Chapter published in:
Learning Language through Task Repetition
Edited by Martin Bygate
[Task-Based Language Teaching 11] 2018
► pp. 193–222

Chapter 8
Perform, reflect, recycle

Enhancing task repetition in second language speaking classes

| University of Edinburgh

In this chapter I review my research into the benefits of various forms of internal repetition in speaking tasks created for English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses at the University of Edinburgh. A common objective of the tasks was that they should create a context for language learners to recycle their performance – adapting and modifying their previous output, rather than merely doing the same thing again. I discuss four different speaking tasks and analyze the specific forms of recycling that they involved. After summarizing the evidence that each promoted improved learners’ spoken output in later task cycles, I contrast the findings with those from my recent replication study. In that study, I used one of the speaking tasks in a different pedagogic context, and found virtually no change in learners’ performances. I will suggest how this difference in uptake might stem from the way in which participants translated task-as-workplan into task-in-process, as well as from other contextual factors. Drawing on this synthesis of two decades of research, I propose a model of task recycling that incorporates the use of reflection activities, feedback, and comparator recordings, through which teachers can help second language learners to recycle and enhance their spoken English output.

Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Alternative perspectives in task repetition research
  • Enhanced repetition
  • Benefits of enhanced repetition: Four classroom tasks
    • Task 1: Free Talk
    • Task 2: Poster Carousel
    • Task 3: Conference Presentation
    • Task 4: Scenario
    • Some counter evidence: A second Poster Carousel study
    • A model for maximising the benefits of enhanced repetition
  • Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 25 September 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.11.08lyn
References
Ahmadian, M.
(2012) Task repetition in ELT. ELT Journal, 66(4), 380–382.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ahmadian, M., & Tavakoli, M.
(2011) The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production Language Teaching Research, 15, 35–59.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J.
(1994) Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78, 465–483.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K., Maclean, J., & Lynch, T.
(2004) Study speaking (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Birjandi, P., & Ahangari, S.
(2008) Effects of task repetition on the fluency, complexity and accuracy of Iranian EFL learners’ oral discourse. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 10(3), 28–52.Google Scholar
Brown, R.
(1988) Classroom pedagogics – A syllabus for the interactive stage? The Teacher Trainer, 2(3), 8–9.Google Scholar
Bygate, M.
(1996) Effect of task repetition: Appraising the development of second language learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136–46). Oxford: Heinemann.Google Scholar
(1998) Theoretical perspectives on speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 3–19.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V.
(2005) Integrative planning through the use of task repetition. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language (pp. 37–74). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coughlan, P., & Duff, P.
(1994) Same task, different activities: Analysis of an SLA task from an activity theory perspective. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskyan approaches to second language research (pp. 173–193). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Craik, F., & Lockhart, R.
(1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Di Pietro, R.
(1987) Strategic interaction: Learning language through scenarios. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Finardi, K.
(2008) Effects of task repetition on L2 oral performance. Trabalhos de Linguistica Aplicada, 47(1), 31–43.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frawley, W., & Lantolf, J.
(1985) Second language discourse: A Vygotskyan perspective. Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 19–44.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gashan, A., & Almohaisen, F.
(2014) The effect of task repetition on the fluency and accuracy of Saudi female learners’ oral performance. Advances in Language and Literacy Studies, 5(3), 36–41.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Fernandez, M., & Alvarez-Torres, M.
(1999) The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49, 549–80.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gourlay, L.
(2005) Directions and indirect action: Learner adaptation of a classroom task. ELT Journal, 59(3), 209–216.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hawkes, M.
(2009) Effects of task repetition on learner motivation. In A. Stoke (Ed.), JALT2009 conference proceedings (pp. 456–465). Tokyo: JALT.Google Scholar
(2012) Using task repetition to direct learner attention and focus on form. ELT Journal, 66(3), 327–336.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, K.
(1995) Understanding communication in the second language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Q.
(2014) Get it right in the end: The effects of post-task transcribing on learners’ oral performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.) Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 129–154). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lynch, T.
(2001) Seeing what they meant: Transcribing as a route to noticing. ELT Journal, 55(2), 124–132.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) Learning from the transcripts of an oral communication task. ELT Journal, 61(4), 311–320.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009a) Responding to learners’ perceptions of feedback: The use of comparators in second language speaking courses. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
(2009b) Teaching second language listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lynch, T., & Anderson, K.
(1992) Study speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lynch, T., & Maclean, J.
(1994) Poster carousel. In K. Bailey & L. Savage (Eds.), New ways of teaching speaking (pp. 278–279). Washington DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
(2000) Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recycling for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 221–250.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) ‘A case of exercising’: Effects of immediate task repetition on learners’ performance. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and research (pp. 141–162). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
(2003) Effects of feedback on performance: A study of advanced learners on an ESP course. Edinburgh Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 12, 19–44.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L.
(1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mennim, P.
(2003) Rehearsed oral output and reactive focus on form. ELT Journal, 57(2), 130–138.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Learner negotiation of L2 form in transcription exercises. ELT Journal, 66(1), 52–61.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, E.
(2008) Effects of task repetition on poster carousel. In K. Bradford-Watts, T. Muller, & M. Swanson (Eds.), JALT2007 conference proceedings (pp. 188–199). Tokyo: JALT.Google Scholar
Ogilvie, G., & Dunn, W.
(2009, September). Task repetition as a pedagogical strategy: Interactional effects and affective responses. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching, Lancaster, England.
Ohta, A.
(1995) Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of learner discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 93–121.Google Scholar
Pang, F., & Skehan, P.
(2014) Self-reported planning behaviour and second language performance in narrative retelling. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 95–128). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pinter, A.
(2005) Task repetition with 10-year-old children. In J. Willis & C. Edwards (Eds.), Teachers exploring tasks in English language teaching (pp. 113–126). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richards, J.
(1985) Conversational competence through role-play activities. RELC Journal, 16(1), 82–100.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Samuda, V.
(2001) Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and research (pp. 119–140). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
(2015) Tasks, design and the architecture of pedagogic spaces. In M. Bygate (Ed.) Domains and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp. 271–302). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stevick, E.
(1976) Memory, meaning and method. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
(1995) Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(4), 371–391.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thornbury, S.
(2000) A dogma for EFL. IATEFL Issues, 153(2).Google Scholar
Willis, J.
(1996) A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 10 other publications

