key concepts in e l t

Task repetition in ELT

Mohammad Javad Ahmadian

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/66/3/380/439513 by guest on 04 September 2019

A ‘task’ can be defined as a meaning-focused pedagogic activity in which
learners need to rely on their linguistic and non-linguistic resources in order
to achieve a communicative outcome (Ellis 2009a). Since the early 1980s,
the notion of task has been widely used in E LT circles, and previous Key
Concept articles on task (Rubdy 1998) and task-based language teaching
(Foster 1999) note that initial debates centred around: (a) providing
a working definition for a task, (b) designing classificatory schemes for
grading and sequencing tasks, and (c) examining the effects of different
types of tasks on L2 development. In addition to these themes, researchers
and practitioners have also been concerned with task design and
implementation, implementation being considered in terms of pre- and
post-task activities. One of the implementation variables that has attracted
researchers’ interest is ‘task repetition’.
Task repetition involves asking language learners to repeat the same or
slightly altered tasks at intervals of, for example, one or two weeks (Bygate
and Samuda 2005: 43). In task repetition, the first performance of the task is
regarded as preparation for (or a pre-task activity before) further
performances (Ellis 2005). At first glance, this might seem reminiscent of
behaviourist drills that are based on the assumption that language learning
occurs via a process of habit formation through repetition. (For instance,
Paulston and Bruder (1976: 12) identified different types of repetition drills
and defined them as ‘plain repetition of the cue’.) However, in its new
conceptualization, task repetition does not at all refer to ‘verbatim’
repetitions of the cues in the L2 classroom; rather it involves the repetition of
familiar form and content (Bygate 2006). This new conceptualization is in
part informed by the view that our attentional and processing capacity
during communication activities is inherently restricted in some important
ways, for instance, L2 learners cannot focus on both meaning and form
simultaneously. By repeating the same or similar tasks, therefore, learners
might be able to build upon what they have already done in order to ‘buy
time’ not only to do mental work on what they are about to communicate but
also to access and (re)formulate words and grammatical structures more
efficiently, effectively, and accurately.
The effects of task repetition on L2 oral production have been examined in
a number of studies. For example, Bygate (1996, 2001) documented the
positive effects of task repetition on the fluency and accuracy of L2 output.
Gass, Mackey, Fernandez, and Alvarez-Torres (1999) found similar patterns
regarding the effects of task repetition with L2 learners of Spanish, while the

380 ELT Journal Volume 66/3 July 2012; doi:10.1093/elt/ccs020

© E LTThe Authordoi:10.1093/elt/ccs020
Journal; 2012. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved. 1 of 3
ª The Author
Advance Access publication
2012. PublishedApril 25, 2012
by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
 study by Lynch and Maclean (2000) revealed that recycling had positive
effects on both accuracy and fluency in an English for Specific Purposes
context. Similarly, Ahmadian and Tavakoli (2011) reported the positive effect
of task repetition on the complexity and fluency of L2 speech and, more
recently, Hawkes (2011) found that task repetition could be used as
a pedagogic tool to direct L2 learners’ attention towards form.
Despite these positive findings, empirical evidence regarding the extension
of the effects of task repetition to a new task is still relatively scarce. Arguably,
if the benefits of repeating the same task do not transfer when a new task is
performed, one may conclude that task repetition does not assist L2

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/66/3/380/439513 by guest on 04 September 2019

