A Video-Conferencing English-Spanish eTandem Exchange: Negotiated Interaction and Acquisition
Issue: (0) Advance Access
Journal: CALICO Journal
This study analyzed eTandem video-conferencing exchanges between five pairs of university students of English as a foreign language (EFL) and Spanish as a foreign language (SFL). The exchanges, which involved discussion of seven tasks, took place on a weekly basis. Drawing on an interactionist perspective (Ellis et al., 2001a; Loewen, 2005), the study explored the impact of incidental noticing on subsequent language learning. Data were collected from two sources: transcripts of all the video-conferencing sessions and immediate and delayed post-tests. Drawing on Loewen’s (2005) framework of analysis, the transcripts revealed that students generated a total of 915 focus-on-form episodes (FFEs). As measured by the post-tests, participants recalled over half of the targeted FFE linguistic items. In contrast to previous studies (Loewen, 2005; Shekary & Tahririan, 2006), where successful uptake was a predictor for L2 learning, the present study revealed that the only significant predictor was deferred timing. More generally, the present study supports the claim that eTandem video-conferencing is a useful activity for promoting L2 acquisition.
Author: German Arellano-Soto, Susan Parks
Akiyama, Y. (2014). Using Skype to focus on form in Japanese telecollaboration: Lexical categories as a new task variable. In S. Li & P. Swanson (Eds.), English language learners through technology integration: Theory, applications, and outcomes (pp. 181-209). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Akiyama, Y., & Cunningham, D.R. (2017). Synthesizing the practice of SCMC-based telecollaboration: A scoping review. CALICO, 35, 49-76.
Akiyama, Y., & Saito, K. (2016). Development of comprehensibility and its linguistic correlates: A longitudinal study of video-mediated telecollaboration. The Modern Language Journal, 100(3), 585-609.
Arellano-Soto, G., & Parks, S. (in press). The role of multimodality during the negotiation of meaning in an English-Spanish eTandem videoconferencing exchange. Canadian Modern Language Review.
Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 120-136.
Brammerts, H. (1996). Language learning in tandem using the Internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawai’i symposium (pp.121-130). Honolulu, Hawai’i: University of Hawai’i.
Bower, J., & Kawaguchi, S. (2011). Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in a Japanese/English etandem. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 41-71.
Bueno-Alastuey, C. (2013). Interactional feedback in synchronous voice-based computer communication: Effect of dyad. System, 41, 543-550.
Cappellini, M. (2013). Co-construction des routines d’étayage dans un tandem franco-chinois par visioconference. In C. Dejean, F. Mangenot, E. Nissen, T. Soubrié (Eds.), Actes du colloque EPAL: Échanger pour apprendre en ligne (pp. 1-13). Grenoble, France: Université Grenoble.
Cappellini, M. (2016). Roles and scaffolding in teletandem interactions: A study of the relations between the sociocultural and the language learning dimensions in a French-Chinese teletandem. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 6-20.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001a). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281-318.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001b). Preemptive focus on form in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 407-432.
El-Hariri, Y. (2016). Learner perspectives on task design for oral-visual eTandem language learning. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 49-72.
Eslami, Z. R., & Kung, W-T. (2016). Focus-on-form and EFL learners’ language development in synchronous computer-mediated communication: Task-based interactions. The Language Learning Journal, 44(4), 401-417.
Flick, L. (2013). Motivating francophone ESL learners in Quebec: A pilot study on the potential role of etandem with anglophone peers in Ontario. Unpublished Master’s thesis. University of Ottawa. Canada.
Giguère, C., & Parks, S. (2018). Child-to-child interaction and corrective feedback during eTandem ESL-FSL chat exchange. Journal of Language Learning & Technology, 22(3), 176-192. http://www.lltjournal.org/item/3087
Guillén, G. (2014). Expanding the language classroom: Linguistic gains and learning opportunities through e-tandems and social networks. Doctoral dissertation. University of California, Davis, Davis, CA.
Janssen Sánchez, B. (2015). The dynamics of social interaction in telecollaborative tandem exchanges. Doctoral dissertation. University of Iowa.
Jefferson, G. (1984). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In. J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social interaction: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 364-369). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jepson, K. (2005). Conversations ─ and negotiated interaction ─ in text and voice chat rooms. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 79-98.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.
Little, D., & Brammerts, H. (Eds.). (1996). A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet. Trinity College, Dublin: Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
Loewen, S. (2004). Uptake and incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Language Learning, 54, 153-188.
Loewen, S. (2005). Incidental focus on form and second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 361-386.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
O'Dowd, R. (2015). Supporting in-service language educators in learning to telecllaborate. Language Learning & Technology, 19(1), 64-83. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2015/odowd.pdf
Parks, S., Huot, D., Hamers, J., & H.-Lemonnier, F. (2005). "History of theatre" web sites: A brief history of the writing process in a high school ESL languge arts class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 233-258.
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2000). Approches interactionnistes de l'acquisition des langues étrangères. AIKE, 12, 1-15. Available at file:///C:/Users/separ2/AppData/Local/Temp/aile-934.pdf
Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Theory and practice of network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Priego, S. (2011). Helping each other: Scaffolding in electronic tandem language learning. The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society, 7(2), 133-152.
Ramos, K.A.H.P., & Carvalho, K.C.H.P. (2018). Portuguese and Spanish teletandem: The role of mediators. Teletandem Portugués y Español: El papel de los Mediadores. Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J., 20(1), 35-48.
Shekary, M., & Tahririan, M.H. (2006). Negotiation of meaning and noticing in text-based online chat, The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 557-573.
Schwienhorst, L. (2000). Virtual reality and learner autonomy in second language acquisition. Unpublished manuscript, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Smith, B. (2004). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction and lexical acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 365-398.
Smith, B. (2005). The relationship between negotiated interaction, learner uptake, and lexical acquisition in task-based computer-mediated communication. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 33-58.
Sotillo, S.M. (2005). Corrective feedback via Instant Messenger learning activities in NS-NNS and NNS-NNS dyads. CALICO Journal, 22, 467-496.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-337.
Tian, J., & