Age Differences in Negotiation and Feedback in Classroom and Pairwork

Abstract

This study examines whether differences exist in the provision and use of negative feedback, according to the age of the learners and the context of the interaction. The data were collected from 20 classrooms (10 adult and 10 child ESL classes) and 32 NS-NNS dyads (16 adult and 16 child). Transcriptions of these formed the basis of analysis and were coded to reflect three parts of the conversational exchange and the interactional patterns to which these could be assigned. The results showed that learners both received negative feedback in response to their nontargetlike utterances and used this feedback. Further, the findings indicated that the age of the learners and context of the exchanges did indeed affect the pattern of interaction. Negative feedbackAlthough the necessity for input in the process of second language acquisition (SLA) is well accepted, the form that it needs

Negotiation for Meaning and Feedback among Language Learners

“…Lyster (1998) argues that recasts (yes/no questions functioning as a confirmation check), which are mostly used by teachers rather than learners, do not lead to negotiation and are not as effective in promoting language learning as teachers expect. In a similar vein to Lyster's (1998) analysis of contexts, Oliver (2000) identifies some cases of negative feedback through NfM and establishes how negative feedback is utilized by learners in ways that vary by age and context. He considers interaction patterns contextually (teacher-fronted lessons vs. pair-work tasks) and concludes that negative feedback occurs in both contexts, and that young learners especially tend to use this feedback in their subsequent utterances.…”

“…Signals (or as Long calls them "negotiation strategies") such as repetitions, clarification requests, confirmation checks, and recasts are examples of negative feedback (Long, 1996;Oliver 2000). When there is a communication breakdown, negative feedback can be implemented explicitly through overt error correction or implicitly through NfM strategies (Long, 1996).…”

“…Prior examples of negotiation work (Foster, 1998;Long, 1996;Oliver, 2000;Pica, 1994) are limited in their scope to lexis, phrases, and syntax. In these cases, acts of NfM aimed to resolve problems related to these aspects of language, as learners' ungrammatical utterances were followed by feedback in the form of implicit corrections (negotiation strategies such as clarification requests, as in (3), (4) and confirmation checks, as in (2)).…”

“…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).…”

The acquisition of pedagogical expertise in dance : a constraints-led approach

“…The above explanation suggests that Alexis and Elvira's preferences in teaching adults might not be dependent on their assumptions that adults might have tendencies to be more interactive and, therefore, more creative, than children. Their preferences might be influenced by specific task goals directly dependent on adults' specific interactive capabilities, which seemed to be different from children's interactive capabilities (Oliver, 2000).…”