Task-based language teaching: An empirical study of task transfer

Language Teaching Research

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 341-365

  Benson, Susan D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Generalizability; task selection; task based; TBLT; transfer

Indexed keywords

EID: 84965155581     PISSN: 13621688     EISSN: 14770954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1362168815569829     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. S.M.BarnettS.J.Ceci (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 612–637.
2. D.BatesM.MaechlerB.Bolker (2011). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-40. Retrieved from: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4 (January2015).
3. B.D.BlumeK.J.FordT.T.BaldwinJ.L.Huang (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36, 1065–1105.
4. G.Brindley. (1994). Task-centered language assessment in language learning. The promise and the challenge. In: (Eds.), Language and learning: Papers presented at the Annual International Language in Education Conference, Hong Kong (pp. 73–94). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Education Department.
5. J.D.BrownT.HudsonJ.M.NorrisW.Bonk (2002) An investigation of second language task-based performance assessments. Technical Report #24. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
6. Z.Chen. (1996). Children’s analogical problem solving: The effects of superficial, structural, and procedural similarity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 62, 410–431.
7. C.J.DoughtyM.H.Long (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Forum of International Development Studies, 23, 35–73.
8. R.M.Gagne (1965). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
9. M.L.GickK.J.Holyoak (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306–355.
10. R.F.GroseR.C.Briney (1963). Transfer of learning: An enduring problem in psychology. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
11. R.E.Haskell (2001). Transfer of learning: Cognition, instruction, and reasoning. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
12. F.Jaeger. (2008) Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446.
13. A.M.Johns (1988). The discourse communities dilemma: Identifying transferable skills for the academic milieu. English for Specific Purposes, 7, 55–59.
14. L.Lin. (2010). A video-based CALL program for proficient and less-proficient L2 learners’ comprehension ability, incidental vocabulary acquisition. Educational Media International, 47, 199–216.
15. M.H.Long (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In: (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition. (pp. 77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
16. M.H.Long (2007). Texts, tasks, and the advanced learner. In: (Ed.), Problems in SLA (pp. 119–138). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. M.H.Long (2015). Task-based needs and means analysis. In: (Ed.), Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
18. M.LongG.Crookes (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27–56.
19. M.LongG.Crookes (1993). Units of analysis in syllabus design: The case for task. In: (Eds.), Tasks in a pedagogical context: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–54). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
20. M.H.LongJ.M.Norris (2000). Task-based teaching and assessment. In: (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language teaching (pp. 597–603). London: Routledge.
21. R.L.MislevyL.S.SteinbergR.G.Almond (2002). Design and analysis in task-based language assessment. Language Testing, 19, 477–496.
22. D.D.MorrisJ.D.BransfordJ.J.Franks (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer-appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.
23. J.M.Norris (2002). Interpretations, intended uses and designs in task-based language assessment. Language Testing, 19, 337–346.
24. J.M.Norris (2009). Task-based teaching and testing. In: (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 578–594). Oxford: Blackwell.
25. J.M.NorrisJ.D.BrownT.D.HudsonW.Bonk (2002). Examinee abilities and task difficulty. Language Testing, 19, 425–443.
26. J.M.NorrisJ.D.BrownT.D.HudsonJ.K.Yoshioka (1998). Designing second language performance assessments. Technical Report #18. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
27. R Development Core Team (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from: http://www.R-project.org (January2015).
28. P.Robinson. (2001a). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In: (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. P.Robinson. (2001b). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27–57.
30. P.Robinson. (2007). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In: (Ed.), Investigating tasks is formal language learning (pp. 7–26). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
31. P.Robinson. (2009). Syllabus design. In: (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 294–310). Oxford: Blackwell.
32. P.RobinsonS.Ross (1996). The development of task-based assessment in English for academic purposes programs. Applied Linguistics, 17, 455–476.
33. R.A.SchmidtR.A.Bjork (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3, 207–217.
34. M.K.SingleyJ.R.Anderson (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. P.Skehan. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17, 38–62.
36. P.Skehan. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. E.L.ThorndikeR.S.Woodworth (1901). The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions. Psychological Review, 8, 247–261.