Minding the gap
A small-scale study on negotiation of form in telecollaborative tasks
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.19812Keywords:
Negotiation of form, Telecollaboration, Tandem Learning, Peer Written Corrective Feedback, L2 English, L2 ItalianAbstract
This study investigates how different ways of receiving peer written corrective feedback (WCF) affect learners’ opportunities to actively engage in negotiation of form in tandem virtual encounters. Two types of WCF are compared, namely direct WCF plus oral metalinguistic explanation and indirect WCF plus oral prompt. During a telecollaboration programme between Italian students of English and US students of Italian, the participants (n = 16) were given several tasks to complete in dyads, including that of providing feedback on written compositions produced by their partner in the target language. The eight dyads were divided into two groups which received the same instructions for the activities, with the exception of instructions on how to provide WCF to their partner. The data of six dyads – three from each group – were analysed with regard to the quality of language-related episodes. The data analysis showed that indirect WCF plus oral prompt was more effective in leading the NNSs to actively engage with negotiation of form during the discussion phase. This result will be discussed together with other findings which emerged from the analysis, with the aim to provide useful insights on how to promote focus on form when implementing peer-review activities in telecollaboration programmes.
References
Akiyama, Y. (2017) Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System (64): 58–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.007
Akiyama, Y. and Cunningham, D. (2018) Synthesizing the practice of SCMC-Based telecollaboration: A scoping review. CALICO Journal 35(1): 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.33156
Akiyama, Y. and Saito, K. (2016) Development of comprehensibility and its linguistic correlates: A longitudinal study of video-mediated telecollaboration. The Modern Language Journal 100: 582–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12338
Belz, J. A. (2003) Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning and Technology 7(2): 68–99. http://dx.doi.org/10125/25201
Belz, J. A. (2006) At the intersection of telecollaboration, learner corpus research, and L2 pragmatics: considerations for language program direction. In J. A. Belz and S. L. Thorne (eds) Internet-Mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education 207–46. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Belz, J. A. and Kinginger, C. (2003) Discourse options and the development of pragmatic competence by classroom learners of German: The case of address forms. Language Learning 53: 591–647. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-9922.2003.00238.x
Belz, J. A. and Kinginger, C. (2005) Socio-cultural perspectives on pragmatic development in foreign language learning: Microgenetic case studies from telecollaboration and residence abroad. Intercultural Pragmatics 2(4): 369–421. https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2005.2.4.369
Belz, J. A. and Thorne, S. L. (2006) Internet-Mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Belz, J. A. and Vyatkina, N. (2005) Learner corpus analysis and the development of L2 pragmatic competence in networked intercultural language study: The case of German modal particles. Canadian Modern Language Review 62(1): 17–48. https://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.62.1.17
Belz, J. A. and Vyatkina, N. (2008) The pedagogical mediation of a developmental learner corpus for classroom-based language instruction. Language Learning & Technology 12(3): 33–52. https://doi.org/10125/44154.
Bitchener, J. (2008) Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 17: 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
Cosgun Ögeyik, M. (2018) The comparative effectiveness of noticing in language learning. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 56(4): 377–400. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-0049
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M. and Takashima, H. (2008) The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in English as a foreign language context. System 36: 353–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001
Ferris, D. R. (2003) Response to student writing implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ferris, D. R. (2006) Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects on written error correction. In K. Hyland and F. Hyland (eds) Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues 81–104. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524742.007
Ferris, D. R. (2010) Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32: 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263109990490
Ferris, D. R. and Roberts, B. (2001) Error feedback writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing 10: 161–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1060-3743(01)00039-X
García Mayo, M. P. and Azkarai, A. (2016) EFL task-based interaction: Does task modality impact on language-related episodes? In M. Sato and S. Ballinger (eds.), Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning: Pedagogical Potential and Research Agenda 241–66. Amsterdam : John Benjamins.
García Mayo, P. and Pica, T. (2000) L2 learner interaction in a foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 38: 35–59. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2000.38.1.35
Gass, S. M. (1991) Grammar instruction, selective attention, and learning processes. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith, and M. Swain (eds) Foreign/Second Language Pedagogy Research: A Commemorative Volume for Claus Faerch 134–41. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100012250
Guth, S. and Helm, F. (2010) Telecollaboration 2.0: Language Literacies and Intercultural Learning in the 21st Century. Bern: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.498
Hatch, E. (1978) Acquisition of syntax in a second language. In J. C. Richards (ed) Understanding Second and Foreign Language Learning: Issues and Approaches 34–70. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.39.4.911a
Hyland, K. and Hyland, F. (2006) State-of-the-art article: Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching 39: 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444806003399.
