Classroom Learning, Teaching, and Research: A Task-Based Perspective

Author(s): Teresa Pica

Source: The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 89, No. 3, Special Issue: Methodology,
Epistemology, and Ethics in Instructed SLA Research (Autumn, 2005), pp. 339-352
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3588662 .
Accessed: 04/10/2011 11:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Blackwell Publishing and National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
Classroom Learning, Teaching,
and Research: A Task-Based
Perspective
TERESAPICA
Graduate School ofEducation
University of Pennsylvania
3700 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6216
Email: [email protected]

In an increasing number of second language (L2) classrooms, teachers and researchers are
taking on new roles and responsibilities. From these new perspectives, they are developing
similar concerns about L2 learning processes, which they typically express in ways that reflect
their different backgrounds and goals. To support learning, teaching, and research in the L2
classroom, researchers and teachers have attempted to develop activities that both address
their concerns and accommodate their differences on a long-term basis. This article reflects
my participation as a researcher in this context and presents the ways in which the teachers
and students with whom I have worked have turned to information gap tasks to serve many
of our needs. The first part of the article describes the contributions of information gap tasks
as seen from our learning, teaching, and research perspectives. The second part describes
the issues and challenges we have faced in integrating and implementing them. Then the
third part presents an approach that we have developed for designing information gap tasks
both as authentic activities for teaching and learning and as reliable instruments for research.
Examples of our tasksare provided, together with excerpts from the discourse of their classroom
implementation. These excerpts reveal the effectiveness of the tasks in drawing students'
attention to form, function, and meaning in ways that we considered vital to students' L2
learning.

THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF SECOND In many classrooms today, students, now also
language (L2) learning and teaching are dynamic referred to as learners, take an active role in
enterprises, subject to continued debate, develop- their learning, as they work together on projects,
ment, and change. In recent times, some fascinat- respond collaboratively to texts, and exchange
ing changes have occurred within the L2 class- ideas in pairs and groups. Their teacher takes
room, as participants have broadened their roles, on the roles of resource person, coach, and co-
extended their responsibilities, and collaborated participant, encouraging the students to be mean-
in their activities. What was once, and remains ingful, comprehensible, and supportive in their
in some places, a formal setting for instruction work together. Teachers of language have become
and practice, has become in other places a center teachers of language learners and strive to meet
for purposeful communication and meaningful their students' social, academic, and work-related
exchange. This article focuses on this other class- needs. They are often asked to teach sheltered
room context, its challenges and its and opportu- sections of regular, subject matter classes and the-
nities. It begins with the participants, the students matic units on cultural topics, or to provide tuto-
and teachers, and then turns increasingly to re- rial support in academic areas. They use textbooks
searchers including me. and materials that emphasize content, communi-
cation, and study skills more than linguistic rules
TheModernLanguageJournal, 89, iii, (2005) and structures. Although students and teachers
0026-7902/05/339-352 $1.50/0 have embraced this orientation overall, many of
?2005 TheModernLanguageJournal them have called into question its lack of emphasis
340 TheModernLanguageJournal 89 (2005)

on language instruction and corrective feedback sequence for the field (e.g., Doughty & Varela,
(e.g., Boyd-Kletzander,2000; Pica, 2002). 1998, on the effect of science lesson feedback on
Researchers have also taken on new roles and past tense formation; Harley, 1998, on the role of
responsibilities. Over the years, classroom ob- curriculum-grounded games in grammatical gen-
servers,who counted instructional moves and cor- der awareness).
related them with learning outcomes (e.g., Levin,
1972), werejoined by researchers concerned with
classroom processes. Early on in our careers, my THE CLASSROOMAS AN ENVIRONMENT
colleagues and I would ask teachers to imple- FOR L2 RESEARCH
ment different approaches to grouping students,
posing questions, and adjusting input. We would What is emerging from studies such as those
then compare the impact of these classroom pro- just noted is that the strength of the classroom
cesses on students' interaction, comprehension, lies not only in its contributions as a context for
and other aspects of their L2 learning (e.g., the teaching and learning, but also in its role as a
seminal work of Long, Adams, McLean, & Cas- research environment. Among its benefits to re-
tanos, 1976; and subsequent studies by Blau, 1982; searchers are the availability of cohorts of stu-
Doughty & Pica, 1986; Pica & Doughty, 1985; Pica, dents and teachers to study and stretches of time
Young, & Doughty, 1987). for these studies. This availabilityis especially im-
More recently, many of us have moved beyond portant because answers to theoretical questions
ouf earlier concerns about classroom practice to about L2 learning often center on the internal-
theoretical questions on the role of input com- ization of grammatical systems, which take time
prehension and interaction in L2 learning. Even for learners to develop, teachers to guide, and re-
though these questions did not originate in class- searchers to track.When theoretical questions are
room practice, but rather in theoretical issues of addressed on a short-term basis, however, results
the need for attention and intervention in the L2 can be elusive. Features that appear to have been
acquisition process, they resonate with concerns acquired over the course of a few weeks or months
about language and learning that many teachers can be absent during follow-up observation and
and students also hold. Thus, as researchers have testing. Lightbown and Spada (1999) pointed out
continued to question relationships between at- in their review of research that there was no way
tention to form and meaning and L2 development to determine whether such absences were due to
and learning, teachers and students have also insufficiency of the research treatment, its prema-
looked for ways to emphasize language forms and ture withdrawal,or a lack of student readiness for
features in their content lessons and meaning- internalization of grammatical systems.
oriented activities. Along similar lines, while re- Additional strengths of the classroom as a re-
searchers have begun to ask about the theoreti- search environment are characterized by what
cal necessity for negative evidence in L2 learning, DeKeyser (2003) and Doughty (2003) have called
teachers have wanted to know when to provide ecologicalvalidity. Many studies have sought an-
the correction and feedback that their students swers to theoretical questions about learning pro-
expect from them, and how to do so in the ways cesses that have close ties to classroom experi-
that serve them best. ences. As reviewed by Doughty (2003), studies
This convergence of concerns has given me on attention to form and negative evidence, for
the opportunity to work with my colleagues on example, have become increasingly prominent
projects that are both theoretical and practical in the field of instructed L2 acquisition. How-
in their implications. Although projects of such ever, most of these studies have been carried out
scope can be carried out in controlled settings, through instructional treatments provided under
we have begun to see how well they fare in the controlled conditions. The elegance of their de-
classroom context. The classroom has long been sign and the importance of their results for Sec-
considered an excellent site for descriptive stud- ond Language Acquisition (SLA) theory are offset
ies and action research. However, it has also been somewhat by concerns about the authenticity of
viewed as a place where intervening variables the treatments and the relevance and applicabil-
make it difficult to test theories or run exper- ity of their results to actual classroom participants.
iments. New treatment studies, focused on in- As long as theoretical issues on learning processes
structional interventions, have shown that these connect with classroom commodities, the results
interventions can be implemented during regu- of controlled studies will need to be validated with
lar class time. These studies have provided data data from intact classes. Moreover, the strengths
of important theoretical and pedagogical con- of the classroom as a research site suggest that
TeresaPica 341

