Rick de Graaff | IVLOS, Institute of Education, Utrecht University
Gerard.J. Westhof | IVLOS, Institute of Education, Utrecht University
This paper presents a theoretical framework to estimate the effectiveness of second language tasks in which the focus is on the acquisition of new linguistic items, such as vocabulary or grammar, the so-called focused tasks (R. Ellis, 2003). What accounts for the learning impact offocused tasks? We shall argue that the task-based approach (e.g. Skehan, 1998, Robinson, 2001) does not provide an in-depth account of how cognitive processes, elicited by a task, foster the acquisition of new linguistic elements. We shall then review the typologies of cognitive processes derived from research on learning strategies (Chamot & O'Malley, 1994), from the involvement load hypothesis (Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001), from the depth of processing hypothesis (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) and from connectionism (e.g Broeder & Plunkett, 1997; N. Ellis, 2003). The combined insights of these typologies form the basis of the multi-feature hypothesis, which predicts that retention and ease of activation of new linguistic items are improved by mental actions which involve a wide variety of different features, simultaneously and frequently. A number of implications for future research shall be discussed.
Anderson, J R. (2000). Cognitive psychology and its implications (5th ed.). New York: Worth.
Arievitch, I. M., & Haenen, J. P. P. (2005). Connecting sociocultural theory and educational practice: Galperin's approach. Educational Psychologist, 401(31), 155–165.
Aitchison, J. (1994). Words in the mind. An introduction to the mental lexicon (2nd ed.). Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell.
Baddeley, A. (1997). Human memory. Theory and practice: Hove: Psychology Press
Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory and language: an overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 361, 189–208.
Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. (2002). Connectionism and the mind, parallel processing, dynamics and evolution in networks (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Bereiter, C. (1991). Implications of connectionism for thinking about rules. Educational Researcher, 201(31),10–16.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn. Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington D. C: National Academic Press.
Breen, M. (1987). Learner contributions to task design. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks (pp. 23–46). London: Prentice-Hall.
Broeder, P., & Plunkett, K. (1997). Connectionism and second language acquisition. InN. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit/earning of/anguages (2nd ed., pp. 421–453). London, San Diego: Academic Press Limited.
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks. Second language learning, teaching and testing: Harlow: Pearson
Brown, S., & Craik, F. (2000). Encoding and retrieval of information. In E. Tulving & F. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 93–107). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chamot, A., & O'Malley, M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 371–392). London: Academic Press.
Cowan, N. (2005). Working memory capacity. New York: Psychology Press.
Craik, F., & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 111 ,671–684.
Craik, F., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1041,268–294.
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Driessen, C., Haenen, J., & Westhoff, G. (2002). A critical analYSis offoreign language learning tasks. In S. Selander & M. Tholey (Eds.), New educational media and textbooks (Vol. 91, pp. 162–180). Stockholm: Stockholm Institute of Education Press.
Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, N. (2001). Memory for language. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 33–68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, N. (2003). Constructions, chunking and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of SLA (pp. 63–103). Malden, Oxford, Victoria: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gasser, M. (1990). Connectionism and universals of second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 121, 179–199.
Gazzaniga, M., Ivry, R., & Mangun, G. (2002). Cognitive neuroscience. The biology ofthe mind. New York: Norton.
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 511(31),539–558.
Laufer, B. (1997). What's in a word that makes it hard or easy: some intralexical factors affecting the learning of words. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary. Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140–155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 221(11), 1–26.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking. From intention to articulation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Uttlewoord, w. (2004). The task-based approach: some questions and suggestions. ELT Journal, 581(41), 319–326.
Lockhart, R., & Craik, F. (1990). Levels of processing: a retrospective commentary on a framework for memory research. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 441(11), 87–112.
Markovitsch, H. (2000). Neuroanatomy of memory. In E. Tulving & F. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 465–484). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McClelland, J. (2000). Connectionist models of memory. In E. Tulving & F. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 583–596). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McClelland, J., Rumelhart, D., & Hinton, G. (1986). The appeal of parallel distributed processing. In D. Rumelhart & J. McClelland (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing. Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. (Vol. 11: Foundations, pp. 3–44). London: MIT Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Richards, J. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 101(11),77–89.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (6th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rumelhart, D. (1989). The architecture of mind: a connectionist approach. In M. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 133–159). London: MIT Press.
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: a triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. IRAL. International review of applied linguistics in language teaching, 431.
Rumelhart, D., & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In R. Anderson, R. Spiro & W. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquiSition of knowledge (pp. 99–135). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 361, 1–14.
Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: The case of Task-Based Instruction. Applied Linguistics, 261(31),376–401.
Westhoff, G. (2004). The art of playing a pinball machine. Characteristics of effective SLAtasks. Babylonia(31), 58–62., [URL]
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Essex: Longman.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Yanagisawa, Akifumi & Stuart Webb
2021. To What Extent Does the Involvement Load Hypothesis Predict Incidental L2 Vocabulary Learning? A Meta‐Analysis. Language Learning 71:2 ► pp. 487 ff.
Moonen, Machteld, Rick de Graaff, Gerard Westhoff & Mieke Brekelmans
2014. The multi-feature hypothesis: Connectionist guidelines for L2 task design. Language Teaching Research 18:4 ► pp. 474 ff.
BIRD, STEVE
2012. Expert knowledge, distinctiveness, and levels of processing in language learning. Applied Psycholinguistics 33:4 ► pp. 665 ff.
Jauregi, Kristi, Silvia Canto, Rick de Graaff, Ton Koenraad & Machteld Moonen
2011. Verbal interaction in Second Life: towards a pedagogic framework for task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning 24:1 ► pp. 77 ff.
Westhoff, Gerard J.
2009. A prioriassessment of language learning tasks by practitioners. Language Teaching 42:4 ► pp. 504 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 august 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.