acquisition and that the effects of task repetition are limited to immediate L2
performance (Ellis 2009b; Larsen-Freeman 2009). Thus, regarding the
effects of task repetition on acquisition, there are, at least, two additional
possibilities that need to be (re)examined: (a) in order for task repetition to
have beneficial effects on acquisition, learners may need to receive feedback
on their initial performance of the task (Sheppard 2006, cited in Ellis
2009b), and (b) as Bygate (2001) hypothesizes, it may be that massed
repetition practice is required for acquisition to take place, i.e. repeating the
same or a slightly altered task a large number of times over a short period of
time. However, further rigorous empirical investigation is necessary before
any solid claims about effects of (massed) task repetition on L2 acquisition
can be confirmed.
The concept of task repetition has clear implications for pedagogy. Research
into task repetition provides insights into how teachers might develop the
pre-, while-, and post-task phases of lessons. Research also explores the ways
in which tasks might be linked within lessons (and across sequences of
lessons) to provide learners with opportunities to work repeatedly with
similar linguistic content. Thus, instead of focusing upon the performance
of tasks in isolation (which characterizes much research to date), the
concept of task repetition moves the focus of debate clearly towards the
pedagogic use of tasks within lessons.

References and A. Martı́nez-Flor (eds.). Current Trends in the

Ahmadian, M. J. and M. Tavakoli. 2011. ‘The effects of
simultaneous use of careful online planning and
task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency
in E F L learners’ oral production’. Language Teaching
Research 15/1: 23–49.
Bygate, M. 1996. ‘Effect of task repetition:
appraising the development of second language
learners’ in J. Willis and D. Willis (eds.). Challenge
and Change in Language Teaching. Oxford:
Heinemann.
Bygate, M. 2001. ‘Effects of task repetition on the
structure and control of oral language’ in M. Bygate,
P. Skehan, and M. Swain (eds.). Researching
Pedagogic Tasks, Second Language Learning, Teaching
and Testing. Harlow: Longman.
Bygate, M. 2006. ‘Areas of research that influence
L2 speaking instruction’ in E. Usó-Juan
Development and Teaching of the Four Skills.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bygate, M. and V. Samuda. 2005. ‘Integrative
planning through the use of task repetition’ in
R. Ellis (ed.).
Ellis, R. (ed.). 2005. Planning and Task Performance in
Second Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ellis R. 2009a. ‘Task-based language teaching:
sorting out the misunderstandings’. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics 19/3: 221–46.
Ellis, R. 2009b. ‘The differential effects of three types
of task planning on the fluency, complexity and
accuracy in L2 oral production’. Applied Linguistics
30/4: 474–509.
Foster, P. 1999. ‘Task-based language learning and
pedagogy’. ELT Journal 53/1: 69–70.

2 of 3 Ahmadian
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian 381
Gass, S., A. Mackey, M. Fernandez, and M. Alvarez-
Torres. 1999. ‘The effects of task repetition on
linguistic output’. Language Learning 49/4: 549–80.
Hawkes, M. 2011. ‘Using task repetition to direct
learner attention and focus on form’. E LT Journal
Advance Access published 12 September 2011;
doi:10/1093/elt/ccr059.
Larsen-Freeman D. 2009. ‘Adjusting expectations:
the study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency
in second language acquisition’. Applied Linguistics
30/4: 579–89.
Lynch, T. and J. Maclean. 2000. ‘Exploring the
benefits of task repetition and recycling for
classroom language learning’. Language Teaching
Research 4/3: 221–50.
Paulston, C. and M. Bruder. 1976. Teaching English
as a Second Language: Techniques and Procedures
Cambridge, MA: Winthrop Publishers.
382 Task repetition in ELT
Rubdy, R. 1998. ‘Task’. E LT Journal 52/3: 264–5.
Sheppard, C. 2006. ‘The effects of instruction
directed at the gaps second language learners
noticed in their oral production’. Unpublished PhD
thesis, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
The author
Mohammad Javad Ahmadian holds a PhD in
applied linguistics and is a Lecturer at the University
of Isfahan, Iran. His recent and forthcoming articles
on task-based language learning and teaching
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article-abstract/66/3/380/439513 by guest on 04 September 2019
appear in Language Teaching Research, International
Journal of Applied Linguistics, and T ES O L Quarterly.
He is primarily interested in cognitive approaches to
second language acquisition.
Email: Ahmadian.edu@gmail.com
3 of 3