CORRELATIONS OF ENGLISH WRITING COMPLEXITY, ACCURACY, FLUENCY, AND TEST SCORES: A CASE STUDY OF STANDARDIZED WRITING TEST SAMPLES

Ming Huei Lin

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP1902199L
First page
199
Last page
210

Abstract


The Limited Attentional Capacity Model (LACM) (Skehan & Foster, 1997, 2001) is believed to affect the memory processing system, leading to a trade-off model between the levels of complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) in writing output by EFL learners. Time may be one of the critical variables moderating EFL writers’ LACM, but few writers, least of all in the context of Taiwan, have studied the possible influence of LACM on the CAF relationship as demonstrated in timed writing,. What has not been properly investigated includes possible CAF interaction varying with Taiwanese EFL writers’ proficiency levels. This should also be examined, given the changes in the development of student writers’ skills as they learn, that is, mastering greater complexity, accuracy or fluency than before. To shed light on these aspects, the present researcher studied 150 timed writing samples created by 150 EFL test-takers who participated in the General English Proficiency Test High Intermediate. Both inferential and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. The research results indicate a possible shifting relationship between complexity and fluency/accuracy, suggesting that LACM impacts on Taiwanese EFL writers’ performance, mostly probably subject to the time factor, since no differences of any kind were found between the interrelationship of writing qualities and their CAF.


Keywords

the Limited Attentional Capacity Model (LACM), EFL writing, writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency

Full Text:

PDF

References


Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 5-35.

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(1), 59-84.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(1), 59-84.

Evans, N. W., Hartshorn, K. J., Cox, T. L., & Martin de Jel, T. (2014). Measuring written linguistic accuracy with weighted clause ratios: A question of validity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 24, 33-50.

Groom, N., & Littlemore, J. (2011). Doing applied linguistics: A guide for students. London and New York: Routledge.

Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Complexity, accuracy and fluency. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA (Vol. 32) (pp. 1-20). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Ishikawa, S. (1995). Objective measurement of low-proficiency EFL narrative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 51-70.

Johnson, M. D., Mercado, L., & Acevedo, A. (2012). The effect of planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 264-282.

Latif, M. M. M. A. (2013). What do we mean by writing fluency and how can it be validly measured? Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 99-10.

Lin, M. H. (2012). Blog assisted language learning in the EFL writing classroom: An experimental study. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Lin, M. H. (2014). Effects of Classroom Blogging on ESL Student Writers: An Empirical Reassessment. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(3), 577-590.

Lin, M. H. (2015). Writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency: Validity as indicators for Taiwanese EFL writers? Paper presented at The 1st Interschool Academic Conference on Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching. Providence University, Taichung, Taiwan.

Lin, M. H., & Chen, I.-T. (2015). Time factors in writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency: A preliminary trade-off model found in Taiwanese EFL students' compositions. In the Proceedings of 2015 International Conference and Workshop on TEFL & Applied Linguistics (pp. 161-169). Taipei: Crane Publishing.

Lin, M. H., Chen, I.-T., & Chen, H.-K. (June, 2015). What does time buy? A preliminary investigation on Taiwanese EFL students’ writing performance. Paper presented at the 11th Annual English Conference. New Taipei City, Taiwan.

Lin, M. H., Li, J. J., Hung, P. Y., & Huang, H. W. (2014) Blogging a Journal: Changing Students’ Writing Skillsand Perceptions. ELT Journal, 68(4), 422-431.

Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474-496.

Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 218-233.

Polat, B., & Kim, Y. (2013). Dynamics of complexity and accuracy: A longitudinal case study of advanced untutored development. Applied linguistics, 35(2), 184-207.

Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing. Language Learning, 47, 101-143.

Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and performance. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 161-176.

Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance assessment. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 167-185). Harlow: Pearson Education.

Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1-14.

Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1, 185–211.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retelling. Language Learning, 49(1), 93-100.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183-205). Ernst Klett Sprachen.

Yang, W., Lu, X., & Weigle, S. C. (2015). Different topics, different discourse: Relationships among writing topic, measures of syntactic complexity, and judgments of writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 53-67.

Yeh, S.-Y., & Lin, M. H. (May, 2015). The trade-off relationship between English writing fluency, accuracy, and complexity: The time factor in college students' English writing performance. Paper presented at the 32nd International Conference on English Teaching & Learning, Taipei, Taiwan.

Young, R. (1995). Conversational styles in language proficiency interviews. Language Learning, 45(1), 3-42.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP1902199L

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)

ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)



Publisher:

University of Niš

Univerzitetski trg 2, 18000 Niš, Serbia
Phone:    +381 18 257 095
Telefax:  +381 18 257 950


© 2013 by University of Niš, Serbia