original studies on these processes could very well mation and the form in which it is encoded. This
be initiated within the classroom context. process can be seen in Excerpt 1, in which a pair
Despite this optimistic view, however, classroom of English language learners try to reproduce a
research on theoretical questions will continue picture story that matches one hidden from their
to be challenging because it must deal with stan- view. In order to recreate the complete story, the
dards for methodological rigor while the class- participants exchange verbal descriptions of their
room remains a place where students and teach- own incomplete portions of the story.
ers have their own, important work to do. Activi-
ties and materials used in research not only must Excerpt 1
resonate with teacher and student concerns about Story Reproduction
L2 form and feedback, but also must be consistent Yaka:So I have just one more-two picture-
with what these classroom participants are used to one of them she called someone
doing-working together, exchanging ideas, and
Suno: She is?
communicating about content.
Is it possible to develop a methodology that Yaka:She is calling someone (Pica, Lincoln-
can satisfy the needs and expectations of learners, Porter, Paninos, & Linnell, 1996, p. 74)
teachers, and researchers? Is it possible to develop
a collection of activities that can be used in the During this exchange, Suno extracts a small seg-
classroom, not only as intensive, short term exper- ment of Yaka's description, an act that serves as
iments, but also as engaging activities, worth sus- a signal for Yaka to try again to get his message
across. Yaka responds by changing the word call
taining over time? These are some of the questions
I found myself asking over many years of carrying from its past time encoding to its continuous form,
out classroom research. I have asked them to stu- which is more appropriate to the ongoing story
dents and colleagues, and they in turn have often depicted in the picture sequence. Both learners
asked them to me. The answers have come from make modifications to input and output, which
activities that have emerged steadily over these eventually lead to successful selection and place-
same years in L2 learning research and practice, ment of their pictures. As suggested by this ex-
and that, collectively, have become known as tasks. cerpt, information gap tasks promote the kinds of
There are many types of tasks and many activities interactions that are welcome to students, teach-
and exercises that are referred to as tasks (for a ers, and researchers. Their goal-oriented interac-
recent review, see Ellis, 2003). However, the one tion requirements set up conditions for students
task type that we have found especially compatible to receive feedback, enhance their comprehen-
with our learning, teaching, and research objec- sion, and attend to message form and meaning.
tives is the information gap task, and it is to this Drawn from seminal work on the theoretical
construct of task and its role in the learner's cur-
type of task that I now turn.
riculum (e.g., Candlin & Murphy, 1987; Crookes,
INFORMATION GAP TASKSFOR 1986; Long, 1985b; Nunan, 1989; Skehan, 1996),
INSTRUCTION AND RESEARCH information gap tasks have become increasingly
visible in SLA research. Some studies have exam-
The information gap task is characterized by ined and compared different types of tasks and
several features: Only one outcome or answer is their impact on learning processes (e.g., Doughty
considered possible, appropriate, or correct, and & Pica, 1986; Duff, 1986; Kowal & Swain, 1994;
reaching it requires a verbal exchange of infor- Newton & Kennedy, 1996; Swain, 1998; Swain &
mation among task participants (Ellis, 2003; Pica, Lapkin, 2001). Other studies have used informa-
Kanagy, & Falodun, 1993). In order to reach the tion gap tasks as instruments to gather data on
precise outcomes that information gap tasks re- classroom practice and learner generation of in-
quire, participants must make sure the informa- put, output, and feedback (e.g., Crookes & Ru-
tion they exchange is both accurate and under- lon, 1988; Mackey, 1999; Mackey, Oliver, & Lee-
stood. When access to one participant's informa- man, 2003; Mackey & Philp, 1998; Oliver, 1995,
tion becomes difficult, another participant signals 2000; Plough & Gass, 1993), and to address ques-
the need for clarity, and the first participant re- tions on input comprehension and comprehen-
sponds by recoding, rephrasing, or expanding the sibility (e.g., Gass & Varonis, 1985, 1994; Pica,
information, often doing so until it appears to be 1991; Pica et al., 1987). More recently, informa-
understood. As the participants engage in this ne- tion gap tasks have been used to study learners
gotiation (e.g., Long, 1983; Varonis & Gass, 1985), as they react to corrective feedback and attend
they draw attention to the meaning of the infor- to targeted grammatical forms, functions, and
342 TheModernLanguageJournal 89 (2005)

