In:Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda
Edited by Masatoshi Sato and Susan Ballinger
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 45] 2016
► pp. 91–112
3. Interaction or collaboration? Group dynamics in the foreign language classroom
Published online: 10 March 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.04sat
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.04sat
This chapter reports on a classroom-based quasi-experimental study examining the relationship between interactional moves and collaborative patterns in peer interaction and their effect on L2 development, using proficiency as an independent variable. Participants were from two parallel Grade 10 English classes in Chile, divided into low and high proficiency classes by the school (N = 53). A series of communicative group work activities were designed and implemented during the regular classes. L2 development was investigated by examining past tense usage and vocabulary size. Focus groups from the two classes (n = 10) were used for analyses of interactional features. Results indicated that learners in the low proficiency group (a) provided more corrective feedback and produced more modified output, (b) engaged in more collaborative interaction, and (c) exhibited a greater L2 development, than the high proficiency group. In order to interpret the results and conceptualize the links among interaction-collaboration-learning, the findings are discussed in relation to a theory in social psychology referred to as social interdependence theory. It is concluded that while proficiency does have an impact on learners’ interactional behaviours, a collaborative mindset – a learner’s psychological approach towards the partner and/or task – may be a stronger mediating factor for L2 development.
References (68)
Adams, R., Nuevo, A., & Egi, T. (2011). Explicit and implicit feedback, modified output, and SLA: Does explicit and implicit feedback promote learning and learner-learner interactions? Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 42–63.
Alcón, E. (2002). Relationship between teacher-led versus learners’ interaction and the development of pragmatics in the EFL classroom. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(4), 359–377.
Alexander, O. (2012). Exploring teacher beliefs in teaching EAP at low proficiency levels. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(1), 99–111.
Ballinger, S. (2013). Towards a cross-linguistic pedagogy: Biliteracy and reciprocal learning strategies in French immersion. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 131–148.
Berns, M. (1990). ‘Second’ and ‘foreign’ in second language acquisition/foreign language learning: A sociolinguistic perspective. In B. VanPatten & J. Lee (Eds.), Second language acquisition/Foreign language learning (pp. 3–11). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Davin, K., & Donato, R. (2013). Student collaboration and teacher-directed classroom dynamic assessment: A complementary pairing. Foreign Language Annals, 46(1), 5–22.
DeKeyser, R. (2010). Practice for second language learning: Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. International Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 155–165.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Dörnyei, Z., & Malderez, A. (1997). Group dynamics and foreign language learning. System, 25(1), 65–81.
Farías, M., & Abrahams, M. (2008). Innovation and change in the Chilean ITT curriculum for teachers of English.
II Latin American Congress on Language Teacher Education (II CLAFPL)
, 26–29.
Fernández Dobao, A.F. (2012). Collaborative dialogue in learner–learner and learner–native speaker interaction. Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 229–256.
Foster, P., & Ohta, A. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 402–430.
Gagné, N., & Parks, S. (2013). Cooperative learning tasks in a Grade 6 intensive ESL class: Role of scaffolding. Language Teaching Research, 17(2), 188–209.
Galaczi, E. (2008). Peer-peer interaction in a speaking test: The case of the First Certificate in English Examination. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(2), 89–119.
García Mayo, M., & Pica, T. (2000). L2 learner interaction in a foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 38(1), 35–58.
García Mayo, M.P, & Azkarai, A. (2016). EFL task-based interaction: Does task modality impact on language-related episodes? In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 241–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gillies, R., Ashman, A., & Terwel, J. (Eds.). (2008). The teacher’s role in implementing cooperative learning in the classroom. New York, NY: Springer.
Guk, I., & Kellogg, D. (2007). The ZPD and whole class teaching: Teacher-led and student-led interactional mediation of tasks. Language Teaching Research, 11(3), 281–299.
Hulstijn, J., Young, R., Ortega, L., Bigelow, M., DeKeyser, R., Ellis, N., Lantolf, J., Mackey, A., & Talmy, S. (2014). Bridging the gap: Cognitive and social approaches to research in second language learning and teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36, 1–61.
Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional moves and modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as a foreign language. System, 29(2), 267–287.
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379.
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 211–234.
King, S. (Writer) & Darabont, F. (Director). (1994). The shawshank redemption [Motion picture]. United States of America: Columbia Pictures.
Kormos, J., & Kiddle, T. (2013). The role of socio-economic factors in motivation to learn English as a foreign language: The case of Chile. System, 41(2), 399–412.
Lantolf, J.P, & Poehner, M.E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33.
Leeser, M. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55–81.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lyster, R., & Sato, M. (2013). Skill acquisition theory and the role of practice in L2 development. In M. García Mayo, J. Gutierrez-Mangado, & M.M. Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 71–92). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McDonough, K. (2004). Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities in a Thai EFL context. System, 32(2), 207–224.
McDonough, K., & Chaikitmongkol, W. (2010). Collaborative syntactic priming activities and EFL learners’ production of wh-questions. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(6), 817–841.
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2008). Syntactic priming and ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(1), 31–47.