No author info given
2022.  In How to Teach an Additional Language [Task-Based Language Teaching, 15], Crossref logo
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian & Michael H. Long
2021.  In The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching, Crossref logo
Bygate, Martin
2018.  In Speaking in a Second Language [AILA Applied Linguistics Series, 17], ► pp. 153 ff. Crossref logo
Bygate, Martin
2020. Some directions for the possible survival of TBLT as a real world project. Language Teaching 53:3 ► pp. 275 ff. Crossref logo
Bygate, Martin, Virginia Samuda & Kris Van den Branden
2021.  In The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching, ► pp. 27 ff. Crossref logo
Kartchava, Eva & Hossein Nassaji
2019. The role of task repetition and learner self-assessment in technology-mediated task performance. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 170:2 ► pp. 180 ff. Crossref logo
Khezrlou, Sima
2021. Focus on form in task repetition through oral and written task modeling. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0 Crossref logo
Samuda, Virginia & Martin Bygate
2021.  In The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching, ► pp. 262 ff. Crossref logo
Souza Ferraz D'Ely, Raquel Carolina, Mailce Borges Mota & Martin Bygate
2019.  In Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy [Task-Based Language Teaching, 13], ► pp. 199 ff. Crossref logo
Suzuki, Yuichi & Keiko Hanzawa
2022. MASSED TASK REPETITION IS A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD FOR FLUENCY DEVELOPMENT. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 44:2 ► pp. 536 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 january 2023. 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.