Differences in the effects of Task Repetition Techniques on the fluency development of ESL learners

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Sujata Kakoti, Sarat Kumar Doley
{"title":"Differences in the effects of Task Repetition Techniques on the fluency development of ESL learners","authors":"Sujata Kakoti, Sarat Kumar Doley","doi":"10.24815/siele.v10i3.29751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In an attempt to compare the effects of interleaved and blocked practice on L2 fluency development, 44 adolescent Indian English as L2 learners were given fluency training in English for three months. The participants in the blocked group engaged in task repetition practice of speaking English sentences in a predictable sequence of task repetition, i.e., aaaa, bbbb, cccc, and dddd, in the first 16 sessions. The sequence of the task repetition practice in the interleaved group was arranged using the technique of spacing and mixing, i.e., abcd, abbd, aacc, and bdcd, in the first 16 sessions. The mean values of the English fluency scores of the interleaved and blocked group in the two intermediate fluency tests in the middle of the training and one achievement test at the end showed no statistically significant difference in fluency development as the p-value of the comparison in a repeated measures ANOVA test was .29 representing low F value of 1.16 and effect size of .05. The participants in the blocked group, however, demonstrated a minor growth in fluency development from slow and hesitant speech behavior to occasional self-correction or repetition in a long speech in the later stages of the fluency training in English. The systematic manipulation of the sequence of the tasks to be practiced incorporating high similarity or stimuli retrieval in blocked practice might be more effective in fluency development in L2 than interleaving. As interleaving causes anxiety among beginners, it might not be an appropriate method of task repetition in the initial stage of fluency practice in L2.","PeriodicalId":36412,"journal":{"name":"Studies in English Language and Education","volume":"237 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in English Language and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i3.29751","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In an attempt to compare the effects of interleaved and blocked practice on L2 fluency development, 44 adolescent Indian English as L2 learners were given fluency training in English for three months. The participants in the blocked group engaged in task repetition practice of speaking English sentences in a predictable sequence of task repetition, i.e., aaaa, bbbb, cccc, and dddd, in the first 16 sessions. The sequence of the task repetition practice in the interleaved group was arranged using the technique of spacing and mixing, i.e., abcd, abbd, aacc, and bdcd, in the first 16 sessions. The mean values of the English fluency scores of the interleaved and blocked group in the two intermediate fluency tests in the middle of the training and one achievement test at the end showed no statistically significant difference in fluency development as the p-value of the comparison in a repeated measures ANOVA test was .29 representing low F value of 1.16 and effect size of .05. The participants in the blocked group, however, demonstrated a minor growth in fluency development from slow and hesitant speech behavior to occasional self-correction or repetition in a long speech in the later stages of the fluency training in English. The systematic manipulation of the sequence of the tasks to be practiced incorporating high similarity or stimuli retrieval in blocked practice might be more effective in fluency development in L2 than interleaving. As interleaving causes anxiety among beginners, it might not be an appropriate method of task repetition in the initial stage of fluency practice in L2.
任务重复技巧对ESL学习者流利性发展影响的差异
为了比较交叉练习和阻断练习对二语流利性发展的影响,对44名印度青少年二语学习者进行了为期三个月的英语流利性训练。受阻组的参与者在前16个阶段进行任务重复练习,按照可预测的任务重复顺序(aaaa, bbbb, cccc, dddd)说英语句子。交错组的任务重复练习顺序采用间隔混合技术,即abcd、abbd、aacc、bdcd在前16个时段进行。在训练中期的两次中间流利性测试和训练结束时的一次成就性测试中,交错组和闭塞组的英语流利性得分的平均值在流利性发展方面没有统计学意义,重复测量方差分析比较的p值为0.29,低F值为1.16,效应量为0.05。然而,受阻组的参与者在英语流利性训练的后期阶段,从缓慢和犹豫的言语行为到偶尔的自我纠正或长时间的重复,表现出了流利性发展的轻微增长。系统地操作任务的顺序,结合高相似性或刺激检索在阻塞练习中可能比交错更有效地发展第二语言的流利性。由于交错会引起初学者的焦虑,在二语流利度练习的初始阶段,任务重复可能不是一种合适的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in English Language and Education
Studies in English Language and Education Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信