Fluency Summer Intern Project 2010 - Revision history

Ndjong: Undo revision 12196 by Elenilowery (Talk)

2011-09-01T11:06:02Z

Undo revision 12196 by Elenilowery (Talk)

New page

== Abstract ==

[[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning#Study_1:_Repetition.2C_proceduralization_and_L2_fluency|De Jong & Perfetti (in press)]] showed that high-intermediate ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics. This study investigated whether repetition of the monologues had a long-term effect on the use of grammatical structures.

Twenty-four high-intermediate adult ESL students with mixed L1s were assigned to two conditions (Repetition, No Repetition). They performed three training sessions, and a pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test. Two verbs (''buy'', ''find'') and two grammatical structures (auxiliary - AUX; infinitive - INF) were selected for analysis. An additional group of high repeaters was analyzed.

Results showed that the High Repetition group repeated ''buy'' and ''find'' with the grammatical structures more than the No Repetition group. The High Repetition group also used the structures with other verbs more often than No Repetition, and they increased INF use at the post-test.

In conclusion, the 4/3/2 task with repetition may increase the use of the same grammatical structures with repeated words, yielding more practice of the structure. With repetition, high repeaters may have abstracted the structure and used it with different lexical items in the post-test.

== Background and significance ==

[[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning#Study_1:_Repetition.2C_proceduralization_and_L2_fluency|De Jong & Perfetti (in press)]] showed that ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics.

There was significant lexical overlap across retellings for the students who repeated the same topic, but the lexical overlap did not transfer to the post-tests. Since fluency gains cannot be attributed to faster lexical access of these specific vocabulary words, it is possible that the repetition of grammatical contexts in which the repeated words occurred is driving these fluency gains.

Oral fluency depends primarily on the proceduralization of declarative linguistic knowledge (Towell, Hawkins, & Bazergui, 1996). Linguistic knowledge becomes proceduralized through repeated practice, such that language knowledge is accessed automatically from long-term memory (Towell et al., 1996). From the constructionist perspective, specific lexical items become associated with certain grammatical constructions (Ellis, 2002) With frequent use, these structures become abstract representations in the speaker’s mind and can generalize to other lexical items (Bybee, 2005).

== Research question ==

* Does repetition of a monologue have a long-term effect on the use of grammatical structures in intermediate ESL learners?
* Does repetition of grammatical structures in the 4/3/2 task lead to increased use of these structures in other contexts?

== Method ==

=== Participants ===
24 high-intermediate adult ESL students with mixed L1s

=== Training ===
* Repetition (Rep; n = 15): spoke about shopping 3 times
** High-Repetition (High-Rep) AUX (n = 7)
** High-Repetition (High-Rep) INF (n = 6)
* No-Repetition (No-Rep) (n = 9): spoke about shopping, cell phones, television

=== Tests ===
2-minute pre-test and post-test speech on different topics

=== Selection of Words and Structures ===

Selected common grammatical structures around verbs repeated across deliveries in training session B. Focused analysis to two verbs and their two most common structures:

* ''Buy'' (topic related), ''Find'' (not topic related)
* Auxiliary Structure (AUX): Auxiliary + buy/find
* Infinitive Structure (INF): Verb + to + buy/find

== Independent variables ==

* Training condition / Frequency of use: Repetition, No Repetition, High Repetition
* Time: Pre-test, post-test

== Dependent variables ==
* Frequency of use in 4/3/2 training session B
** INF
** AUX
* Frequency of use in tests
** INF
** AUX

== Hypotheses ==

* Students in the Repetition condition repeat words across deliveries in the same grammatical structures, and use these words with the structures more than the students in the No Repetition condition.

* Students who repeat these words and their grammatical structures also show increased use of the abstract grammatical structure in the post-test.

== Findings ==
* In the 4/3/2 task, the High Repetition group repeated ''buy'' and ''find'' with the grammatical structures more than the No Repetition group.
* High Repetition group also used the structures with other verbs more often than No Repetition
* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.

