| Tasks are considered as significant means to learn a second language in that learners will negotiate about communicative topics and language forms when implementing tasks, thus creating opportunities for language learning. In the past three decades, researchers have increased interest in how inherent characteristics of tasks impact L2 learners’ language production and interaction features. Robinson (2001) proposed a triadic task analytic framework in which cognitive complexity of task is in a central position. The present study mainly investigated whether and how task complexity impacted students’ peer interaction when completing the tasks; it also examined learners’perception of task difficulty as cognitive complexity varied.Task design of the present study was based on Robinson’s (2007) task analytic model. Two factors manipulating cognitive complexity of task, namely, information elements and reasoning demands, were independent variables operationalized through simple and complex versions of two tasks:decision making and picture narration. The dependent variables were the quantity and quality of peer interaction during tasks. The subjects were 40 sophomores from non-English major in a local college. The subjects who were randomly paired performed four tasks——the simple and complex version of decision making task; and simple and complex version of picture narration task. After each task, they were asked to complete a questionnaire about perception of task difficulty. Task performances were all recorded and transcribed. The quantitative analysis of data includes a) the total word counts in interaction discourse and the number of turn taking; b) the number of negotiated interaction episodes and modified output; and distribution of negotiation strategies. The differences within and between groups were tested by SPSS 18.0. Besides, some interaction episodes were qualitatively analyzed to see more about relationship between task complexity and negotiated interaction; The major results are as follows:a) Regarding the quantity of peer interaction, the learners generated significantly more interaction discourse in terms of word counts and turn taking occurred more frequently when implementing the complex tasks than in simple tasks.b) Regarding the quality of peer interaction, the learners generated more negotiated interaction episodes and more modified output in terms of meaning clarifying in complex tasks than in simple tasks, but the difference was not significant.c) All of the tasks, regardless of complexity levels, generated various types of negotiation:negotiations of form, meaning and topical content. Negotiation of topic took up the largest proportion which was more evident when complexity level was higher. Besides, task complexity affected the distribution of negotiation strategies. Complex tasks generated more clarification requests, confirmation checks and comprehension checks than simple tasks with confirmation checks used most frequently.d) There is some difference in the impact of task complexity on peer interaction when taking types of task into account. Picture narration task generated more negotiation episodes than decision making task. The former generated more negotiation of form, which was more evident under complex conditions. The latter generated more negotiation of topic and modified output, which varied in degree with complexity levels.e) Learners perceived that complex tasks were significantly more stressful and difficult and they felt less confident in completing complex tasks. However, there was no loss of motivation and interest.The research results were explained and discussed from the perspectives of Robinson’s Cognition Hypothesis and interaction theories. The study has partially confirmed Robinson’s hypotheses, with some results not fully supportive. This may be partly due to the designing itself, and it has also revealed limitations of merely manipulating task complexity. The researcher should also consider learners’cognition and language proficiency levels so as to provide optimal conditions for peer interaction and language performance. |
PDF Full Text Request