(1973) The acquisition of phonology: A case study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spoelman, M., & Verspoor, M.
(2010) Dynamic patterns in development of accuracy and complexity: A longitudinal case study in the acquisition of Finnish. Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thewissen, J.
(2013) Capturing L2 accuracy developmental patterns: Insights from an error–tagged EFL learner corpus. The Modern Language Journal, 97(S1), 77–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, M., & van Geert, P.
(2007) Wobbles, humps and sudden jumps: A case study of continuity, discontinuity and variability in early language development. Infant and Child Development, 16(1), 7–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, M., Verspoor, M. H., & Lowie, W.
(2011) Variability and DST. In M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques (pp. 55–84). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Geert, P.
(2008) The dynamic systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 179–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009a) A comprehensive dynamic systems theory of language development. In K. de Bot & R. W. Schrauf (Eds.), Language development over the lifespan (pp. 60–104). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2009b) Nonlinear complex dynamical systems in developmental psychology. In S. J. Guastello, M. Koopmans & D. Pincus (Eds.), Chaos and complexity in psychology: The theory of nonlinear dynamical systems (pp. 242–281). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2011) The contribution of Complex Dynamic Systems to Development. Child Development Perspectives, 5(4), 273–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Dynamic Systems. In B. Lauren, T. Little, & N. Card (Eds.), Handbook of developmental research methods (pp. 725–741). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
(2014, March). L2 acquisition and the study of change in complex systems. In K. de Bot & D. Larsen-Freeman (Chair), From universality to variability in second language development. Colloquium conducted at the meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics 2014, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
van Geert, P., Steenbeek, H., & van Dijk, M.
(2011) A dynamic model of expert-novice co-adaptation during language learning and acquisition. In M. S. Schmid & W. Lowie (Eds.), Modelling bilingualism: From structure to chaos: In honor of Kees de Bot. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Geert, P., & van Dijk, M.
(2002) Focus on variability: New tools to study intra-individual variability in developmental data. Infant Behaviour and Development, 251, 340–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Ambiguity in child language: The problem of inter-observer reliability in ambiguous observation data. First Language, 23(3), 259–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., & Behrens, H.
(2011) Dynamic systems theory and a usage–based approach to second language development. In M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques (pp.1 25–38). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., de Bot, K., & Lowie, W.
(2004) Dynamic Systems Theory and variation: A case study in L2 writing. In H. Aertsen, M. Hannay & R. Lyall (Eds.), Words in their places: A festschrift for J. Lachlan Mackenzie (pp. 407–421). Amsterdam: Department of English Language and Culture, Vrije Universiteit.Google Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., de Bot, K., & Xu, X.
(2011) The role of input and scholastic aptitude in second language development. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen, 861, 47–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., Lowie, W., & de Bot, K.
(2009) Input and second language development from a dynamic perspective. In T. Piske & M. Young–Scholten (Eds.), Input matters in SLA. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., Lowie, W., & van Dijk, M.
(2008) Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., & Sauter, K.
(2000) English sentence analysis: An introductory course. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X.
(2012) A dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 239–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., Smiskova, H.
(2012) Foreign language writing development form a dynamic usage based perspective. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives (pp. 17–46). Boston/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., & van Dijk, M.
(2011) Visualizing interactions between variables. In M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques (pp. 85–98). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vyatkina, N.
(2012) The development of second language writing complexity in groups and individuals: A longitudinal learner corpus study. The Modern Language Journal, 96(4), 576–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Specific syntactic complexity: Developmental profiling of individuals based on an annotated learner corpus. The Modern Language Journal, 97(S1), 11–30. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Witherington, D. C.
(2007) The Dynamic Systems Approach as metatheory for Developmental Psychology. Human Development, 501, 127–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.-Y.
(1998) Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. Manoa: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawai’i.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 11 other publications

Shokoufeh Abbasi Dogolsara, Saeideh Ahangari & Zohreh Seifoori
2022. Improving the Fluency of the Iranian EFL Learners’ Oral Performance through Task Variation. International Journal of Research in English Education 7:3 ► pp. 76 ff. DOI logo
Abdelrahim, Azza AM
2022. Developing EFL learners’ syntactic complexity in writing: The role of eTandem communication. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 40:3 ► pp. 337 ff. DOI logo
Hepford, Elizabeth
2020. Chapter 7. The elusive phase shift. In Complex Dynamic Systems Theory and L2 Writing Development [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 54], ► pp. 161 ff. DOI logo
Khomeijani Farahani, Ali Akbar, Abbas Ali Rezaee & Robabeh Moshtaghi Zonouz
2020. Exploring the Development of Writing Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Relation to the Motivational Trajectories: a Dynamically-Oriented Case Study. English Teaching & Learning 44:1 ► pp. 81 ff. DOI logo
Lahuerta Martínez, Ana Cristina
2018. Analysis of syntactic complexity in secondary education EFL writers at different proficiency levels. Assessing Writing 35 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Li, Zhi, Veronika Makarova & Zhengxiang Wang
2023. Developing literature review writing and citation practices through an online writing tutorial series: Corpus-based evidence. Frontiers in Communication 8 DOI logo
Thewissen, Jennifer & Alena V. Anishchanka
2022. Interaction between grammatical accuracy and syntactic complexity at different proficiency levels. In Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in Learner Corpus Research [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 104], ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Zehua, Feifei Han & Filomena Papa
2021. Developing English language learners’ oral production with a digital game-based mobile application. PLOS ONE 16:1 ► pp. e0232671 ff. DOI logo
Xue, Jin, Liyan Zheng, Xiaoyi Tang, Banban Li & Esther Geva
2021. Human Ratings of Writing Quality Capture Features of Syntactic Variety and Transformation in Chinese EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writing. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Zhang, Jianhua & Lawrence Jun Zhang
2024. Examining L2 studentsʼ development of global cohesion and its relationship with their argumentative essay quality. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0 DOI logo
Zhang, Shuang, Huiping Zhang & Cun Zhang
2022. A Dynamic Systems Study on Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in English Writing Development by Chinese University Students. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.