Pre-task planning, working memory capacity, and l2 speech performance

Abstract

Research on task-based planning provides evidence of trade-off effects among the goals of fluency, accuracy, and complexity of L2 performance in the context of learners’ limited attentional resources (e.g., Foster & Skehan, 1996; Menhert, 1998; Yuan & Ellis, 2003). However, there is a lack of empirical investigation on the role of working memory within the effects of planning on L2 performance. The present study investigates the relationship among pre-task planning, working memory capacity, and L2 speech performance. More specifically, it addresses the question whether individual differences in working memory capacity plays a role in performance under planning conditions and in the processes learners engage in when they plan. A population of 50 students from Letras Licenciatura, Letras Secretariado, and Cursos Extracurriculares at Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina was divided in two groups: control and experimental. Participants in the control group performed a working memory test, two narrative tasks under a no-planning condition, and a retrospective interview. Participants in the experimental group performed a working memory test, two narrative tasks (one under a no-planning and one under a planning condition), a retrospective online protocol, and a retrospective interview. L2 speech performance was assessed in terms of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. In general, results show that under a no-planning condition, working memory capacity significantly correlates with L2 speech accuracy (for the control group) and L2 speech fluency (for the experimental group). Under a planning condition, working memory capacity significantly correlates with L2 speech fluency and complexity. As for the impact of planning on performance, there was a significant effect on L2 speech accuracy and complexity, but not on fluency. Results also show that learners engage mainly in organization of ideas, rehearsal, lexical searches, and monitoring when they plan an oral task. Moreover, higher spans employ significantly more metacognitive strategies during planning when compared to lower spans. Results were discussed in terms of the working memory capacity model proposed by Engle, Kane, and Tuholski (1999), according to which individuals differ in the capacity for controlled attention in face of interference; and studies on task-based planning (e.g.,Ortega, 1999, 2005; Foster & Skehan, 1996; Menhert, 1998; Yuan & Ellis, 2003). Pedagogical implications were also pointed out suggesting that planning is as a task implementation condition that can be employed in the L2 classroom with the aim of drawing learners’ attention to form.