Reconsidering Task Complexity Through Different Planning and Proficiency in L2 Written Tasks

Motivated by the debate and inconsistent findings between the Trade-off Hypothesis and the Cognition Hypothesis in second language (L2) written tasks, the purpose of this study was to investigate task complexity in relation to different planning conditions and proficiency to enhance syntactic complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF). The rationales of the study are: (a) To examine task complexity in terms of various planning including online planning, which has not been considered in previous studies, and task-relevant proficiency, and (b) To examine task complexity using different measures for obtaining different predictive power with a large number of participants in a classroom-based study. A total of 459 Korean undergraduate English learners were classified into 12 groups in terms of task complexity (simple and complex tasks), planning conditions (no planning, pre-task planning, and online planning), and proficiency (intermediate and advanced levels). The findings indicate that (a) Task complexity, at least manipulated by the [± here-and-now] variable in L2 writing, may be less valid because of the increase of syntactic complexity and accuracy with the assistance of online planning and contradicted task features, and (b) Intermediate learners’ written performance seems to support the Trade-off Hypothesis, while advanced learners’ written performance seems to support the Cognition Hypothesis. Experimental and pedagogical implications are suggested.