Article published in:
The Assessment of Functional Adequacy in Language Performance: Special issue of the Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 2:1 (2022)
Edited by Folkert Kuiken and Ineke Vedder
[TASK 2:1] 2022
► pp. 137–145

Functional adequacy, task-based language teaching and instructed second language acquisition

A commentary

| Michigan State University

This commentary synthesizes the five articles in Kuiken and Vedder’s special issue on functional adequacy in linguistic performance. The commentary considers the different scales that were used to measure functional adequacy, as well as the relationship between functional adequacy and other measures of linguistic performance such as complexity, accuracy, and fluency. The commentary also considers how functional adequacy might be usefully incorporated more frequently into studies from a task-based language teaching or instructed second language acquisition perspective, both as pedagogical instruction and as a means of measuring linguistic development.

Keywords: functional adequacy, task-based language teaching, instructed second language acquisition
Published online: 20 June 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/task.21007.loe
References
Council of Europe
(2001) Commonm European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I.
(2017) Functional adequacy in L2 writing. Towards a new rating scale. Language Testing, 34(3), 321–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) Assessing functional adequacy of L2 performance in a task-based approach. In N. Taguchi & Y-J. Kim (Eds.), Task-based approaches to assessing pragmatics (pp. 265–286). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, F., Vedder, I., & Gilabert, R.
(2010) Communicative adequacy and linguistic complexity in L2 writing. In I. Bartning, M. Martin & I. Vedder (Eds.) Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research (pp. 81–100). Eurosla Monographs Series 1. Roma: Eurosla.Google Scholar
Loewen, S.
(2020) Introduction to instructed second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S. & Sato, M.
(2021) Exploring the relationship between TBLT and ISLA. TASK: Journal on Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Early View. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S., & Wolff, D.
(2016) Peer interaction in F2F and CMC contexts. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 163–184). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D.
(2018) Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field: replication in second language research. Language Learning, 68 (2), 321–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michel, M.
(2017) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in L2 production. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 50–68). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Révész, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E.
(2016) The effects of complexity, accuracy and fluency on communicative adequacy in oral task performance. Applied Linguistics, 37 (6), 828–848. DOI logoGoogle Scholar