Cover not available
Part of
Researching L2 Task Performance and Pedagogy: In honour of Peter Skehan
Edited by Zhisheng (Edward) Wen and Mohammad Javad Ahmadian
[Task-Based Language Teaching 13] 2019
► pp. 229–252

Chapter 10
Input-based tasks in the French language classroom

| University of Auckland
This study extended previous research by investigating the effectiveness of input-based instruction with beginner-level learners of French. Students completed a series of 11 focused tasks over 3 lessons which aimed to have them make form-meaning connections for target lexical and grammatical items. They received no explicit grammatical instruction. The tasks were taught by their classroom teacher during their normal French programme. An examination of the transcripts of the instruction allowed for information to be collected about the number of times that students were required to make form-meaning connections for each of the target items. Evidence of their learning on both measures of comprehension and production is presented, as well as evidence of the relationship between form-meaning connections (FMCs) and learning gains made.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Theoretical background
  • Research on form-meaning connections and second language acquisition
  • The present study
  • Participants
  • Research method
  • Target structures
    • Lexical items
    • Grammatical items
  • Instructional treatments
  • Testing instruments
    • Vocabulary test
    • Elicited imitation test
  • Analysis
    • Examples of FMCs
    • Examples of exposure
  • Results
    • Lexical gains
    • Grammatical gains
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Image links, credits, and changes made
  • Acknowledgement
  • References
Published online: 28 August 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.13.11erl
References (30)
References
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (2001). Introduction. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 1–20). Harlow: Pearson EducationGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (1994). Vocabulary acquisition. The explicit ins and outs of explicit cognitive mediation. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp.211–282). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 319–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y., & Yamazaki, A. (1994). Classroom interaction, comprehension and the acquisition of word meanings. Language Learning, 44, 449–491. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erlam, R., & Ellis, R. (2018a). Task-based language teaching for beginner-level learners of L2 French: An exploratory study. Canadian Modern Language Review, 71(1), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erlam, R. & Ellis, R. (2018b). Input-based tasks for beginner-level learners: An approximate replication and extension of Erlam and Ellis (2018). Language Teaching. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 47–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. (2014). Making the minutes count in L2 teaching. Language Awareness, 23, 3–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). From language learner to language learning researcher. In R. Ellis (Ed.) Becoming and being an applied linguist (pp.175–211). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loschky, L. (1994). Comprehensible input and second language acquisition: What is the relationship? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 303–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanz, C. & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: a computer assisted study. Language Learning, 54, 35–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.) Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shintani, N. (2011). A comparative study of the effects of input-based and production-based instruction on vocabulary acquisition by young EFL learners. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 137–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). The effect of focus on form and focus on forms instruction on the acquisition of productive knowledge of L2 vocabulary by young beginning-level learners. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 36–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015a). The incidental grammar acquisition in focus on form and focus on forms instruction for young, beginner learners. TESOL Quarterly 49(1), 115–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015b). The effectiveness of processing instruction and production-based instruction on L2 grammar acquisition: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 306–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2010). The incidental acquisition of English plural –s by Japanese children in comprehension-based lessons: a process-product study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 607–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shintani, N., Li, S., & Ellis, R. (2013). Comprehension-based and production-based grammar instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Language Learning, 63(2), 296–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17, 38–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Researching tasks: Performance, assessment and pedagogy. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. 1996. Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Oikkenon, S. (1996). Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., Williams, J., & Rott, S. (2004). Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp.1–26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Williams, J. (2004). Implicit learning of form-meaning connections. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp.203–218). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar