The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics

Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 19 , No. 4

[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 736-754
Abbreviation: KASELL
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2019
Received 10 Nov 2019 Revised 11 Dec 2019 Accepted 19 Dec 2019

형태 초점 과제의 반복과 협력이 하위 수준 대학생의 문법 학습에 미치는 영향
조혜경* ; 이진화**
*제1저자, 중앙대학교
**교신저자, 중앙대학교

Effects of form-focused task repetitions and collaboration on low-level EFL college students’ form learning
Jo, Hye-Kyoung* ; Jin-Hwa Lee**


The study investigated the effects of form-focused task repetitions and pair work on low-level Korean college students’ task performance and English present perfect acquisition. Forty students performed a text-editing task three times either individually (n = 22) or in pairs (n = 18). The two groups’ performances were compared in terms of how many errors they found and accurately corrected and how these numbers changed along with task repetition. In addition, the students’ knowledge of English present perfect was measured before and after task repetitions. The effects of task repetitions were confirmed in both task performance and form acquisition. Both groups could find and correct more errors as they repeated the task. Furthermore, they showed significant gains in the posttest of present perfect. In contrast, the effects of collaboration were not born out in this study. There was no significant difference between the groups in task performance and form acquisition. However, a significant correlation was found between individual learners’ participation in pair work and gains in the posttest. This indicates that it is not the pair work itself but the members’ participation that affects L2 form acquisition.

Keywords: form-focused tasks, text-editing tasks, task repetitions, collaboration, pair work

1. 김경희·박강훈·박주홍(Kim, K., K. Park and J. Park). 2013. 『한국폴리텍대학 취업경쟁력을 위한 전공영어 기초연구』(A Preliminary Study on English Courses for Job Competitiveness at Korea Polytechnics). 인천: 한국폴리텍대학.
2. 김성곤 외 8명(Kim, S. et al.). 2018. 『Middle School English 2』. 서울: ㈜NE능률.
3. 강은영(Kang, E. Y.). 2017. 대학 교양영어 수업에서 딕토글로스를 활용한 말하기 중심과 쓰기 중심 듣기 후 활동이 학습자의 듣기 능력과 그들의 인식에 미치는 영향(The effects of speaking and writing activities in dictogloss on learners’ listening abilities and perceptions at an EFL college context). ≪영어영문학연구≫(Studies in English Language & Literature) 43-1, 187-210.
4. 김연희·주미란·이준(Kim, Y. H., M. Joo and J. Lee). 2009. 딕토글로스 학습법을 통한 공과대학생의 영어능력 향상에 관한 연구(A study on improving English ability of engineering college student through dictogloss). ≪한국공학교육학회≫(Korean Society for Engineering Education) 12-1, 24-30.
5. 김지정·홍선호(Kim, J-J. and S-H. Hong). 2018. 딕토글로스(Dictogloss) 활동을 통한 초등 6학년 학습자의 과거 시제 습득 양상(A study of the effects of dictogloss on the elementary 6th graders learning of English past tense). ≪언어학연구≫ (Journal of Linguistic Studies) 23-1, 47-65.
6. 김창호(Kim, C.). 2012. 대학교 교양영어 학습에서 딕토글로스(Dictogloss)의 효과에 관한 연구(A study on the effects of dictogloss in university English classes). ≪영어영문학연구≫(Studies in English Language & Literature) 38-2, 191-218.
7. 박옥희(Park, O. H.). 2013. 딕토글로스 지도 방법이 학습자들의 듣기 및 쓰기 능력에 미치는 효과(The effect of dictogloss on university students’ listening and writing ability). ≪학습자중심교과교육연구≫(Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction) 13-5, 453-479.
8. 박정주·이희경(Park, J-J. and H-K. Lee). 2009. 중학교 영어 문법 수업에서 Dictogloss의 효과에 관한 연구(A study of the effect of dictogloss in middle school English classes). ≪외국어교육≫(Foreign Languages Education) 16-1, 147-171.
9. 이재승 외 6명(Lee, J. et al.). 2019. 『MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH 2』. 서울: ㈜천재교육
10. 이명관(Lee, M-K.). 2014. 딕토글로스 활동이 대학 교양영어 수업에 미치는 영향(The effects of dictogloss on college English classes). ≪현대영어영문학≫(Modern Studies in English Language & Literature) 58-2, 237-263.
11. 정사열 외 5명(Jung, S. et al.). 2018. 『MIDDLE SCHOOL ENGLISH 2』. 서울: ㈜천재교육
12. 주미란(Joo, M.). 2014. 딕토글로스 듣기학습이 토익 듣기 파트별 성취도와 수업 태도에 미치는 영향-하위집단 중심으로(The effects of dictogloss listening activity on each part of TOEIC LC and learning attitude: focusing on low proficiency level learners). ≪21세기영어영문학회≫(The 21st Century Association of English Language and Literature) 27-2, 273-291.
13. 최윤정 · 김신혜(Choi, Y. J. and S. Kim). 2012. 딕토글로스 활동이 초등학생의 부정문 학습에 미치는 영향(Effects of dictogloss on elementary school students’ English negative form). ≪영어교과교육≫(Journal of the Korea English Education Society) 11-2, 157-176.
14. 최지연·홍선호(Choi, J-Y. and S-H. Hong). 2011. 딕토글로스(Dictogloss)를 통한 초등 6학년 학습자의 의문문 습득 양상(The sixth graders’ acquisition of question forms through dictogloss). ≪초등영어교육≫(Primary English Education) 17-2, 107-126.
15. Baek, S-H., and J-H. Lee. 2012. The effects of English proficiency and text difficulty on collaborative dialogue during dictogloss. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics 28, 87-114.
16. Bygate, M. 1996. Effects of task repetition: Appraising the developing language of learners. In J. Willis and D. Willis, eds., Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, 136-146. Oxford: Heinemann.
17. 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, 23-48. Harlow: Longman.
18. Bygate, M. 2018. Task repetition for language learning: A perspective from skill acquisition theory. In M. Bygate, ed., Learning Language through Task Repetition, 27-41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
19. Bygate, M. and V. Samuda. 2005. Integrative planning through the use of task repetition. In R. Ellis, ed., Planning and Task Performance in a Second Language, 37-74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
20. Han, Y. 2008. Focus-on-form in a collaborative output task: Exploring a dictogloss. English Teaching 63, 29-49.
21. Kim, D-Y. 2006. The effects of implicit and explicit grammar instruction. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics 6, 521-548.
22. Kim, J-K., and J-H. Lee. 2019. Effects of the number of task repetitions on Korean middle school students’ English writing and perception. Secondary English Education 12, 3-25.
23. Kim, Y., S. Crossley, Y. Jung, K. Kyle and S. Kang. 2018. The effects of task repetition and task complexity on L2 lexicon use. In M. Bygate, ed., Learning Language Through Task Repetition, 75-96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
24. Kowal, M. and M. Swain. 1994. Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students’ language awareness. Language Awareness 3, 73-93.
25. Kowal, M. and M. Swain. 1997. From semantic to syntactic processing: How can we promote metalinguistic awareness in the French immersion classroom? In K. Johnson and M. Swain, eds., Immersion Education: International Perspectives, 284-309. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. Kuiken, F., & I. Vedder. 2002. The effect of interaction in acquiring the grammar of a second language. International Journal of Educational Research 37, 343-358.
27. LaPierre, D. 1994. Language Output in a Cooperative Learning Setting: Determining its Effects on Second Language Learning. Master’s thesis, University of Toronto (OLSE), Toronto, Canada.
28. Lee, M. H., J. Shim and H. Lee. 2018. The effects of dictogloss tasks on EFL learners’ syntactic development. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal 26, 175-197.
29. Leeser, M. 2004. Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research 8, 55-81.
30. Long, M. H. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch, eds., Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspective, 39–52. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
31. Long, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia, eds., Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 413-468. New York: Academic Press.
32. Nabei, T. 1996. Dictogloss: Is it an effective language learning task?. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 12, 59-74.
33. Nassaji, H. and J. Tian. 2010. Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research 14, 397-419.
34. Nassaji H. and S. Fotos. 2011. Teaching Grammar in Second Language Classrooms: Integrating Form-focused Instruction in Communicative Context. New York: Routledge.
35. Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11, 206–226.
36. Storch, N. 1999. Are two heads better than one? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System 27, 363-374.
37. Storch, N. 2007. Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research 2, 143-59.
38. Swain, M. 1993. The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren’t enough. Canadian Modern Language Review 50, 158-64.
39. Swain, M. 1998. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty and J. Williams, eds., Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition, 64-81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. VanPattern, B. 1990. Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12, 287-301.
41. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Wajnryb, R. 1990. Grammar Dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. Yeo, K. 2002. The effects of dictogloss: A technique of ‘focus on form’. English Teaching 57, 149-167.

조혜경(Jo, Hye-Kyoung), 대학원생(Graduate Student)중앙대학교 영어교육과(Dept. of English Education, Chung-Ang University)서울시 동작구 흑석로 84(84 Heukseok-ro Dongjak-gu, Seoul, Korea)Email:

이진화(Lee, Jin-Hwa), 교수(Professor)중앙대학교 영어교육과(Dept. of English Education, Chung-Ang University)서울시 동작구 흑석로 84(84 Heukseok-ro Dongjak-gu, Seoul, Korea)Tel: 02-820-5400Email: