Patterns of Interaction in ESL Pair Work

Abstract

This study investigated the nature of dyadic interaction in an adult ESL classroom. The study was longitudinal, classroom based, and examined the nature of interaction between 10 pairs of adult ESL students over a range of language tasks and over time (a semester). Four distinct patterns of dyadic interaction were found. These patterns are distinguishable in terms of equality and mutuality (Damon & Phelps, 1989). More importantly, the findings suggest that certain patterns of dyadic interaction are more conducive than others to language learning. These findings are explained by reference to Vygotsky's theory of cognitive development.The use of group and pair work is widespread in education. The nature of group interaction has been the topic of extensive research in social psychology and general education. In education, for example, there is a large volume of research on cooperative groups (see reviews by Johnson & Johnson, 1990Sharan, 1990;Slavin, 1990). This research has identified the essential elements of cooperative groups, the merits of cooperative learning, and how learners relate to each other within the groups and factors-such as academic status or gender-that affect these relations (e.g., Cohen, 1994).

Language awareness and language learning

“…The process of talking about and making explicit the workings of language requires learner interaction and engagement, the third feature in Borg's list. There is a body of LA research on the forms of learnerlearner interaction and its learning effects (Fortune & Thorp 2001;Storch 2002;Swain & Lapkin 2002) and also on teacher-learner interaction. In the curriculum outlined in van Lier (1996), awareness, autonomy, and authenticity are key notions, and learner engagement is central.…”

O diálogo colaborativo como ação potencial para a aprendizagem de línguas

“…Estudos de Storch (2001Storch ( , 2002 demonstram o quanto tarefas desenvolvidas entre pares podem auxiliar na aquisição de línguas, pois quando engajados em atividades interativas os aprendizes podem dar andaimento à atuação do outro. A pesquisadora fez uma investigação longitudinal para examinar a interação entre pares em um grupo de alunos adultos de inglês como L2.…”

“…Foi concluído que mais instâncias de aprendizado ocorreram entre os pares com orientação colaborativa do que entre aqueles com orientação não colaborativa (dominante/dominante e dominante/passivo). A autora percebeu que a falta de engajamento durante o diálogo nas duplas não-colaborativas resultou em erros individuais de produção não corrigidos (STORCH, 2002). Esses resultados foram confirmados pela pesquisa de Watanabe e Swain (2007), segundo a qual os pares com orientação colaborativa produziram menos erros e refletiram mais sobre sua produção na língua alvo.…”

Negotiation for Meaning and Feedback among Language Learners

“…The benefit of conversational interaction in the classroom has been a focus of research in the contexts of both nonnative speaker/native speaker (NNS/NS) interaction (e.g., Long, 1996;Oliver, 2000;Pica, 1994;Pica, Young, & Doughty, 1987;Swain, 2000) and nonnative speaker/nonnative speaker (NNS/NNS) interaction (e.g., Adams, 2007;Storch, 2002;Swain & Lapkin, 1998;Varonis & Gass 1985). One area of frequent focus is negotiation for meaning (henceforth NfM).…”

“…Research has been carried out exploring the question of the existence of NfM and its function and frequency (Foster, 1998;Foster & Ohta, 2005). Research has also considered the relationship between task types and the amount of NfM, as well as between the language proficiency of learners' speech partners and the amount of NfM the learners engage in (e.g., Ellis, 2003;Pica & Doughty, 1986;Storch, 2002). Long (1996) suggests that by causing learners to do the work of negotiation with native or more competent speakers, NfM triggers beneficial changes and results in a more effective language learning experience.…”