No abstract

Vygotsky's concept of zone of proximal development and its related scaffolding metaphor serve as the theoretical basis for the study of peer collaboration in the English as a Second Language (ESL) writing classroom. The purpose of the study was to observe the mechanisms by which strategies of revision take shape and develop in the interpsychological space created when 2 learners are working in their respective ZPDs. A microgenetic approach was adopted to analyze the interaction produced by 2 intermediate ESL college students (a "reader" and a "writer") as they worked collaboratively in revising a narrative text written by one of them. Although in the first half of the revision session the reader played a crucial role as mediator, both reader and writer became active partners in the revision task with guided support moving reciprocally between each other. In general, results showed that in second language (L2) peer revision scaffolding may be mutual rather than unidirectional. (1978, 1986) concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) serves as the theoretical basis for the study of peer collaboration in the English as a Second Language (ESL) writing classroom. The ZPD concept has been used in conjunction with the notion of scaffolding, which refers to those supportive behaviors by which an expert can help a novice learner achieve higher levels of regulation. In this study, we wanted to alter the typical novice-expert ZPD scenario by bringing together 2 novice writers in a revision task. In particular, we wanted to observe the mechanisms by which strategies of revision take shape and develop in the interpsychological space created when 2 learners are working in their respective ZPDs. A microgenetic approach-one in which momentto-moment changes in the participants' behavior are noted and examined-was used in order to analyze the interaction generated by 2 intermediate ESL college students as they worked collaboratively in revising a text. IN THIS ARTICLE, VYGOTSKY'S

The use of metaphor is widespread among language teachers and in language learning theory. Metaphors also play a significant role as vehicles for reflection and awareness raising among educators. This study, framed within a socio-cultural theory approach, explored the basic conceptualizations of ESL teaching and learning reflected in metaphorical representations of an ESL teacher. Nine distinct conceptual metaphors for an ESL teacher (co-operative leader, provider of knowledge, challenger/agent of change, nurturer, innovator, provider of tools, artist, repairer, gym instructor) with entailed views of the ESL learner and the teaching/learning processes emerged. Appropriation of various theoretical models of language learning was observed in the participants' metaphors.

INTERACTION HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS an important factor in second language (L2) acquisition (9; 17).1 Research has focused on several variables of interaction: task type (13), teacher participation (27), nature of input (17), and negotiation strategies (22). Some recent studies (1; 2; 19; 26), however, have pointed out the need to look at the social relationships that characterize learner/learner and teacher/ learner L2 discourse and how these might affect the learning of the L2. We believe that Vygotskyan psycholinguistics (19;20;30;36;38; 39), a theoretical framework originated by the work of Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky (34; 35), offers an ideal model for studying the interrelatedness of the social and cognitive aspects of interactive discourse. We are particularly interested in applying a Vygotskyan social-cognitive2 perspective to the analysis of interaction during peer revision in the L2 writing classroom.Peer revision, peer response, or peer tutoring-however one may choose to call it-has long been advocated as an effective writing technique, both in first language (Ll) (4; 14; 18; 32) and L2 classrooms (6; 16; 29; 33). Relatively few studies have investigated what actually occurs between students as they gather to talk critically about a writing piece. Freedman examined peer talk in two ninth-grade L1 English classrooms and found a wide variety of behaviors and types of interaction within response groups, for example, talk based on response sheets, spontaneous discussion of content, avoidance of negative evaluation, and self-The Modern Language Journal, 78, iv (1994) 01994 The Modern Language Journal 0026-7902/94/484-496 $1.50/0 response during reading, among others. In the L2 writing classroom, Mangelsdorf and Schlumberger looked at how freshman university students actually responded to other students' writings during peer review sessions. These researchers focused primarily on whether the student readers adopted an "interpretive," a "prescriptive," or a "collaborative" stance toward the student writers. Nelson and Murphy, using a case study approach, also explored the task and social dimensions of a four-membered university peer writing group from an L2 perspective.The results showed social dynamics that were more complex and less ideal than generally believed, as evidenced by the presence of some rather undesirable behaviors among the students, such as attacking and reacting negatively to critical comments.In their review of research on peer response groups, Di Pardo and Freedman suggest using the Vygotskyan perspective for the analysis of peer interaction in the writing class. Vygotsky's theory of cognitive development (34; 35) seems especially apt for this type of analysis because of its insistence on the social origin of language and thought. According to Vygotsky, higher psychological operations are first exercised and learned in social interaction through the medium of language. Vygotsky's concept of "zone of proximal development,"3 in particular, clearly suggests that communicative collabor...

No abstract