meanings (e.g., Iwashita, 2003; Leeman, 2003; (e.g., Newton & Kennedy, 1996; Williams & Evans,
Mackey, 1999; Philp, 2003). 1998). Such practices guarantee uniform delivery
Information gap tasks can also serve as instruc- of task treatments, across multiple participants,
tional treatments, to generate and then study L2 with consistent timing in task implementation.
learning processes and outcomes. The most re- The research design can be maintained with re-
vealing tasks are those in which the information liability and consistency, so that task directions
required to fill a gap must also be encoded with are followed carefully,and tasks are implemented
a specific form. To date, the work of Loschky and uniformly across different learners and within a
Bley-Vroman (1993) remains one of the most in- comparable time frame.
fluential in this area. For them, the most benefi- Although the data collected under controlled
cial tasks include task essential forms, in that the conditions are highly reliable, there are con-
tasks cannot be completed unless a targeted form cerns as to whether they reflect authentic experi-
is used. Locative forms, for example, would be es- ences for the students and teachers who provided
sential to a task that required object selection and them. As noted above, both DeKeyser (2003) and
placement. Doughty (2003) have questioned the ecological
Form-focusing aspects of Loschky and Bley- validity of such studies. In addition, as Byrnes
Vroman's model have influenced researchers in (2000) has argued, the limited extent of their im-
their choice of form focus, task selection, and plementation time calls into question the authen-
input, output, and feedback emphases (e.g., ticity and applicability of even the most theoret-
Doughty &Varela, 1998; Harley, 1998). More chal- ically grounded and empirically successful tasks.
lenging is their integration into actual curricula Her points resonate with the views of many educa-
and implementation into intact classrooms for tors, namely that what is recognized as instructed
dual purposes of instruction and research. These SLA research must be situated in, and responsive
requirements have raised issues and challenges to, the needs of classroom participants if it is to
for my colleagues and me, but they have given us have utility for instruction.
opportunities and advantages that we could not Now that so much is known about SLA pro-
have found, had we worked on our own. cesses and the contributions of task participation
One issue of great concern is the yet untested to them, situated studies that would bring them
dimension of time. Although it is widely accepted together in the classroom seem both feasible and
that information gap tasks can hold their own timely. One especially inviting situation can be
as high-interest classroom activities, it is still not found in classrooms where students are used to
known whether they can maintain their reliability working with activities that address content mean-
as research instruments over time. Information ing, but where their L2 development suggests they
gap tasks have been used effectively as instruc- need greater awareness of, and feedback on, lan-
tional treatments in short-term studies (e.g., Lee- guage form. Such classrooms, growing in abun-
man, 2003; Newton & Kennedy, 1996). Their role dance in schools and language centers across a
in effecting long-term outcomes has been largely variety of settings, have been the site and impe-
unexplored. tus for the work on tasks that my colleagues and
A second issue involves authenticity. Despite the I have recently developed, and which I describe
pedagogical origins of information gap tasks and below.
the important data that their research implemen-
tation has brought to the field, a large part of the
CONTENT CLASSROOMSAS CONTEXTS
data contributed by researchers, including me, FOR TASK-BASEDLEARNING,TEACHING,
has come from conditions that were classroom- AND RESEARCH
oriented, but were more typical of a controlled
environment than a classroom setting. These set- Although it has been shown that many language
tings have included monitored sessions outside skills can be learned through a focus on mean-
the classroom (e.g., Long, 1985a; Pica, Holliday, ing, there is increasing evidence that the learn-
Lewis, Berducci, & Newman, 1991; Pica, Holliday, ing is incomplete and that grammatical impreci-
Lewis, & Morgenthaler, 1989; Pica et al., 1996; Pica sions remain. Several researchers have raised the
et al., 1987) and researcher visits to classrooms possibility that meaning-focused, content class-
in session and during break time (e.g., Doughty rooms may not offer students sufficient opportu-
& Pica, 1986; Pica, 1991, respectively). In several nities to modify their output syntactically (e.g.,
studies, tasks have been carried out with intact Swain, 1985, 1991) or to receive feedback on
classes of students, but as extracurricular activ- their grammatical accuracy (e.g., for English as
ities, added on to the regular classroom agenda a second language [ESL] classrooms, see Pica &
TeresaPica 343

Washburn, in press; Pica, Washburn, Evans, &Jo, Excerpt 3

1998; for the same findings in French immersion Course on Film and Culture
classrooms see Swain, 1985, 1991; and for a L2
Italian content-based classroom, see Musumeci, Teacher: give me a thumbnail sketch
Student: one-one-one thing is, his grand-
1996). Excerpts 2 and 3 suggest such insufficient
mother about his grandmother? be-
opportunity for language development. They are
taken from a database of tape-recorded classes in cause he feel, if he is he work hard
content areas, including university-level English he can go to college and he need
now to pay for the aah
language courses on literature and culture (Boyd-
Kletzander, 2000) and film and culture (Pica, Teacher: uh-huh, uh-huh
2002; Pica & Washburn, in press; Pica et al., 1998),
which my colleagues and I have gathered over Student: for the nursing of the- xxx the sec-
many years. Some of the data collection was in- ond one is, eh, the teacher give him,
spired solely by curiosity. Another motivator was gives him enough time and encour-
the need for information to apply to practice or aged him-like Patricia said, the
to use for assessment. teacher give him enough uh
In my own case, I simply wanted to observe
Teacher: ah
content classroom interaction. In reviewing cur-
ricula for the content courses taught in a L2, I Student: space to let him to feel he can do
had found very little explicit attention to L2 forms good... (from Pica, 2001, p. 166)
and features in the materials and activities, and I
assumed that the students' interaction and nego- These data reflect the discourse characteris-
tiation over curriculum content would draw them tics of a wide range of content-based classrooms
to attend to L2 form as they shared content-laden that I have studied, together with teachers, ad-
messages. What I found, however, fell short of my ministrators, and preservice graduate students.
expectations. They reveal fluent, but linguistically inaccurate,
During discussion, which was the most typical student production and show greater attention
activity in most of the classes, teachers responded given to the meaning of their contributions than
to students with topic-related, meaningful L2 in- to their linguistic encodings. This pattern was
put and spent little time with language, even when consistent with the teachers' instructional objec-
a request for clarification or a corrective move tives for content reporting and information ex-
focused on grammatical imprecisions might have change and with the discourse norms of their
been helpful. As shown in Excerpt 2, from a course classroom lessons and discussions. Grammatical
on literature and culture, the teacher responded imprecisions were overlooked because they did
to the meaning of a student's grammatically mis- not keep the teachers and their students from dis-
formed utterance with a reformulation, but in so playing knowledge and conveying ideas. Although
doing, retained the target-like portion of the utter- there was a good deal of negotiation for meaning,
ance, he mustn't show his humiliation, and did not its focus was on defining unfamiliar lexical items
call attention to the gramatically incorrect non- and clarifying factual information rather than on
target phrase, by don't give money. calling attention to grammatical errors. As the
data revealed, grammatical features-articles and
Excerpt 2 pronouns, modal verbs, and bound inflectional
Course on Literature and Culture endings for tense and aspect-were seldom the
focus of classroom negotiation. Numerous con-
Student: yeah if he's still proud he mustn't
texts for supplying these grammatical features
show his humiliation by don't give
were generated given that discussion topics re-
money
quired the students to refer to multiple individ-
Teacher: right it's his humiliation that would uals, concepts, and conditions; to structure infor-
show (Pica, 2001, p. 160) mation into arguments; and to connect issues and
concepts. However, the absence or imprecision of
In Excerpt 3, from a course on film and culture, these grammatical features was seldom acknowl-
Language and Film, the teacher's back channels edged or addressed.
and positive feedback led the student to believe That a language teacher's response to students
that his production regarding TheJoy Luck Club might focus solely on content is not unique to
(Stone, 1993) was accurate, despite its many errors content thematic settings such as those in Ex-
(I have highlighted errors in italics for Excerpt 3). cerpts 2 and 3. As Lyster (1998) pointed out, when
344 TheModernLanguageJournal 89 (2005)

immersion teachers' follow-up responses to stu- noted earlier in Excerpt 3. Housed in a university-
dents are encoded as recasts of their errors, these level English language program, this course em-
moves are often perceived as content-focused ac- phasizes academic English language, literacy and
knowledgements, even if they are not intended to communication skills, and contemporary Amer-
function in this way.It is unlikely that the implicit ican culture. Students view films, read reviews,
corrective dimensions of recasts make an impact summaries, and scripts, and discuss them with
in classrooms where content rather than its form teachers and classmates. Though our collabora-
matters for success. Although recasts are legiti- tion has focused on a specific course and its cur-
mate corrective moves to language form in exper- riculum and students, the challenges we have had
imental contexts, where their linguistic emphases to confront in task design are consistent with
can be isolated and noticed, they serve mainly as broader issues we have faced across a range of
follow-up responses to content accuracyin immer- meaning-focused classroom contexts.
sion classrooms, where subject matter learning is
the key to school advancement. Selectionof Forms,Function, and Meaning
My concerns about content classrooms as con-
texts for L2 learning have been echoed many As has been the case with other form-focused
times by my colleagues at community language interventions (e.g., Harley, 1993, 1998; Swain,
programs, adult literacy centers, foreign lan- 1998), our impetus for task intervention arose
guage departments, and elementary and sec- from concerns that the classroom experiences
ondary school classrooms. We foresee that our of our students in the film course did not meet
concerns are likely to increase as schools con- all their needs for successful L2 acquisition. We
tinue to move language learners into sheltered therefore worked within the existing curriculum
and regular classrooms, as university language and considered ways in which the form-focusing
courses adopt content-based curricula, and as experiences of information gap tasks could en-
theme-based and specific purpose classes increase hance those provided by their meaning-focused
in scope and popularity. Optimal tasks will have texts and activities. In keeping with guidelines on
to pinpoint students' needs for accurate encod- task-essentialforms (e.g., Loschky & Bley-Vroman,
ing of form, function, and meaning, and be in- 1993), we designed tasks in which the content
tegrated within the classroom curriculum, imple- necessary to fill the information gap required a
mented during actual class time, and sustained specific form for its encoding. It was necessary to
over a course term. A step-by-stepapproach is re- choose forms that the students were developmen-
quired to address these criteria, so simple in their tally ready to learn, but were struggling to master.
articulation. Even further steps may be needed so In making these choices, we relied on the prin-
that teachers can implement the tasks with credi- ciples of Harley (1993) and Long (1996). Thus,
bility and researchers can trust their findings for forms were chosen whose encodings were difficult
reliability. Observation, discussion, and revision for the students to perceive, seldom available in
must accompany each step. As will be discussed, their classroom input, or lacking in transparency
I have found that however time-consuming these with their function or meaning.
steps may appear to be, it is possible and worth- Based on these criteria and concerns, one cat-
while to take them. egory of forms selected was articles and deter-
miners. Although these forms were widely avail-
able in classroom input, they were difficult to
TASKDESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
FOR L2 LEARNING,INSTRUCTION, perceive and their relationship was seldom trans-
AND RESEARCH parent with the numerous functions they served.
We also selected conjunctions and connectors, be-
How is it possible to design form-focusing in- cause they were used to identify newly named and
formation gap tasks that assist L2 learning and previously identified referents, organize informa-
teaching, retain classroom authenticity, and yet tion, mark transitions, and make connections. Fi-
adhere to standards of research rigor? During the nally, we also selected modal verbs (for building
past several years, my colleagues and I have been arguments, making predictions, suggestions, and
both challenged and guided by this question as we speculations) and verb tense and aspect (to orga-
have worked together as students, teachers, and nize and sequence information, distinguish gen-
researchers to develop such multipurpose tasks.' eralizations and details, and highlight reported
The following sections highlight the many initia- speech).
tives and interim products of these efforts, as they It should be underscored that we chose forms
focused on the course, Language through Film, not only because they lacked saliency, but also
TeresaPica 345

because they encoded multiple or complex re- discussed and that we incorporated into a Spotthe
lationships of function and meaning with which Differenceinformation gap task.
the students were struggling. The functions for
all the L2 features the students needed were thus
East Los Angeles High School had many problems.
crucially important to our selection decisions. In The principalwasworriedthat the school mightlose
the case of articles, for example, the students were its accreditation.So he held a facultymeeting to ask
familiar with rules regarding article use in express- for suggestions.The vice principalsaid that the stu-
ing uniqueness, but less familiar with their appli- dents entered the school withbarelya seventhgrade
cation to repeated or multiple references. So it education.He argued that there wasn'ta teacherat
was this latter function that we targeted. The next the meetingwho wasn'tdoing everythinghe possibly
could do. (pp. 699-700)
step was to figure out ways to make these form,
function, and meaning relationships essential to
task implementation and completion. Even in this tiny excerpt, there were numerous
contexts for the various form, function, and mean-
Compliancewith Curriculum,Classroom, ing relationships of reference, argument, and or-
and ResearchExpectations ganization that the students needed to notice. Be-
cause there were also contexts for the connector,
When tasks are used as research instruments, pronoun, and verb forms needed by the students,
they can appear to be tests to students and their we were able to create two additional versions of
teachers, and indeed, several students shared the task.
this concern with us as they sampled our initial The Spot the Difference task has been widely
tasks. In addition, the attractiveness of the activity- used as a tool for data collection (e.g., Crookes &
orientation and problem-solving aspects of a task Rulon, 1988; Long, 1981). Students are asked to
can be offset by its inconsistency with curricu- work in pairs and together locate subtle differ-
lum content. In both cases, rapid abandonment ences between pictures, and to do so by oral com-
can ensue. Therefore, to enhance their authen- munication only, that is, without showing their
ticity and insure their long-term use, we made pictures to each other. In the tasks we developed
sure our tasks would be integral to curriculum for the film curriculum, the students followed di-
texts, topics, and assignments, and that they had rections that asked them to identify differences
enough variety among them so that teachers and between review passages and to choose which of
students would want to sustain their participation the differently encoded words or phrases made
over time. their passages more accurate and precise. They
Locating sources for our tasks was quite easy, were also asked to justify their choices to each
given that the topics, texts, and assignments of other.
the film curriculum were replete with contexts The passage cited previously is presented in
for the forms and functions noted above. Thus Tables la-c (see Appendix), which were the ver-
there was little need to enrich curriculum mate- sions given to different student pairs, A and B, C
rials with these features. Because so much of ac- and D, and E and F. Table la displays the versions
tual class time was focused on the discussion of for articles and determiners as they were used in
the film reviews and summaries the students had sentences that referred to film elements. Tables lb
read, we based the tasks on these texts. The texts and lc display versions for pronoun and connec-
were modified mainly to streamline sentence com- tive forms in sentences that marked relationships
plexity, reduce paragraph length, and eliminate between individuals, events, and ideas, and verb
outdated, distracting expressions, colloquialisms, and modal forms, in sentences that sequenced
and allusions to other films that the students and and reported information and made speculations
many of their teachers had never seen. In further and predictions. The differences are italicized
keeping with the curriculum's emphasis on the here, for purposes of display only; the italics were
learning of academic English, task directions be- not used in the student versions.
gan with a statement to the students that the task Later in the activity, the students followed di-
would help them become moreaccurate and pre- rections that asked them to recall their word and
cise in their speaking and writing in areas such phrase choices as they reconstructed, or com-
as organizing, reporting, reviewing, or editing pleted, a cloze version of the original passage with-
information. out looking back at it. This exercise was in keep-
The following passage is based on an excerpt ing with current theory that views attention and
from a review (Ebert, 1990) of the film Stand and noticing as central to L2 learning and holds that
Deliver,which the students had already viewed and the ability to recall a linguistic item is evidence
346 TheModernLanguageJournal89 (2005)

