Computer–Mediated Negotiated Interaction: An Expanded Model

Abstract

This study examines task-based, synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) among intermediate-level learners of English. The research specifically explores (a) whether learners engage in negotiated interaction when they encounter new lexical items, (b) whether task type has an effect on the amount of negotiation that transpires, and (c) how this computer-mediated negotiation compares to that noted in the face-to-face literature. Fourteen nonnative-nonnative dyads collaboratively completed 4 communicative tasks using ChatNet, a browser-based chat program. Each dyad completed 2 jigsaw and 2 decision-making tasks, which were each "seeded" with 8 target lexical items. The chatscripts reveal that learners do in fact negotiate for meaning in the CMC environment when nonunderstanding occurs. Furthermore, task type was found to have a definite influence on the extent to which learners engaged in negotiation, but not necessarily in the same way that has been observed in the face-to-face literature. Though the negotiation that occurs in the CMC environment proceeds in ways that are roughly similar to face-to-face negotiation, the observed differences call for a new model of computer-mediated negotiation. This new model is presented as a more accurate tool for describing computer-mediated negotiated interaction than those offered to chart face-to-face negotiation episodes.AS THE PROLIFERATION OF COMPUTERS IN the language learning classroom continues, it is important for language teachers embracing the use of computer technology to understand the norms of language use during computer-mediated interaction and their potential relationship to second language acquisition (SLA). The use of synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) in particular has recently increased in the communicative language classroom through freeware and readily-available Webbased "chat" programs such as AOL Instant Messenger and Yahoo Messenger, among countless others. In general, CMC appears to be a potentially useful tool for language teaching and learning as well as for research into both second language use and acquisition. Research suggests that CMC may elicit more (and more equitable) learner participation (that found in face-to-face interaction. Computermediated communication may also help create a less stressful environment for second language practice (Chun, 1998). Furthermore, because of the "logging" capabilities of most CMC programs, we may capture and readily access this interaction for both research and pedagogical purposes. Indeed, the computer as a data collection instrument seems to be less intrusive in many ways than traditional procedures for recording face-to-face student interaction.Though the use of well-crafted communicative activities, which promote learner-learner interaction, is generally considered sound pedagogical practice, the theoretical and empirical support for the efficacy of such activities for facilitating SLA is less than conclusive. Nevertheless, it is widely held that communicative interaction

Improving Communicative Competence through Synchronous Communication in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments: A Systematic Review

“…It seems in those comparative studies across modality, there is usually a clear abundance of global LREs (41% in AudCMC, 39% in VidCMC) [23,31]. Whereas, local triggers for OCMC were rather prominent in exclusive examination of SVCMC [21,22,31,45,46]. To give a closer investigation of designs of these research, such divergence could possibly be interpreted by the profile of their participants.…”

<b>Elaboration and validation of an ESL/EFL software evaluation instrument</b><br>DOI:10.5007/2175-8026.2011n60p305

“…For example, group work with computers has been found to provide support for: relatively autonomous learning on the part of students (Collins & Berge, 1996, Jonassen, 1994Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999); increased collaboration and negotiation (Blake 2000;Fernandez-Garcia & Martinez-Arbelaiz, 2002;Kern, 1995;Kim, 1998;Pellettieri, 2000;Repman, 1993;Smith, 2003, andWarschauer, 1996); a higher quality of exploratory talk and cognitive discourse (Davis & Thiede, 2000;Irvine, 2000;Sengupta, 2001); greater problem solving competencies and higher order thinking (DeLoach & Greenlaw, 2002;Kamhi-Stein, 2000;MacKinley, 1999); development of writing skills and literary uses of language (Warschauer, 2004;Schultz, 1996).…”

“…Some recent studies (Bohlke, 2003;Fitze, 2006;Lee, 2004;Simpson, 2005;Smith, 2003) attempted to investigate the differences in the quality of interaction between face-to-face and written electronic conferences. These studies suggest that in the written electronic setting, tasks involving negotiation of meaning tend to lead to incidental interactions in which students are asked to clarify and rearticulate what they have written in the target language.…”

Vol. 2, No. 3, September 2009

“…(Tyson,199,p.368) It is out of this cultural awareness and acuteness developed since her college years that Morrison is determined to cast a black oppositional gaze in Beloved to create from the "shadow" speaking black subjects, putting whites this time in the status of object to be gazed, to put it in her own words, writing "from the described and imagined to the describers and imaginers; from the serving to the served." (Smith andJones, 2000, p.1065) Or as John A. Powell has stated, "challenging the dominant discourse (of silencing black presence) requires disturbing and de-centering the white gaze." (Powell, 2008) Ever since its first appearance in 1987, Toni Morrison's novel Beloved has been widely acclaimed as a triumph of literary efforts by African American writers over the silencing tendency still in prominence of the dominant white American culture at a time when multiculturalism has gained the upper hand over other schools of thoughts concerning cultures.…”

“…In addition to providing opportunities for online activities, technology has become an integral part of learning and teaching. Previous studies have documented a number of benefits that students have gained by using Internet technology (e.g., Chun & Wade, 2003;Darhower, 2002;Lee, 2002aLee, , 2004Smith, 2003;Warschauer, 2000). Technology-enhanced instruction offers students unparalleled access to instructional resources, far surpassing the reach of the traditional classroom.…”