Cover not available
Article published In:
TASK
Vol. 3:1 (2023) ► pp.28–73

Modelling plurilingual instruction through a crosslinguistic-communicative task sequence

A developmental study

ORCID logo | Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada
ORCID logo | Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Canada
ORCID logo | Université de Montréal, Canada
This study aims to bridge the gap between ‘communicative’ and ‘plurilingual’ approaches, by providing a means for teachers to integrate learners’ plurilingual repertoires when teaching an additional language (Lx). We developed a model of crosslinguistic instruction embedded within the task-based language teaching approach. It consists of a 4 stages task sequence: input-based task, crosslinguistic consciousness-raising task, output-based task, and recap of the sequence. An iterative process of field testing and analysis (Harvey & Loiselle, 2009) allowed us to refine the model: researchers in-depth analysis (functional field test), implementation of the model in Lx classrooms (empirical field test) and experts assessment (second functional field test). Participant perceptions and evaluations provide an overview of their appreciation of different aspects, which lead to the current version of the model.
Keywords: task-based language teaching, plurilingual practices, task sequence, communicative language teaching, developmental research
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Conceptual framework: TBLT
    • Plurilingualism
    • Intersection of TSLT and plurilingual practices
  • Research objectives
  • Methodology
  • Repository: Elaboration of the model
  • Task sequence: Presentation of the model
  • Data collection: Validation of the model
  • Results and interpretation
  • Prototype 1
  • Empirical field test
    • Results obtained for Stage 1 – Consciousness-raising task (CRT) (IBT + CCRT in the current version)
    • Results obtained for Stage 2 – Communicative activity (OBT + RSCR in the current version)
  • Second functional field test
    • Positive comments
    • Constructive comments
  • Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 October 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/task.22013.wou
References (78)
References
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2007). The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research, 23 (4), 459–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Basturkmen, H. & Philp, J. (2018). The role of collaborative tasks and peer interaction in the development of second language awareness. In P. Garrett & J. M. Cots (Eds.) The Routledge handbook of language awareness, pp. 290–305. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beaudry, M.-C. (2009). Enseigner les stratégies de lecture littéraire au secondaire: Une recherche-développement autour du roman « Nikolski » de Nicolas Dickner (Thèse de doctorat inédite). Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
(2016). Dispositif didactique pour développer la lecture littéraire au deuxième cycle du secondaire. In I. Carignan, M.-C. Beaudry, & F. Larose (Éds), La recherche-action et la recherche-développement au service de la littératie (pp. 92–122). (S.l.): Les Éditions de l’université de Sherbrooke. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beaulieu, S., Fortier, V., Damiens, J., Laberge, C., & Fillion, C. (2020). Développer des connaissances lexicales et grammaticales sans support écrit et sans production grâce à une approche par tâches basée sur la compréhension. La Revue de l’AQEFLS, 33 1, 12–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergeron, L., Rousseau, N., & Dumont, M. (2021). Une opérationnalisation de la recherche-développement menée en contextes éducatifs. In L. Bergeron & N. Rousseau (Eds.), La recherche-développement en contextes éducatifs: Une méthodologie alliant le développement de produits et la production de connaissances scientifiques (pp. 25–44). Presses de l’Université du Québec. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryfonski, L., & McKay, T. H. (2019). TBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23 (5), 603–632. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bygate, M. (2016). Sources, developments and directions of task-based language teaching. The Language Learning Journal, 44 (4), 381–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canagarajah, S. (2011). Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review, 2 1, 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Candelier, M., & Manno, G. (Eds.) (2023, in press). La didactique intégrée des langues – Apprendre une langue avec d’autres langues? Association ADEB.Google Scholar
Candelier, M., Camillieri-Grima, A., Castellotti, V., de Pietro, J.-F., Lörincz, I., Meißner, F.-J., Schrôder-Sura, A., & Molinié, M. (2012). FREPA – Competences and Resources. Council of Europe and ECML.Google Scholar
Carver, J., & Kim, Y. (2020). French learners’ past-tense development through collaborative writing tasks: The role of procedural and content repetition. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 76 (2), 114–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2013). The influence of bilingualism on third language acquisition: Focus on multilingualism. Language Teaching, 46 1, 71–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, M. (2018). Task complexity and modality: Exploring learners’ experience from the perspective of flow. The Modern Language Journal, 102 (1), 162–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. (1992). Evidence for multicompetence. Language Learning, 42 1, 557–591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corcoll, C. (2013). Developing children’s language awareness: Switching codes in the language classroom. International Journal of Multilingualism, 10 (1), 27–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cummins, J. (1991). Conversational and academic language proficiency in bilingual contexts. In J. H. Hulstijn & J. F. Matter (Eds.), Reading in two languages (pp. 75–89). AILA Review, 8 1.Google Scholar
