Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue

Abstract

One of the challenges in content-based instruction in second language classrooms is how to focus on form in a way that is both effective and appropriate. The use of collaborative tasks that push learners to consciously reflect on their own language use (i.e., produce ‘language-related episodes’) while conveying meaning has been proposed as one way to accomplish this goal. Studies investigating the use of collaborative tasks that encourage learners to produce language-related episodes (LREs) have been shown to affect positively L2 development. However, little is known about how the proficiency of each dyad member affects how and how much dyads produce LREs during collaborative tasks. Therefore, the study reported in this article investigated how grouping learners by their relative proficiency (high-high, high-low, or low-low) affected the amount, type (lexical or grammatical) and outcome (correct, unresolved, or incorrect) of LREs produced during a passage reconstruction task, completed by twenty-one pairs of adult L2 Spanish learners from a content-based course. The findings revealed that the proficiency of the dyad members affected how much the dyads focused on form, the types of forms they focused on as well as how successful they were at resolving the language problems they encountered.

EFL/ESL Learners’ Language Related Episodes (LREs) during Performing Collaborative Writing Tasks

“…The study also found that learners fro m h igher proficiency levels may be more likely to have more metatalk and to reach more correct resolutions to their linguistic problems during collaborative engagements compared to their less proficient counterparts. Leeser (2004) similarly investigated the effect of proficiency on the occurrence and the outcome of the LREs in an EFL context (i.e., Spain). Ten L2 learners were assigned into five dyads; two of the dyads included pairs of h ig h proficiency (two high-high); t wo of the dyads included pairs of low p roficiency (two low -lo w).…”

Analysing the Characteristics of a Pair Talk on an Editing Task on Two Intermediate Indonesian Learners of English

“…In addition, LREs were also coded the outcome of the talk as correct/acceptable, incorrect/unacceptable, or unresolved (Leeser, 2004 …”

“…A study conducted by Leeser (2004) investigated how the different proficiency had an impact on learner proficiency towards the production of LREs (Storch, 2007). This study revealed that higher proficient learners were able to produce more LREs compared to their lower counterparts.…”

How Proficiency-Pairing Affects Students’ Peer-Mediated Revisions of EFL Writing: Three Case Studies

“…It is noteworthy that although students may usually be paired with classmates of similar or different proficiency levels in a L2 writing class, the research investigating the impact of proficiency-pairing in L2 writing remains scant, and most of the research on peer dyads in either L2 writing or language learning in general mainly focused on the process of peer interactions, with little attention paid to the effects of those interactions on students' subsequent draft revisions (e.g., Leeser, 2004;Lockhart & Ng, 1995;Nelson & Murphy, 1993;Storch, 1998Storch, , 2002aStorch, , 2002bStorch, , 2005aStorch, , 2005bStorch, , 2007aStorch, , 2007bStorch & Aldosari, 2013;Watanabe, 2008;Watanabe & Swain, 2007). Earlier studies like Lockhart and Ng (1995), Nelson and Murphy (1993), and Storch (2002a) examined the types of student interactions that were likely to result in students' incorporation of a higher percentage of peer response into their draft revisions.…”