[[Image:Fluency SI10-graphs.gif|600px|Results]]

== Explanation ==

The 4/3/2 task with repetition may increase the use of the same grammatical structures with repeated words, yielding more practice of the structure. With repetition, high repeaters may have abstracted the structure and used it with different lexical items in the post-test.

=== Future Analysis ===
* Temporal fluency measures (pause data) around the grammatical structures
* Accuracy of grammatical structures in pre- and post-test
* Analyze additional grammatical structures

=== Notes ===
* Frequency data was limited in the pre- and post-test analysis, since students spoke for only two minutes each, compared to nine minutes total in the 4/3/2 sessions.
* Effects may have been topic-driven . The topics in the 4/3/2 task may have elicited use of certain words or structures that were not elicited by the topics in the pre- and post-test.

== Related presentations ==
Warren, M. (2011). The role of repeated grammatical structures in second language fluency. ''Paper presented at McGill's Canadian Conference for Linguistics Undergraduates.'' Montreal, QC, March 2011.

== Further information ==

The data preparation and analysis of this part of the project has been performed by Mariah Warren from Northeastern University (summer intern in June-July 2010), under supervision of Mary Lou Vercellotti and Dr. Laura Halderman from the University of Pittsburgh, and Dr. Nel de Jong from the Free University in Amsterdam. With thanks to Jon-Michel Seman for his contributions to data coding.

This internship was part of the project [[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning|Fostering fluency in second language learning]] by Nel de Jong, Laura Halderman, and Charles Perfetti.

Ndjong at 14:11, 22 March 2011

2011-03-22T14:11:32Z

New page

Ndjong: /* Abstract */

2010-08-12T14:56:02Z

Abstract

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:56, 12 August 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==

	De Jong & Perfetti (in press) showed that high-intermediate ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics. This study investigated whether repetition of the monologues had a long-term effect on the use of grammatical structures.		[[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning#Study_1:_Repetition.2C_proceduralization_and_L2_fluency\|De Jong & Perfetti (in press)]] showed that high-intermediate ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics. This study investigated whether repetition of the monologues had a long-term effect on the use of grammatical structures.

	Twenty-four high-intermediate adult ESL students with mixed L1s were assigned to two conditions (Repetition, No Repetition). They performed three training sessions, and a pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test. Two verbs (''buy'', ''find'') and two grammatical structures (auxiliary - AUX; infinitive - INF) were selected for analysis. An additional group of high repeaters was analyzed.		Twenty-four high-intermediate adult ESL students with mixed L1s were assigned to two conditions (Repetition, No Repetition). They performed three training sessions, and a pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test. Two verbs (''buy'', ''find'') and two grammatical structures (auxiliary - AUX; infinitive - INF) were selected for analysis. An additional group of high repeaters was analyzed.

Ndjong: /* Background and significance */

2010-08-12T14:55:45Z

Background and significance

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:55, 12 August 2010
Line 11:		Line 11:
	== Background and significance ==		== Background and significance ==

	[[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning\|De Jong & Perfetti (in press)]] showed that ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics.		[[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning#Study_1:_Repetition.2C_proceduralization_and_L2_fluency\|De Jong & Perfetti (in press)]] showed that ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics.

	There was significant lexical overlap across retellings for the students who repeated the same topic, but the lexical overlap did not transfer to the post-tests. Since fluency gains cannot be attributed to faster lexical access of these specific vocabulary words, it is possible that the repetition of grammatical contexts in which the repeated words occurred is driving these fluency gains.		There was significant lexical overlap across retellings for the students who repeated the same topic, but the lexical overlap did not transfer to the post-tests. Since fluency gains cannot be attributed to faster lexical access of these specific vocabulary words, it is possible that the repetition of grammatical contexts in which the repeated words occurred is driving these fluency gains.

Ndjong: /* Abstract */

2010-08-12T14:53:45Z

Abstract

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:53, 12 August 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==

	'''~~abstract to be added~~'''		De Jong & Perfetti (in press) showed that high-intermediate ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics. This study investigated whether repetition of the monologues had a long-term effect on the use of grammatical structures.

