Chapter published in:

Complex Dynamic Systems Theory and L2 Writing Development
Edited by Gary G. Fogal and Marjolijn H. Verspoor
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 54] 2020
► pp. 3–25

Chapter 1. Exploring dynamic developmental trajectories of writing fluency

Who benefited from the writing task?

Kyoko Baba | Kinjo Gakuin University

This study investigates the developmental trajectories of L2 writing fluency in 105 university students when the same task procedure was repeatedly used in a classroom setting throughout an academic year. The students wrote a timed narrative composition in their English L2 along with reflective writing in their L1 Japanese every week. Individual growth curve modeling revealed that their writing fluency increased over a year, but the rate of change varied significantly from person to person. Case analyses of high- and low-growth performers suggested that the former seemed to benefit more from task iteration, and actions that showed reflection in action and a positive attitude toward the task may have contributed to increased growth.

Keywords: developmental trajectories, writing fluency, individual growth curve modeling, task iteration, L2 writing

Published online: 04 June 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.54.01bab

References

Baba, K.

(2011) Reflection in second language writing: A longitudinal study of task repetition from a Complexity Theory perspective. 金城学院大学論集（社会科学編）, 8, 70–101.

Baba, K., & Nitta, R.

(2014) Phase transitions in the development of writing fluency from a complex dynamic systems perspective. Language Learning, 64(1), 1–35.

Bulté, B., & Housen, A.

(2017) Synactic complexity in L2 writing: Individual pathways and emerging group trends. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28, 147–164.

Bygate, M.

(2018) 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. Garcia Mayo (Eds.), Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching (pp. 143–166). Berlin: De Gruyter.

Chan, H., Verspoor, M., & Vahtrick, L.

(2015) Dynamic development in speaking versus writing in identical twins. Language Learning, 65, 298–325.

Fogal, G. G.

(2019a) Tracking microgenetic changes in authorial voice development from a complexity theory perspective. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 432–455.

(2019b) Investigating variability in L2 development: Extending a complexity theory perspective on L2 writing studies and authorial voice. Applied Linguistics, 1–27.

Friginal, E., Li, M., & Weigle, S. C.

(2014) Revisiting multiple profiles of learner compositions: A comparison of highly rated NS and NNS essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 23, 1–16.

Garner, J., & Crossley, S.

(2018) A latent curve model approach to studying L2 n-gram development. The Modern Language Journal, 102, 494–511.

Jarvis, S., Grant, L., Bikowski, D., & Ferris, D.

(2003) Exploring multiple profiles of highly rated learner compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 377–403.

Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C.

(2013) L1/L2/L3 writing development: Longitudinal case study of a Japanese multicompetent writer. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 4–33.

Larsen-Freeman, D.

(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.

(2018) Task repetition or task iteration? It does make a difference. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Learning language through task repetition (pp. 311–329). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

(2019) On language learner agency: A complex dynamic systems theory perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 103, 61–79.

Lavelli, M., & Fogel, A.

(2002) Developmental changes in mother-infant face-to-face communication: Birth to 3 months. Developmental Psychology, 38, 288–305.

Lewis, M. D.

(2000) The promise of dynamic systems approaches for an integrated account of human development. Child Development, 71(1), 36–43.

McCarthey, S. J., Guo, Y.-H., & Cummins, S.

(2005) Understanding changes in elementary Mandarin students’ L1 and L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 71–104.

McKean, C., Mensah, F. K., Eadie, P., Bavin, E. L., Bretherton, L., Cini, E., & Reilly, S.

(2015) Levers for language growth: Characteristics and predictors of language trajectories between 4 and 7 years. PLOS ONE, 10, e0134251.

Mehta, S. R., & Al-Mahrooqi, R.

(2015) Can thinking be taught? Linking critical thinking and writing in an EFL context. RELC Journal, 46, 23–36.

Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., & Wu, Q.

(2011) Kindergarten children’s growth trajectories in reading and mathematics: Who falls increasingly behind? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 472–488.

Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., & vom Hofe, R.

(2013) Predicting long-term growth in students’ mathematics achievement: The unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies. Child Development, 84, 1475–1490.

Nguyen, H., & Larsen-Freeman, D.

(2018) Using tasks to teach formulaic sequences: Interindividual and intraindividual variation. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. D. P. Garcia Mayo (Eds.), Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching (pp. 167–193). Berlin: De Gruyter.

Nitta, R., & Baba, K.

(2018) Understanding benefits of repetition from a complex dynamic systems perspective: The case of a writing task. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Language learning through task repetition (pp. 279–309). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

(2014) Task repetition and L2 writing development: A longitudinal study from a dynamic systems perspective. In H. Byrnes & R. Manchon (Eds.), Task-based language learning and teaching: Insights from writing (pp. 107–136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Sasaki, M., Kozaki, Y., & Ross, S. J.

(2017) The impact of normative environments on learner motivation and L2 reading ability growth. The Modern Language Journal, 101(1), 163–178.

Schön, D. A.

(1987) Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.

Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B.

(2003) Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

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(4), 532–553.

Taylor, W. A.

(2000) Change-point analysis: A powerful new tool for detecting changes. http://www.variation.com/cpa/tech/changepoint.html (7 January 2020).

Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M. L.

(2015) Fluency in writing: A multidimensional perspective on writing fluency applied to L1 and L2. Computers and Composition, 38, 79–95.

Vercellotti, M. L.

(2017) The development of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language performance: A longitudinal study. Applied Linguistics, 38, 90–111.

Verspoor, M., & Smiskova, H.

(2012) Foreign language writing development from a dynamic usage-based perspective. In R. M. Manchon (Ed.), L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives (pp. 17–46). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & van Dijk, M.

(2008) Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214–231.

Vyatkina, N.

(2012) The development of second language writing complexity in groups and individuals: A longitudinal learner corpus study. The Modern Language Journal, 96, 576–598.

Weissberg, R.

(1998) Acquiring English syntax through journal writing. College ESL, 8(1), 1–22.