(2005). Teaching for cross-language transfer in dual language education: Possibilities and pitfalls. TESOL Symposium on Dual Language Education: Teaching and Learning Two Languages in the EFL Setting, 1–18.Google Scholar
(2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10 (2), 221–240.Google Scholar
(2008). Teaching for transfer: Challenging the two solitudes assumption in bilingual education. In Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 1528–1538). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckerth, J. (2008). Investigating consciousness-raising tasks: Pedagogically targeted and non-targeted learning gains. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18 (2), 119–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2018). Reflections on task-based language teaching. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2020). Task-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2016). ‘I’m still not sure what a task is’: Teachers designing language tasks. Language Teaching Research, 20(3), 279–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erlam, R., & Ellis, R. (2018). Task-based language teaching for beginner-level learners of L2 French: An exploratory study. Canadian Modern Language Review, 74 (1), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galante, A. (2020). “The moment I realized I am plurilingual”: Plurilingual tasks for creative representations in EAP at a Canadian university. Applied Linguistics Review, 11 (4), 551–580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galante, A., Okubo, K., Cole, C., Elkader, N. A., Carozza, N., Wilkinson, C., Wotton, C., & Vasic, J. (2019). Plurilingualism in higher education: A collaborative initiative for the implementation of plurilingual pedagogy in an English for academic purposes program at a Canadian university. TESL Canada Journal, 36 (1), 121–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on access to fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 61 (3), 325–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1985). The bilingual as a competent but specific speaker-hearer. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 6 1, 467–477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). The bilingual’s language modes. In J. Nicol (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 1–22). Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2011). An attempt to isolate, and then differentiate, transfer and interference. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16 1, 11–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harvey, S., & Loiselle, J. (2009). Proposition d’un modèle de recherche développement. Recherches Qualitatives, 28 (2), 95–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horst, M., White, J., & Bell, P. (2010). First and second language knowledge in the language classroom. International Journal of Bilingualism, 14 (3), 331–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hufeisen, B. (2000). A European perspective: Tertiary languages with a focus on German as L3. In J. Rosenthal (Ed.), Handbook of undergraduate second language education: English as a second language, bilingual, and foreign language instruction for a multilingual world (pp. 209–229). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Jessner, U. (2008). A DST model of multilingualism and the role of metalinguistic awareness. The Modern Language Journal, 92 1, 270–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y. (2015). The role of tasks as vehicles for language learning in classroom interaction. In N. Markee (Ed.), The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction. John Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., Crossley, S., Jung, Y., Kyle, K., & Kang, S. (2018). The effects of task repetition and task complexity on L2 lexicon use. In M. Bygate (Éd.), Learning language through task repetition. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., Jung, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2017). Implementation of a localized task-based course in an EFL context: A study of students’ evolving perceptions. TESOL Quarterly, 51 (3), 632–660. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.Google Scholar
Kursiša, A., & Neuner, G. (2006). Deutsch ist easy – Methodische Grundlagen für Deutsch nach Englisch. Hueber.Google Scholar
Lee, J. (2020). Task closure and task complexity effects on L2 written performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 50 1, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2014). Processing instruction: Where research meets practice. In A. Benati, C. Laval & M. J. Arche, The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 58–81). Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Loiselle, J. (2001). La recherche développement en éducation: Sa nature et ses caractéristiques. In M. Anadón & M. L’Hostie (Eds.), Nouvelles dynamiques de recherche en éducation (pp. 77–98). Presses de l’Université Laval.Google Scholar