that noticing of the item has occurred (Schmidt, ences in form, function, and meaning in sen-
1993). The cloze exercise for Table la is shown in tence pairs based on the passage;Jigsaw required
Table Id (see Appendix). similar noticing using scrambled sentence pairs;
Finally, the students were shown the original and GrammarCommunicationused four words and
passage again, with lines under the phrases that phrases. Samples of these latter two tasks are
had been used in the original sentences. Their shown in Tables 2 and 3 (see Appendix).
directions told them to compare the passage with Consistency was achieved across the three task
the one they hadjust completed, and if they found types by maintaining the same directions, except
any differences with the original, to explain them for a few variations. The initial purpose statement
to each other and record them on taskworksheets. to students was the same on all three task types,
The five task directions, which asked the stu- that is, that the task would help them become
dent pairs to choose between words, phrases, and more accurate and precise in speaking and writ-
sentences, to justify their choices, and later recall, ing; however, the sentence that followed this state-
compare, and explain those choices, provided ment varied according to the specific skill area
them with numerous opportunities to focus their used in each task. Thus, the second sentence of
attention on the form, function, and meaning the Jigsaw told the students that the task would
relationships they needed to learn. These tasks, also help them organize information. The second
in turn, provided data for the researchers. Task sentence of the GrammarCommunicationtask in-
length and consistency also allowed the teach- formed them that they would be helped to report
ers to spend time with each pair of students and information accurately. In Spot the Difference,stu-
monitor their progress. These benefits were built dents were told that they would be assisted with
into two additional information gap tasks, Jig- their editing skills.
saw and GrammarCommunication,which are dis- When managing and understanding the task
cussed briefly in the following section, and de- data, there was yet another issue to be con-
scribed elsewhere (Pica, Kang, & Sauro, 2004). fronted in making sure that tasks were consistent
Also discussed in the next section are ways in and useful for the teachers, their students, and
which task design was kept consistent in order the researchers. Each of the five task directions
to assist classroom implementation and provide to choose, justify, recall, compare, and explain,
reliable data. therefore, became a category for tracking the in-
cidence of SLAprocesses, including the students'
Consistencywith Goalsand Methods participation in negotiation, modification of in-
of Teachersand Researchers put, provision of feedback, production of modi-
fied output, and noticing of the forms, their func-
All three information gap tasks were based on tions, and meanings that they had yet to master.
widely available, published activities whose contri- Other processes to track included the students'
butions to L2 learning processes and outcomes form-focused instruction through their sharing
have been discussed in review articles (e.g., Nas- and transmitting of rules, guidelines, and other
saji, 1999; Pica et al., 1993) and documented metalinguistic insights.
through empirical research. Versions of the tasks
can also be found in professional reference books TaskImplementationas a Context
(e.g., Ur, 1988). SpottheDifference,as noted above, for LearningProcesses
has been shown to engage students in negotiation
in order to reach a successful outcome. As they Excerpts 4 through 8 represent the student ex-
negotiate, they modify their input, provide cor- changes during our development and piloting of
rective feedback, and produce modified output. the tasks. The discourse reveals how the tasks
GrammarCommunicationtasks (e.g., Ellis, 1998; provided the students with more opportunities
Fotos, 1994; Fotos & Ellis, 1991; Loschky & Bley- to attend to relationships of form, function, and
Vroman, 1993) andJigsaw tasks (e.g., Doughty & meaning among our targeted grammatical fea-
Pica, 1986; Pica, 1991; Pica et al., 1989; Pica et al., tures than had been noted during the classroom
1996; Swain& Lapkin, 2001) have revealed similar discussion for Excerpts 2 and 3. We found that,
results. as students followed the task directions to choose
Successful outcomes for the tasks depended among different sentences and phrases in their
on the students' noticing form, function, and film review passages, they negotiated impasses in
meaning relationships in order to reproduce the their mutual understanding or decision making.
original text passage they had read. Spot the Dif- In so doing, they offered each other modified in-
ference required the students to notice differ- put and feedback and responded with modified
TeresaPica 347

output. These negotiations are illustrated in Ex- in math if theypaid attention and workedhard after
cerpts 4 through 6, as the students focused on having already eliminated are able and would have
choosing verb phrases used to speculate on the ca- beenablefrom consideration. As shown in Excerpt
reer choices of the central character in Stand and 6, after many exchanges of justification through
Deliver. In Excerpt 4, the students discussed and negotiation, they eventually chose would be able,
negotiated their selection of could do, does, did, which was the form they had read in the original
and could have done in the sentence Therewasn't passage.
a teacherat the meetingwho believedhe wasn't doing
everythinghe possibly . The form that had
Excerpt 5
appeared in the original passage they had read Grammar Communication Task
was could do.
StudentA: Escalante believed that theywould
Excerpt 4 be able to succeed in math if they
Grammar Communication Task
paid attention and worked hard.
If they.
Student B: Wasn'tdoing. Yes, wasn't doing.
Student B: Okay, but he was talking in past.
Student A: And did. He believed they were able. (Cor-
Student B: And wasn't doing everything he rective Feedback and Reference
to form/function, meaning
possibly (Modified Input)
relationship)
Student A: Yeah, all of them we need past
Student A: No, no, no if, right? If is hypo-
tense in this sentence.
thetic. (Corrective Feedback and
Student B: Did. Coulddo. I think it's could do. Reference to form/function,
meaning relationship)
Student A: Could do? (Negotiation Signal)
Student B: Yes.
Student B: Yes.
Student A: So maybe we need a will modal.
Student A: Why? (Reference to form/function,
meaning relationship)
Student B: Could do is... is possibly could do.
Student B: He believed.
(Modified Output)
Student A: He believe?
Student A: Oh... possibly-uh, huh.
(Negotiation Signal) Student B: Believed. Past.