Kang, E. and Han, Z. (2015) The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal 99(1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12189
Karim, K. and Nassaji, H. (2019) The effects of written corrective feedback: a critical synthesis of past and present research. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 3(1): 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.37949
Kramsch, C. (2014) Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization. Introduction. The Modern Language Journal 98(1): 296–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12057.x
Lam, R. (2010) A peer review training workshop: Coaching students to give and evaluate peer feedback. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada 27(2): 114–127. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1052
Lee, L. (2006) A study of native and nonnative speakers’ feedback and responses in Spanish-American networked collaborative interaction. In J. Belz and S. Thorne (eds) Internet-mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education 147–76. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Lee, L. (2007) Fostering second language oral communication through constructivist interaction in desktop videoconferencing. Foreign Language Annals 40(4): 635–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2007.tb02885.x
Lee, L. (2011) Focus-on-form through peer feedback in a Spanish-American telecollaborative exchange. Language Awareness 20(4): 343–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.592589
Long, M. H. (1981) Input, interaction and second language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy in Sciences 379(1): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb42014.x
Long, M. H. (1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T.K. Bhatia (eds) Handbook of Second Language Acquisition 413–68. New York: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012589042-7/50015-3
Long, M. H. (2015) Second Language Acquisition and Task-based Language Teaching. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lyster, R. and Ranta, L. (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 37–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263197001034
MacWhinney, B. (2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (3rd edn). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.1177/014272370002006006
Nuzzo, E. and Cortés Velásquez, D. (in press) Task-based telecollaborative exchanges between US and Italian Students: A case study in program design and implementa-tion. In M. J. Ahmadian and M. H. Long (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Task-Based Language Teaching 250–61. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Dowd, R. (2006) Telecollaboration and the Development of Intercultural Communicative Competence. Berlin: Langenscheidt.
O’Dowd R. (2021) Virtual exchange: Moving forward into the next decade. Computer Assisted Language Learning 34(3): 209–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1902201
O’Dowd, R., Sauro, S. and Spector-Cohen, E. (2020) The role of pedagogical mentoring in virtual exchange. TESOL Quarterly 54(1): 146–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.543
Philp, J., Adams, R. and Iwashita, N. (2014) Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning. New York: Routledge.
Saito, K., Suzuki, S., Oyama, T. and Akiyama, Y. (2019) How does longitudinal interaction promote second language speech learning? Roles of learner experience and proficiency levels. Second Language Research November: 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319884981
Sato, M. (2015) Density and complexity of oral production in interaction: The interactionist approach and an alternative. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 53(3): 307–29. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2015-0016
Sato, M. and Lyster, R. (2007) Modified output of Japanese EFL learners: Variable effects of interlocutor vs. feedback types. In A. Mackey (ed) Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Collection of Empirical Studies 123–42. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11: 129–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
Schmidt, R. (2001) Attention. In P. Robinson (ed) Cognition and Second Language Instruction 3–32. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schmidt, R. (2010) Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T. Suthiwan and I. Walker (eds) Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010, Singapore, December 2-4, 721–37. Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies.
Sheen, Y. (2007) The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41: 255–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
Shehadeh, A. (2001) Self- and other-initiated modified output during task-based interaction. TESOL Quarterly 35(3): 433–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588030
Shehadeh, A. (2003) Learner output, hypothesis testing, and internalizing linguistic knowledge. System 31: 155–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(03)00018-6
Schenker, T. (2017) Synchronous Telecollaboration for Novice Language Learners: Effects on Speaking Skills and Language Learning Interests. ALSIC: Language Learning and Information and Communication Systems 20: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.4000/alsic.3068
Storch, N. (2008) Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness 17: 95–114. https://doi.org/10.2167/la431.0
Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (1998) Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal 82(3): 320–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01209.x
Taguchi, N. (2018) Contexts and pragmatics learning: Problems and opportunities of the study abroad research. Language Teaching 51(1): 124–37. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444815000440
Thorne, S. L. (2006) Pedagogical and praxiological lessons from internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education research. In J. A. Belz and S. L. Thorne (eds) Internet-mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education 2–31. Boston: Thomson Heinle. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344009000056
Tomlin, R. and Villa, V. (1994) Attention in Cognitive Science and Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16(2): 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100012870
Varonis, E. and Gass, S. (1985) Non-native/Non-native conversations: a model for negotiations of meaning. Applied Linguistics 6(1): 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.1.71
Wang, Q. (2020) Negotiation of Meaning and Negotiation of Form in Chinese EFL Classroom Discourse. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 58 (2): 239–62. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-0088
Ware, P. (2005) “Missed” Communication in Online Communication: Tensions in a German-American Telecollaboration. Language Learning and Technology 9: 64–89.
Ware, P. D. and Kramsch, C. (2005) Toward an Intercultural Stance: Teaching German and English through Telecollaboration. The Modern Language Journal 89: 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00274.x
Ware, P. D. and O’Dowd, R. (2008) Peer Feedback on Language Form in Telecollaboration. Language Learning and Technology 12(1): 43–63. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44130
Ziegler, N. (2016) Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication and Interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38: 553–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/s027226311500025X.
