This study examined the effect of two forms of feedback (qualitatitive and quantitative) on the development of the spoken fluency of English language learners. Sixty-five intermediate- high students from 22 countries and 11 native languages enrolled in an intensive English language program at the English Language Center, Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah, participated.Throughout the 11-week course, the treatment group (consisting of 33 participants) received feedback on a weekly basis during speaking assessment tasks. The first form of feedback consisted of a quantitative analysis of their spoken fluency. This analysis, performed by PRAAT acoustic analysis software, measured several key features: speech rate (syllables per minute), pause frequency and duration, fillers, false starts, and connectedness of speech (mean length of run). In addition to measurements of their own performance, participants were presented with data on the average performance of their peers, as well as measurements of how closely their performance approximated the fluency measurements of a native speaker.The second form of feedback was qualitative, consisting of written descriptions of the participants` dysfluencies including fillers, high pause frequency and duration, low speech rate and false starts. Participants also received qualitative feedback in the form of self-assessment where they analyzed their own previously made recordings.Following the completion of the treatment, participants completed a survey eliciting their perceptions of the forms and effectiveness of feedback they had received over the course of the treatment. Though participants reported that the feedback (especially the qualitative variety) was useful, through statistical analysis of test and task scores it was found that other than for filler and false starts, feedback was not a significant factor in influencing the students' improvement over the course of the semester, and it is probable that other factors (task repetition) played a larger role.

The potentially beneficial role of classroom codeswitching, or the use of the first language (L1) in foreign language (FL) classroom settings, is gradually becoming acknowledged in the field of second language acquisition (SLA) research. However, researchers call for the construction of a framework, which indicates when this use is beneficial for language learning and when it is not. In an attempt to contribute to the construction of this framework, the present study investigates whether codeswitching can be used as a tool within task-based learning settings for the development of second language (L2) oral fluency. It is hypothesised that by allowing learners to codeswitch during task completion, their willingness to communicate (WTC) is enhanced because the function of that switching is likely to be mainly the metalanguage needed to complete the task. Previous research has also suggested that task repetition might lead to greater fluency. However, both teachers and learners may be sceptical of the value of repetition without some form of feedback on the first task attempt. This study sought to explore therefore the value of task repetition with feedback (TR+). By repeating the task with feedback that recycles metalanguage into the L2, it is hypothesised that learners will learn to move to a state of less reliance on their L1, while simultaneously achieving the overall aim of tasks, which is effective L2 communication. With increased WTC and L2 metalanguage, extensive L2 oral practice will facilitate the proceduralisation processes needed for fluency development. In short, the pedagogical package of TR+ on recycled language is tested in the present study as a potential contributor to oral fluency. The thesis begins by relating these themes with the context of Cyprus through teacher interviews. It becomes evident through these interviews that the activities taking place in this context are not tasks in the sense researchers intended. Following the setting of the context, the interactions of 75 primary school learners of English (11-12-year-olds) practising TR+ are analysed qualitatively. This analysis determines whether the package can lead to enriched output on the second attempt. In addition, there is a quasi-experimental aspect to the study. The students were allocated in three groups, each testing a different package. The codeswitching group was allowed to switch to Greek while completing the tasks and had their L1 metalanguage recycled into the L2 when they repeated the tasks. The English-only group completed the tasks strictly under L2 conditions and repeated them with feedback on accuracy. The comparison group completed the tasks once with no language instructions. Oral production tests, used as pre- and post-tests, partly support the hypothesis by suggesting that WTC is enhanced with the incorporation of codeswitching, but no evidence supports fluency development. Nevertheless, when comparing TR+ with no task repetition, the data indicate that TR+ leads to greater fluency. It is suggested that a larger and longer intervention would have allowed more time for fluency to be developed when codeswitching was incorporated. As for task-based learning, it is suggested that TR+ is a more viable way to move forward in real classroom contexts, particularly those with young learners. Furthermore, the results of the present study indicate that this package works better with learners of a certain proficiency level.

Although much research has reported the effectiveness of task repetition on oral performance (Bygate, 2018), few studies have investigated its effectiveness on writing performance (Manchón, 2014), especially in languages other than English. For instance, Nitta and Baba’s (2014) longitudinal study revealed that EFL undergraduates considerably progressed their syntactic complexity and lexical aspects, but not fluency, through repeating a timed writing task. In relation to the task repetition, however, whether and how L2 learners develop their grammatical accuracy and communicative adequacy (Pallotti, 2009) has remained unclear in the literature. Furthermore, in addition to the linguistic measurements and the qualitative assessments, scant research has attempted to investigate whether any significant changes are brought about in terms of learners’ perceptions through repeating language tasks. <br>Therefore, the current study has shed new light on the developmental changes in the writing performance of Japanese-as-a-foreign-language (JFL) learners. It investigated whether any remarkable changes are brought about in terms of overall complexity, complexity by subordination, accuracy, and fluency through repeating a weekly “15-Minute Writing Task” throughout one academic semester (16 weeks) and one academic year (32 weeks). The writing task topics were considered in terms of the Cognition Hypothesis (Robinson, 2001), which states that different cognitive demands of tasks will lead to different L2 output. Regarding this point, this study explored whether there were any significant differences between two task types: descriptive and argumentative essays. JFL learners who were enrolled in an intermediate-level course at an American university engaged in the two different types of timed writing tasks.<br>First, the one-semester investigation, based on the pre/posttest analysis, revealed different patterns between the two types of writing tasks. For the descriptive essays, despite the improvements in overall complexity, complexity by subordination, and fluency with a large effect size (r ≥ .6) (Plonsky & Oswald, 2014), no significant findings were confirmed for accuracy. In contrast, in the argumentative essays, the learners improved all the linguistic aspects but with a medium effect size (.4 ≤ r < .6).<br>Second, in the one-year investigation, the JFL learners significantly improved overall complexity, complexity by subordination, and fluency during the study period. The dynamic systems approach (Verspoor & van Dijk, 2011) also unraveled the developmental trajectories to show how different variables interacted in the two different types of writing tasks, respectively, throughout the measurement period. Although there were no statistically significant differences in grammatical accuracy measures, the process of L2 writing development showed fluctuations, demonstrating that the improvements in syntactic complexity seemed to have caused many grammatical errors temporarily. Lastly, the learners’ compositions, which were also assessed qualitatively by two native Japanese speakers in terms of readability, indicated significant improvements in communicative adequacy.<br>Finally, to investigate any changes in the learners’ beliefs toward Japanese writing before and after the task repetition, the JFL learners completed the Belief Questionnaire About Writing in Japanese (Ishibashi, 2009). In addition, to examine any changes in foreign language anxiety with a focus on Japanese writing, the learners were required to complete the second-language version of the Daly-Miller Writing Apprehension Test (Cheng, Horwitz, & Schallert, 1999). The study found that the extensive writing experience had a positive impact on the JFL learners’ confidence and willingness when writing in L2 Japanese.<br><br>

This work explores various methods teachers can use to promote high quality second language oral production. It consists of a review of empirical research and pedagogical implications related to the following factors: 1) Pre-task planning, 2) within-task planning, 3) task repetition, 4) task design, 5) formulaic sequences, 6) learner strategies, 7) form instruction, and 8) error correction. The work concludes with a consideration of issues within the literature and a brief summary of pedagogical implications. / text