Student B: It's not did. He didn't do it so. Student A: Yeah, he believed.

(Corrective Feedback) Student B: He believed that they were able.
Student A: You mean it's not certain it's so He believed-in past tense. He
it is kind of possibility?In the near thought they were able. (Correc-
future or... ? tive Feedback and Reference to
form/meaning, function rela-
Student B: I think it's... tionship) (based on Ebert, 1990,
pp. 699-700)
Student A: Oh, he possibly could do.
Excerpt 6
Student B: Not definitely do... yeah so... Grammar Communication Task
(based on Ebert, 1990, pp. 699-
Student A: No, they will.... He believed they
700)
will be able to succeed in math if
While the students followed the direction to they...
justify their choices, they often provided form- Student B: Yes, but it is not here. It is not in
focused instruction and corrective feedback that
the options. (Corrective Feed-
drew connections between targeted forms, their
back)
functions, and meanings as revealed in Excerpts
5 and 6. In Excerpt 5, the students justified their Student A: So do the past tense. Will past
choices of would be able and wereable for the sen- tense is would, right? (Form Fo-
tence Escalantebelievedthat they to succeed cused Instruction)
348 TheModernLanguageJournal 89 (2005)

Student B: would be able, would be able. Okay. Student A: OK.... Thank you.
Okay. Some said that they would (based on Ebert, 1990, p. 841)
be able. (based on Ebert, 1990,
pp. 699-700) CONCLUDING REMARKS

As the students followed the directions to re- Over the past two decades, the fields of SLA
construct a passage and identify and explain simi- and foreign language teaching have come to-
larities and differences between their choices and gether in fruitful and informative ways. Long-
the words used in the original, they recalled forms standing reservations about the relevance and ap-
they had chosen, often through utterances of ne- plicability of SLA theory and research to issues
gotiation. These negotiations served to highlight and decisions in classroom practice have notably
the forms in relation to their functions and mean- subsided, as teachers and researchers now draw
ings; they suggest that the students were able to upon each other's knowledge and skills to pose
recall these forms for task completion as seen in questions about classroom interventions and to
Excerpt 7. study their impact on L2 acquisition processes
and outcomes. Earlier discussions (e.g., Hatch,
Excerpt 7 1978; Lightbown, 1985; Tarone, Swain, & Fath-
Jigsaw Task man, 1976), when compared with more recent
ones (e.g., Lightbown, 2000; Pica, 1994, 2004),
Student B: Before we used wouldrisk. (Recall reflect this growth and change. The interventions
of previous choice) It's a suppos- have come to address not only issues in instruc-
ing sentence. Usually we use tional practice but also broader questions about
would. (Reference to form/ the theoretical dimensions and requirements of
function, meaning relationship) the acquisition process.
Student A: Now I got it. This sentence is any Throughout our work together, my colleagues
and I have found that one intervention of great
lawyerwill not risk. Right. So it
promise has been the information gap task, which
means, I don't want to... take we have adjusted and adapted to work effectively
that risk so.... This is the future
as a teaching and learning activity as well as a re-
... (Reference to form/function,
search instrument. Because information gap tasks
meaning relationship) have classroom authenticity, their expansion from
Student B:Yeah. We know the difference use. pedagogical activities to data collection tools and
treatments has been relatively straightforward.
Any lawyerwould not listen.
Would not. It's supposing, suppos- Task design alone, however, is only one compo-
nent of a large endeavor that must include long-
ing sentence, right. If you would
... (Reference to form/function, term classroom implementation of the tasks and
a commitment to collaboration among teachers,
meaning relationship) (based on
Ebert, 1997, pp. 593-594) researchers, and the students whose needs they
serve. Pilot data have illustrated that this collabo-
In Excerpt 8, as the students followed directions ration is possible and have provided a basis for
to compare their choices with those in the original studies addressing questions about the acquisi-
passage and explain them, they drew connections tion and internalization of L2 form and meaning
between their choice of form and the content of that need to be implemented over time. As our
the film they had viewed. recent studies continue to inform the classroom
curriculum and shed light on the acquisition pro-
Excerpt 8 cess (e.g., Pica et al., 2004), we remain active and
Spot the Difference Task forward-looking in our pursuits. Time will reveal
answers on how best to teach and learn languages
Student A:Yes... we have. We have same here in the classroom, but time also holds the greatest
.... (Identified similarities with
challenges for all of us who make a commitment
original passage) and did you lose to work together in this effort.
something about little Amish boy?
Student B: It's actually in bus station, isn't it? NOTE
So the activityof little Amish boy
means what did he do on the sta- 1 In
carrying out the design and implementation of
tion. (Reference to event in film) the tasks in this article, I have worked most closely with
Teresa Pica 349