Loiselle, J., & Harvey, S. (2007). La recherche développement en éducation: Fondements, apports et limites. Recherches Qualitatives, 27 (1), 40–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching (1st ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2016). In defense of tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and real issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36 1, 5–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Marsden, E. (Eds.). (2011). Advancing methodology and practice: The IRIS Repository of Instruments for Research into Second Languages. Routledge.Google Scholar
MacSwan, J. (2017). A multilingual perspective on translanguaging. American Educational Research Journal, 54 (1), 167–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marshall, S., & Moore, D. (2013). 2b or not 2b plurilingual? Navigating languages literacies, and plurilingual competence in postsecondary education in Canada. TESOL Quarterly, 47 (3). 472–499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morrissette, J. (2013). Recherche-action et recherche collaborative: Quel rapport aux savoirs et à la production de savoirs? Nouvelles pratiques sociales, 25 (2), 35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50 (3), 417–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payant, C. (2015). Plurilingual learners’ beliefs and practices toward native and nonnative language mediation during learner-learner interaction. Canadian Modern Language Review, 71 (2), 105–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Étude de la perception des apprenants de français langue étrangère concernant l’enseignement des langues basé sur les tâches. Revue Canadienne de Linguistique Appliquée (RCLA), 22 (1), 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payant, C., & Kim, Y. (2015). Language mediation in an L3 classroom: The role of task modalities and task types. Foreign Language Annals, 48 (4), 706–729. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Impact of task modality on collaborative dialogue among plurilingual learners: A classroom-based study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22 (5), 614–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payant, C., & Michaud, G. (2020). La conceptualisation de la tâche en didactique des langues secondes: L’enseignement des langues basé sur la tâche et l’approche actionnelle. La Revue de l’AQEFLS, 33 (1), 4–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piccardo, E. (2013). Plurilingualism and curriculum design: Toward a synergic vision. TESOL Quarterly, 47 (3), 600–614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 141–160). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Form-focused instruction. In P. Garrett & J. M. Cots (Eds.) The Routledge handbook of language awareness (pp. 40–56). Routledge.Google Scholar
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, V. M., & De la Fuente, M. J. (2008). What’s the problem? L2 learners’ use of the L1 during consciousness-raising, form-focused tasks. The Modern Language Journal, 92 (1), 100–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seals, C. A., Newton, J. M., Ash, M., & Nguyen, B. T. T. (2020). Translanguaging and Task Based Language Teaching: Crossovers and challenges. In Z. Tian, L. Aghai, P. Sayer, & J. L. Schissel (Eds.), Envisioning TESOL through a translanguaging lens: Global perspectives (pp. 275–292). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Current status and future prospects. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (pp. 271–288). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2003). Is there a role for the use of the L1 in an L2 setting? TESOL Quarterly, 37 (4), 760–769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svalberg, A. M.-L., & Askham, J. (2020). Teacher and learner perceptions of adult foreign language learners’ engagement with consciousness-raising tasks in four languages. Language Awareness, 29 1, 236–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2013). Languaging: Collaborative dialogue as a source of second language learning. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–8). Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (2016). Task-based language teaching. In G. Hall (Éd.), The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp. 238–251). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van der Maren, J.-M. (1996). Méthodes de recherche pour l’éducation (2nd ed). De Boeck Université.Google Scholar
White, J., & Horst, M. (2012). Cognate awareness-raising in late childhood: Teachable and useful. Language Awareness, 21 (1–2), 181–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woll, N. (2020). Towards crosslinguistic pedagogy: Demystifying pre-service teachers’ beliefs regarding the target-language-only rule. System, 92 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woll, N., & Paquet, P.-L. (2021). Developing crosslinguistic awareness through plurilingual consciousness-raising tasks. Language Teaching Research. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woll, N., Paquet, P.-L., & Wouters, I. (2022). Language as a vehicle or as a resource? The nature of metalinguistic reflection in a plurilingual consciousness-raising task. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wouters, I., Paquet, P.-L., Woll, N., & Jasor, I. (in press). De la théorie à l’action: l’implantation d’un modèle d’enseignement translinguistique-communication dans les cours de Lx. In Actes de la 10e Rencontre sur l’enseignement des langues (ReEL). Université du Québec à Montréal.
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Paquet, Pierre-Luc & Nina Woll
2024. À la croisée des chemins : modèle d’enseignement translinguistique-communicatif. La Revue de l’AQEFLS 37:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.