			Twenty-four high-intermediate adult ESL students with mixed L1s were assigned to two conditions (Repetition, No Repetition). They performed three training sessions, and a pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test. Two verbs (''buy'', ''find'') and two grammatical structures (auxiliary - AUX; infinitive - INF) were selected for analysis. An additional group of high repeaters was analyzed.

			Results showed that the High Repetition group repeated ''buy'' and ''find'' with the grammatical structures more than the No Repetition group. The High Repetition group also used the structures with other verbs more often than No Repetition, and they increased INF use at the post-test.

			In conclusion, the 4/3/2 task with repetition may increase the use of the same grammatical structures with repeated words, yielding more practice of the structure. With repetition, high repeaters may have abstracted the structure and used it with different lexical items in the post-test.

	== Background and significance ==		== Background and significance ==

Ndjong: /* Findings */

2010-08-12T14:45:00Z

Findings

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:45, 12 August 2010
Line 60:		Line 60:
	* High Repetition group also used the structures with other verbs more often than No Repetition		* High Repetition group also used the structures with other verbs more often than No Repetition
	* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.		* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.


	[[Image:Fluency SI10-graphs.gif\|600px\|Results]]		[[Image:Fluency SI10-graphs.gif\|600px\|Results]]

Ndjong: /* Findings */

2010-08-12T14:44:20Z

Findings

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:44, 12 August 2010
Line 61:		Line 61:
	* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.		* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.

	[[Image:Fluency SI10-graphs.gif\|Results]]		[[Image:Fluency SI10-graphs.gif\|600px\|Results]]

	== Explanation ==		== Explanation ==

Ndjong: /* Findings */

2010-08-12T14:42:51Z

Findings

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:42, 12 August 2010
Line 61:		Line 61:
	* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.		* High Repetition increased INF use at the post-test.

			[[Image:Fluency SI10-graphs.gif\|Results]]
	~~'''Graphs to be added'''~~


	[[Image:~~filename~~.gif\|~~caption~~]]

	== Explanation ==		== Explanation ==

Ndjong: /* Background and significance */

2010-08-05T18:56:16Z

Background and significance

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 5 August 2010
Line 5:		Line 5:
	== Background and significance ==		== Background and significance ==

	De Jong & Perfetti (in press) showed that ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics.		[[Fostering_fluency_in_second_language_learning\|De Jong & Perfetti (in press)]] showed that ESL students who repeated a speech on the same topic in 4 minutes, then 3 minutes, then 2 minutes (the “4/3/2 task”) had greater gains in oral fluency on a post-test compared to students who gave their speeches on three different topics.

	There was significant lexical overlap across retellings for the students who repeated the same topic, but the lexical overlap did not transfer to the post-tests. Since fluency gains cannot be attributed to faster lexical access of these specific vocabulary words, it is possible that the repetition of grammatical contexts in which the repeated words occurred is driving these fluency gains.		There was significant lexical overlap across retellings for the students who repeated the same topic, but the lexical overlap did not transfer to the post-tests. Since fluency gains cannot be attributed to faster lexical access of these specific vocabulary words, it is possible that the repetition of grammatical contexts in which the repeated words occurred is driving these fluency gains.

Ndjong: /* Explanation */

2010-08-05T18:54:42Z

Explanation

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:54, 5 August 2010
Line 75:		Line 75:
	* Accuracy of grammatical structures in pre- and post-test		* Accuracy of grammatical structures in pre- and post-test
	* Analyze additional grammatical structures		* Analyze additional grammatical structures

			=== Notes ===
			* Frequency data was limited in the pre- and post-test analysis, since students spoke for only two minutes each, compared to nine minutes total in the 4/3/2 sessions.
			* Effects may have been topic-driven . The topics in the 4/3/2 task may have elicited use of certain words or structures that were not elicited by the topics in the pre- and post-test.

	== Further information ==		== Further information ==