Kristine Billmyer, MaryAnn Julian, Hyun Sook Kang, consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly,28,
Shannon Sauro, and also Jin Ahn, Marni Baker-Stein, 323-351.
Mara Blake-Ward,Lyn Buchheit,Junko Hondo, Sharon Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about gram-
Nicolary, and Jack Sullivan. Among the many graduate mar: A task-based approach. TESOLQuarterly,25,
students who have provided assistance are Vivian Chen, 605-628.
Cathy Fillman, Hanae Katayana, Atsuko Matsui, Mar- Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1985). Task variation and non-
garet Skaarup, Lauren Smith, and Debbie Tsui. native/non-native negotiation of meaning. In S.
Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in secondlanguage
acquisition (pp. 141-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury
House.
REFERENCES Gass, S., &Varonis, E. (1994). Input, interaction and sec-
ond language production. Studies in SecondLan-
Blau, E. (1982). The effect of syntax on readability for guage Acquisition, 16, 283-301.
ESL students in Puerto Rico. TESOLQuarterly,16, Harley, B. (1993). Instructional strategies and second
517-528. language acquisition in early French immersion.
Boyd-Kletzander, R. (2000). Student responsibilityin a Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 245-
whole language classroom. Unpublished doctoral 260.
dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Harley, B. (1998). The role of focus-on-form tasks in
Byrnes, H. (2000). Meaning and form in classroom- promoting child L2 acquisition. In C. Doughty &
based SLA research: Reflections from a college J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroomsec-
foreign language perspective. InJ. Lee & A. Vald- ond language acquisition (pp. 156-174). New York:
man (Eds.), Formand meaning:Multipleperspectives Cambridge University Press.
(pp. 125-182). Boston: Heinle. Hatch, E. (1978). Apply with caution. Studies in Second
Candlin, C., & Murphy, D. (1987). Language learning Language Acquisition, 2, 123-143.
tasks. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative feedback and positive ev-
Crookes, G. (1986). Taskclassification:A cross-disciplinary idence in task-based interaction: Differential ef-
review (Tech. Rep. No. 4). Honolulu, HI: Univer- fects on L2 development. Studies in Second Lan-
sity of Hawai'i at Manoa, The Center for Second guage Acquisition, 25, 1-36.
Language Classroom Research, Social Science Re- Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994). Using collaborative
search Institute. language production tasks to promote students'
Crookes, G., & Rulon, K. A. (1988). Topic and feed- language awareness. Language Awareness,3, 73-
back in native speaker/non-native speaker con- 93.
versation. TESOLQuarterly,22, 675-681. Leeman,J. (2003). Recasts and second language devel-
DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In opment. Studiesin SecondLanguageAcquisition,25,
C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbookof 37-63.
secondlanguage acquisition (pp. 313-348). Malden, Levin, L. (1972). Comparativestudies in foreign language
MA: Blackwell. teaching. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Conditions, com- Lightbown, P. (1985). Great expectations: Second-
pensation and enhancement. In C. Doughty & M. language and classroom teaching. AppliedLinguis-
H. Long (Eds.), The handbookof second language tics, 6, 173-189.
acquisition (pp. 256-310). Malden, MA:Blackwell. Lightbown, P. (2000). Anniversary article: Classroom
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). Information gap tasks: SLA research and second language teaching. Ap-
Do they facilitate second language acquisition? plied Linguistics, 21, 431-462.
TESOLQuarterly,20, 305-325. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus learned (Rev. ed.). New York: Oxford University
on form. In C. Doughty &J. Williams (Eds.), Focus Press.
onform in classroomsecondlanguage acquisition(pp. Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction, and second lan-
114-138). New York:Cambridge University Press. guage acquisition. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Native lan-
Duff, P. (1986). Another look at interlanguage talk: guage and foreign language acquisition (pp. 259-
Taking task to task. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to 278). New York:New YorkAcademy of Sciences.
learn: Conversationin second language acquisition Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker
(pp. 147-181). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. conversation and the negotiation of comprehen-
Ebert, R. (1990). Roger Ebert's movie home companion. sible input. AppliedLinguistics, 4, 126-141.
Kansas City, MO: Andrews McMeel. Long, M. (1985a). Input and second language acquisi-
Ebert, R. (1997). RogerEbert'svideo companion. Kansas tion theory. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input
City, MO: Andrews McMeel. in secondlanguage acquisition (pp. 377-393). Row-
Ellis, R. (1998). Teaching and research: Options in ley, MA: Newbury House.
grammar teaching. TESOLQuarterly,32, 39-60. Long, M. (1985b). A role for instruction in second lan-
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-basedlanguage learning and teach- guage acquisition: Task-based language teaching.
ing. New York:Oxford University Press. In K. Hylktenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Mod-
Fotos, S. (1994). Integrating grammar instruction and elling and assessingsecondlanguage acquisition (pp.
communicative language use through grammar 115-141). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
350 7he Modern Language Journal 89 (2005)

Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment In W. A. Renandya & N. R. Sunga (Eds.), Lan-
in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie guage curriculum and instruction in multicultural
& T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language ac- societies (pp. 145-173). Singapore: SEAMEO Re-
quisition: Vol. 2. Second language acquisition (pp. gional Language Centre.
413-468). New York:Academic Press. Pica, T. (2002). Subject matter content: How does it as-
Long, M., Adams, L., McLean, M., & Castanos, F. (1976). sist the interactional and linguistic needs of class-
Doing things with words: Verbal interaction in room language learners? Modern LanguageJour-
lockstep and small group classroom situations. In nal, 85, 1-19.
J. Fanselow & R. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL '76 Pica, T. (2004). Second language acquisition research
(pp. 137-153). Washington, DC: TESOL. and applied linguistics. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Hand-
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Creating bookon secondlanguage learning and teaching (pp.
structure-based communication tasks for second 263-280). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
language development. In G. Crookes & S. Gass Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985). The role of group
(Eds.), Tasksand language learning:Integratingthe- work in classroom second language acquisition.
oryandpractice(pp. 123-167). Clevedon, England: Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 233-
Multilingual Matters. 248.
Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., Berducci, D., & Newman,
L2 classroom discourse. Studiesin SecondLanguage J. (1991). Language learning through interaction:
Acquisition,20, 51-81. What role does gender play?Studiesin SecondLan-
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second lan- guage Acquisition,13, 343-376.
guage development. Studiesin SecondLanguageAc- Pica, T, Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L.
quisition, 21, 557-588. (1989). Comprehensible output as an outcome
Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interac- of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in
tional input and the incorporation of feedback: SecondLanguageAcquisition,11, 63-90.
An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing
and child dyads. LanguageLearning, 53, 35-66. and using communication tasks for second lan-
Mackey, A., & Philp,J., (1998). Conversational interac- guage instruction. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.),
tion and second language development: Recasts, Tasksand language learning (pp. 9-34). Clevedon,
responses, and red herrings? Modern Language England: Multilingual Matters.
Journal, 82, 338-356. Pica, T., Kang, H., & Sauro, S. (2004, October). Get-
Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher-learner negotiation ting the learner'sattention throughtask-basedinter-
in content-based instruction: Communication action. Paper presented at the Second Language
at cross-purposes? Applied Linguistics, 17, 286- Research Forum, State College, PA.
325. Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J.
Nassaji,H. (1999). Towardsintegrating form-focused in- (1996). Language learners' interaction: How does
struction and communicative interaction in the it address the input, output, and feedback needs
second language classroom: Some pedagogical of L2 learners? TESOLQuarterly,30, 59-84.
possibilities. Canadian Modern Language Review, Pica, T., &Washburn, G. (in press). Negative evidence in
55, 385-402. language classroom activities: A study of its avail-
Newton,J., & Kennedy, G. (1996). Effects of communi- ability and accessibility to language learners. ITL
cation tasks on the grammatical relations marked Journal of AppliedLinguistics.
by second language learners. System, 24, 309- Pica, T., Washburn, G., Evans, B., & Jo, V. (1998, Jan-
322. uary). Negative feedback in content-based second
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasksfor the communicative language classroom interaction: How does it con-
classroom.New York:Cambridge University Press. tribute to second language learning? Paper pre-
Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS/NNS sented at the Annual Pacific Second Language
conversation. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisi- Research Forum, Tokyo,Japan.
tion, 17, 459-482. Pica, T.,Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of
Oliver, R. (2000). Age differences in negotiation and interaction on comprehension. TESOLQuarterly,
feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language 21, 737-758.
Learning, 50, 119-151. Plough, I., & Gass, S. (1993). Interlocutor and task fa-
Philp,J. (2003). Constraints on "noticing the gap":Non- miliarity effects on interactional structure. In G.
native speakers' noticing of recasts in NS-NNS in- Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasksand languagelearn-
teraction. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition, ing (pp. 35-56). Clevedon, England: Multilingual
25, 99-126. Matters.
Pica, T. (1991). Classroom interaction, participation, Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning and inter-
and negotiation: Redefining relationships. System, language pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-
19, 437-452. Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguagepragmatics (pp. 21-42).
Pica, T. (1994). Questions from the classroom: Research New York:Oxford University Press.
perspectives. TESOLQuarterly,28, 49-79. Skehan, P. (1996). A frameworkfor the implementation
Pica, T. (2001). The content-based curriculum: An op- of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17,
timal or optional approach to language learning? 38-62.
Teresa Pica 351