McKay, S. (2003). Teaching English as an International Language: The Chilean context. ELT Journal, 57(2), 139–148.
Nihalani, P., Wilson, H., Thomas, G., & Robinson, D. (2010). What determines high- and low- performing groups? The superstar effect. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(3), 500–529.
Ohta, A. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Philp, J., Adams, R., & Iwashita, N. (2014). Peer interaction and second language learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
Philp, J., & Tognini, R. (2009). Language acquisition in foreign language contexts and the differential benefits of interaction. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(3-4), 245–266.
Philp, J., Walter, S., & Basturkmen, H. (2010). Peer interaction in the foreign language classroom: What factors foster a focus on form? Language Awareness, 19(4), 261–279.
Pica, T. (2013). From input, output and comprehension to negotiation, evidence, and attention: An overview of theory and research on learner interaction and SLA. In M. García Mayo, J. Gutierrez-Mangado, & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp. 49–69). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30(1), 59–84.
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The Awareness-Practice-Feedback sequence. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspective from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 141–160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Riazi, A.M, & Candlin, C.N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning: Opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2), 135–173.
Roseth, C., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2008). Promoting early adolescents’ achievement and peer relationships: The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 223–246.
Salaberry, M.R. (2000). The acquisition of English past tense in an instructional setting. System, 28(1), 135–152.
Sato, M. (2015). Density and complexity of oral production in interaction: The interactionist approach and an alternative. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53(3), 307–329.
. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633.
. (2011). Constitution of form-orientation: Contributions of context and explicit knowledge to learning from recasts. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 1–28.
. (2007). Social relationships in conversational interaction: A comparison between learner-learner and learner-NS dyads. JALT Journal, 29(2), 183–208.
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (2012). Raising language awareness in peer interaction: A cross-context, cross-method examination. Language Awareness, 21(1-2), 157–179.
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591–262.
. (2007). Modified output of Japanese EFL learners: Variable effects of interlocutor vs. feedback types. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 123–142). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. (2011). Collaborative writing in L2 contexts: Processes, outcomes, and future directions. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 275–288.
Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2013). Pairing learners in pair work activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31–48.
Stæhra, L. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139–152.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 285–304.
. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337.
Toth, P. (2008). Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning, 58(2), 237–283.
Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 71–90.
Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121–142.
Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(1), 89–100.
Yoshida, R. (2008). Learners’ perception of corrective feedback in pair work. Foreign Language Annals, 41(3), 525–541.
. (2013). Conflict between learners’ beliefs and actions: Speaking in the classroom. Language Awareness, 22(4), 371–388.
Young, A., & Tedick, D. (2016). Collaborative dialogue in a two-way Spanish/English immersion classroom: Does heterogeneous grouping promote peer linguistic scaffolding? In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 135–160). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by (28)
Cited by 28 other publications
Nieva-Marroquín, María, María Martínez-Adrián & María Basterrechea
Aksoy-Pekacar, Kadriye
Dao, Phung, Suong Thi Thu Hoang & Mai Xuan Nhat Chi Nguyen
Spinelli, Franciele
Storch, Neomy
Tajabadi, Azar, Moussa Ahmadian, Hamidreza Dowlatabadi & Hooshang Yazdani
Tosun, Sibel & Nuray Alagözlü
Groepper, Emily
Sato, Masatoshi & Neomy Storch
Dao, Phung & Masatoshi Sato
Iwashita, Noriko & Phung Dao
Calzada, Asier & María del Pilar García Mayo
2020. Child EFL grammar learning through a collaborative writing
task. In Languaging in Language Learning and Teaching [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 55], ► pp. 19 ff.
McDonough, Kim, Pavel Trofimovich, Phung Dao & Dato Abashidze
Sippel, Lieselotte
Storch, Neomy & Masatoshi Sato
Crawford, William J., Kim McDonough & Nicole Brun‐Mercer
Leeming, Paul
Leeming, Paul
Sydorenko, Tetyana, John Hellermann, Steven L. Thorne & Vanessa Howe
Loewen, Shawn & Masatoshi Sato
Sato, Masatoshi
Bigelow, Martha & Kendall A. King
2016. 13. Peer interaction while learning to read in a new language. In Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 45], ► pp. 349 ff.
Choi, Hyunsik & Noriko Iwashita
2016. 4. Interactional behaviours of low-proficiency learners in small group work. In Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 45], ► pp. 113 ff.
McDonough, Kim, William J. Crawford & Jindarat De Vleeschauwer
2016. 7. Thai EFL learners’ interaction during collaborative writing tasks and its relationship to text quality. In Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 45], ► pp. 185 ff.
Moranski, Kara & Paul D. Toth
2016. 11. Small-group meta-analytic talk and Spanish L2 development. In Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 45], ► pp. 291 ff.
Philp, Jenefer
2016. New pathways in researching interaction. In Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 45], ► pp. 377 ff.
Young, Amy I. & Diane J. Tedick
2016. 5. Collaborative dialogue in a two-way Spanish/English immersion classroom. In Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 45], ► pp. 135 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
