A Sociocultural Perspective: Seeking Evidence of Development in a PACE Approach to Grammar Instruction

Abstract

Situated within Sociocultural theory (SCT), this article analyzed an existing data set (Toth, 2021a(Toth, , 2021b(Toth, , 2021c, available at https://www.iris-database.org) to investigate learners' development through participation in a dialogic approach to grammar instruction called PACE. The target of instruction was the Spanish pronominal clitic se. Microgenetic analysis of the interaction between the teacher and learners was used to track two students' development during both small-group work and whole-class instruction. To analyze the process of development, evidence of obuchenie (i.e., teaching-learning activity) that preceded changes in each learner's performance was sought. These findings were compared to the two students' performance on a pre-, post-and delayed-intervention picture description task. Findings highlight the instances of mediation that promoted students' metalinguistic awareness and use of se. The article concludes with a discussion of the extent to which claims of development could be made based on the provided data set and considerations of the affordances of dialogic versus deductive explanations of grammar. Keywords mediation; zone of proximal development; obuchenie; instructional conversations; conceptsWe would like to thank Paul Toth for the invitation to take part in this special issue, for sharing his meticulous data set, and for his many insights and contributions to our analysis and manuscript. We would also like to thank Richard Donato, Próspero García, and participants at the 2019 Sociocultural Theory and L2 Learning Working Group, whose ideas and mediation shaped this manuscript.

Exploring “Intersubjectivity Negotiation Episodes” and “Language Related Episodes” in Second‐Language Peer Interaction

“…Because our aim is to qualitatively document learners’ negotiation over L2 communication in the tasks rather than the grammatical accuracy of their outcomes, we will explore two learner groups in each class without considering the impact of their contrasting grammar presentations beyond their respective time spent in INEs and LREs. (See Azkarai et al., 2022, and Davin & Kushki, 2022, for qualitative analyses of accurate LRE outcomes; and see Juffs & Fang, 2022, and Moranski & Zalbidea, 2022, for quantitative analyses of all PACE vs. deductive classes in the data set overall. )…”

Context and Generalizability in Multisite L2 Classroom Research: The Impact of Deductive Versus Guided Inductive Instruction

“…Although beginner-and intermediate-level learners may encode some exemplars as lexical chunks (Ellis, 2002;Zyzik, 2006), as noted earlier, the complexity of the accompanying grammar explanations for se represent a departure from previous research. Due to its bottom-up reasoning procedures, the explicit information derived from PACE co-construction strategies may have been less clear and therefore less effective as a guide for L2 use than deductively provided information (see also studies by Park, 2022, andDavin &Kushki, 2022, for additional qualitative evidence).…”

Process and Product in ISLA Research: Courage, Commitment, and Tolerance for Ambiguity

“…The four process articles summarized above can be seen as complements to the findings from the product analyses: we gain a greater understanding of the challenges of guiding learners during co‐construction, of predicting what kind of language use will happen during learning tasks, and of the need to address broader goals for second language programs. The last article by Davin and Kushki (2022), provides insights about teaching, the learning process, and learning outcomes, all from the perspective of sociocultural theory (SCT). In Table 1, I grouped this article with the process studies because it focuses on two learners only and provides detailed analysis of excerpts of interaction.…”

“…Through reading these articles, I have expanded my understanding and appreciation of some approaches that I had never used in my own research activities. Particularly illuminating for my own understanding was Davin and Kushki's (2022) discussion of how Toth's original research design and the types of data collected did not align closely with the current theoretical assumptions of the SCT paradigm, which in turn affected what kind of analysis could be done. Moreover, Davin and Kushki draw attention to the fact that theory development has been evolving with respect to SCT and to the pedagogy of PACE.…”

“…Although the two product-oriented studies can inform us about the relative effects of deduction vs. guided induction, the process-oriented studies (Table 1) illuminate what happened in the black box. As Table 1 shows, most of the process-oriented studies focused on the data from Walton School; two studies compared the PACE and the Deductive groups at that school (Azkarai et al, 2022;Toth & Gil-Berrio, 2022) and three focused on data from the PACE class only (Davin & Kushki, 2022;Mattson-Prieto & Showstack, 2022;Wagner & Park, 2022). The researchers also varied with regard to their use of quantitative or qualitative methods.…”