Stone, O. (Producer), & Wang, W. (Director). (1993). collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In
Thejoy luck club [Motion picture]. United States: M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Research-
Buena Vista Pictures. ing pedagogictasks, secondlanguage learning, teach-
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some ing and testing (pp. 99-118). Harlow, UK: Long-
roles of comprehensible input and comprehen- man.
sible output in its development. In S. Gass & Tarone, E., Swain, M., & Fathman, A. (1976). Some limi-
C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language ac- tations to the classroom application of current sec-
quisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury ond language acquisition research. TESOLQuar-
House. terly,10, 19-31.
Swain, M. (1991). French immersion and its offshoots: Ur, P. (1988). Grammarpractice activities.NewYork:Cam-
Getting two for one. In B. Freed (Ed.), Foreign bridge University Press.
language acquisitionand theclassroom(pp. 91-103). Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native
Lexington, MA: Heath. conversation: A model for negotiation of meaning.
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious re- AppliedLinguistics, 11, 71-90.
flection. In C. Doughty &J. Williams (Eds.), Fo- Williams,J., & Evans,J. (1998). Which kind of focus on
cus on form in classroomsecond language acquisi- which kind of forms? In C. Doughty &J. Williams
tion (pp. 64-81). NewYork: Cambridge University (Eds.), Focus on form in classroomsecond language
Press. acquisition (pp. 177-196). New York: Cambridge
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through University Press.

APPENDIX
Tables Showing Activities

All activities are based on a passage, also cited in the text of this article, from a film review by Ebert (1990,
pp. 699-700).
TABLE la
Passage Versions for Articles and Determiners
Version to Student A Version to Student B

East Los Angeles High School had many problems. East Los Angeles High School had many problems.
The principal was worried that the school might The principal was worried that their school might
lose its accreditation. So he held a faculty lose its accreditation. So he held a faculty
meeting to ask for suggestions. The vice principal meeting to ask for the suggestions. The vice
said that the students entered school with barely a principal said that the students entered the school
seventh grade education. He argued that there with barely a seventh grade education. He argued
wasn't a teacher at a meeting who wasn't doing that there wasn't a teacher at the meeting who
everything he possibly could do. wasn't doing everything he possibly could do.

TABLE lb
Passage Versions for Pronouns and Connectors
Version to Student C Version to Student D

East Los Angeles High School had many problems. East Los Angeles High School had many problems.
The principal was worried that the school might The principal was worried that the school might
lose its accreditation. So he held a faculty meeting lose his accreditation. So that he held a faculty
to ask for suggestions. The vice principal said meeting to ask for suggestions. The vice principal
when the students entered the school with barely said that the students entered the school with
a seventh grade education. He argued but there barely a seventh grade education. He argued that
wasn't a teacher at the meeting who wasn't doing there wasn't a teacher at the meeting who wasn't
everything he possibly could do. doing everything he possibly could do.
352 The Modern Language Journal 89 (2005)

TABLE Ic
Passage Versions for Verb and Modal Morphology
Version E Version F

East Los Angeles High School had many problems. East Los Angeles High School had many problems.
The principal was worried that the school might The principal was worried that the school must
lose its accreditation. So he held a faculty meeting lose its accreditation. So he holds a faculty
to ask for suggestions. The vice principal said that meeting to ask for suggestions. The vice principal
the students enter the school with barely a seventh said that the students enteredthe school with
grade education. He argued that there wasn't a barely a seventh grade education. He argued that
teacher at the meeting who wasn't doing there wasn't a teacher at the meeting who wasn't
everything he possibly should do. doing everything he possibly could do.

TABLE Id
Cloze Passage for Articles and Determiners

East Los Angeles High School had many problems. The principal was worried that might lose its
accreditation. So he held a faculty meeting to ask The vice principal said that the students
entered with barely a seventh grade education. He argued that there wasn't a teacher
who wasn't doing everything he possibly could do.

TABLE 2
Jigsaw Passage Versions for Articles and Determiners
Version to Student C Version to Student D

Sentence # 1 Stand and Deliver tells the story Sentence # 1 Stand and Deliver tells the story
of a high school mathematics of a high school mathematics
teacher namedJaime teacher named Jaime
Escalante. Escalante.
Sentence #_ Escalante motivates them by Sentence #_ Escalante motivates them by
getting attention. getting their attention.
Sentence #_ Students are undisciplined, Sentence #_- The students are undisciplined,
unmotivated and rebellious. unmotivated and rebellious.
Sentence #_- He is asked to teach a class of Sentence # He is asked to teach a class of
losers and potential dropouts. some losers and potential
dropouts.
Sentence #__ Escalante faces an enormous Sentence #_ Escalante faces his enormous
challenge on the first day of challenge on the first day of
school. school.

TABLE 3
Grammar Communication Passage Versions for Articles and Determiners

Version to Student A Version to Student B

1. Escalante returned to education to prove 1. Escalante returned to education to prove

something. something.
2. What he proved was that students/some students 2. What he proved was that his students/the
can succeed through motivation and hard work. students can succeed through motivation and
hard work.
3. His students were able to pass the difficult math 3. His students were able to pass a difficult math
test/this difficult math test. test/his difficult math test.
4. However they were accused of cheating on 4. However they were accused of cheating on
his test/their test. his test/their test.
5. Even though the students/these students had not 5. Even though students/their students had not
cheated, their scores were questioned by the cheated, their scores were questioned by the
Educational Testing Service. Educational Testing Service.