The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learner-generated content and engagement in second language task performance
Open accessAbstract
This study investigates the benefits of designing second language (L2) learning tasks to operate on learner-generated content (related to actual content in their lives and experiences) as opposed to teacher-generated content typical of current approaches to L2 task design (fictitious ideas and events created to provide an opportunity for meaningful language use). Thirty-two Japanese learners completed parallel versions of narrative tasks, which operated on learner-generated content and teacher-generated content respectively. Learner engagement in L2 use was measured in terms of behavioral, cognitive, and social components: behavioral engagement was measured in terms of effort and persistence in task completion; cognitive engagement in terms of attention to elaborating and clarifying content; and social engagement in terms of participants’ affiliation in the discourse. Results indicate that tasks operating on learner-generated as opposed to teacher-generated content had positive effects on all aspects of engagement in L2 use during task performance. Furthermore, participants’ affective responses to the respective conditions as reflected in a post-performance questionnaire corroborated the results for performance. This indicates that learners were also more affectively engaged in the performance of the tasks in the learner-generated content condition than they were in those in the teacher-generated content condition.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Handbook of Research on Student Engagement
(2012) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7 · Cited by 3,050
Academic Emotions and Student Engagement
Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012) · Handbook of Research on Student Engagement · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_12 · Cited by 1,181 · cited 2×
“Drawing on this work, which sees engagement as multidimensional, Philp and Duchesne (2016) describe engagement as ‘a state of heightened attention and involvement, in which participation is reflected not only in the cognitive dimension, but in social, behavioural and affective dimensions’ (p.”
BackgroundExploring Engagement in Tasks in the Language Classroom
Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2016) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190515000094 · Cited by 752 · cited 5×
“Social engagement also supports peer participation and collaboration through encouragement (Baralt et al, 2016; Philp & Duchesne, 2016).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationCritical distinctions among three approaches to peer education
Damon, W., & Phelps, E. (1989) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/0883-0355(89)90013-x · Cited by 538
Engagement with language: interrogating a construct
Svalberg, A. M.-L. (2009) · Language Awareness · doi:10.1080/09658410903197264 · Cited by 405
Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom
Helme, S., & Clarke, D. (2001) · Mathematics Education Research Journal · doi:10.1007/bf03217103 · Cited by 242
Baralt, M., Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Kim, Y. (2016) · Language Learning & Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/lllt.45.09bar · Cited by 152
Language Awareness in language learning and teaching: A research agenda
Svalberg, A. M.-L. (2012) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444812000079 · Cited by 109
Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2008) · Language Learning & Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/lllt.23.07phi · Cited by 54 · cited 1×
“Swain (2013) emphasizes the inseparability between emotion and cognition, recognizing the affective dimension as making learning opportunities such as this more salient and memorable (see also Philp & Duchesne, 2008).”
BackgroundSelf-citationShintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2014) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168813519885 · Cited by 24 · cited 1×
“This research might also track learners’ behaviors on tasks in which they are engaged in language use and relate it to learning gains to understand how engagement contributes to language use (Markee, 2008; Shintani & Ellis, 2014).”
Background
Cited by
Exploring Engagement in Tasks in the Language Classroom
Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2016) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190515000094 · Cited by 752
Self-citationEngagement in language learning: a systematic review of 20 years of research methods and definitions
Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., Vitta, J. P., & Wu, J. (2024) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688211001289 · Cited by 677
“In addition to such negotiation of meaning, others see language-related episodes (LREs) as fitting indicators of cognitive engagement (e.g. Baralt et al., 2016; Lambert et al., 2017; Svalberg, 2017).”
BackgroundInfluentialTask-Based Language Teaching: Theory and Practice
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019) · doi:10.1017/9781108643689 · Cited by 407
Self-citationEffects of chatbot-assisted in-class debates on students’ argumentation skills and task motivation
Guo, K., Zhong, Y., Li, D., & Chu, S. K. W. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104862 · Cited by 188
Kormos, J., & Préfontaine, Y. (2017) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168816683562 · Cited by 95
Metadata
- Authors
- Lambert, C., Philp, J., & Nakamura, S.
- Venue
- Language Teaching Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-12-25
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 665-680
- ISSN
- 1362-1688 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0954
- OpenAlex
- W2577533918
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 101.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
