An Experimental Study On Effects Of Task Type And Pairing Pattern On Negotiation Of Meaning And Oral Performance In EFL Setting

The contribution of tasks to L2 learning has been the focus of a considerable research effort. In particular, researchers have investigated the impact of a variety of task variables, such as task type, task complexity, and task implementation condition, on learners’oral performance and negotiated interactions when completing tasks. Previous studies have been mainly informed by cognitive perspectives and most of them have only focused on one task variable at a time. The variable of pairing pattern in terms of L2 proficiency level of task group members so far has been little researched and the findings borne out are inconclusive. The present study, informed by the cognitive line of theories, as well as incorporating sociocultural perspectives as a complementary framework, set out to investigate the effects of task type and pairing pattern on English L2 learners’negotiation of meaning and oral performance.The present study adopted a 2x2 design. Specifically, closed vs. open task as task type and heterogeneous group vs. homogeneous group as pairing pattern were designed as two independent variables; negotiation of meaning and oral performance were designed as two dependent variables. The leading research questions were:1) what are the effects of task type and pairing pattern both separately and jointly on meaning negotiation? 2) what are the effects of task type and pairing pattern both separately and jointly on oral performance? Meaning negotiation was measured as the number of negotiation sequences and distribution of trigger types; oral performance was measured in terms of complexity and accuracy when the effect of task type was concerned and by length (word count) of turn when the effect of pairing pattern was concerned. The participants were 32 non-English major juniors in a university; 8 learners of relatively high English proficiency and 8 learners of low English proficiency were paired into 8 heterogeneous groups; and 16 learners of intermediate English proficiency were randomly paired into 8 homogeneous groups. All the 16 groups completed two types of task, the process of which was audio recorded and then transcribed. The data were analyzed in the measures above mentioned and subsequently analyzed through paired sample, independent sample T-test and two-way ANOVAby SPSS 19.0 and the findings generated are as follows:Firstly, in terms of negotiation of meaning,1) the closed task led to significantly more meaning negotiation sequences than did the open task; 2) significantly more lexical triggers, pronouncing triggers and morphosyntactic triggers were identified in the closed task; task type did not show salient impact on global trigger; 3) heterogeneous groups produced significantly more negotiation sequences than did homogeneous groups; 4)concerning trigger types, there was no significant difference between heterogeneous groups and homogeneous groups; 6) task type and pairing pattern had interactive effects on negotiation sequences and pronouncing and morphosyntactic triggers. Qualitative analysis of selected excerpts further confirmed these findings.Secondly, in terms of oral performance,1) the open task attained a greater complexity than did the closed task; 2) the closed task attained a greater accuracy than did the open task; 3) concerning length of turn, there was no significant difference between heterogeneous groups and homogeneous groups; 4) task type and pairing pattern had interactive effect only on accuracy. These findings were further confirmed by the qualitative analysis of selected excerpts.The study implies that adoption of heterogeneous groups and closed task together favors meaning negotiation and co-construction of meaning; and open-ended conversational task favors use of more complex language. Teachers should choose proper tasks and pairing patterns in accordance with teaching objectives.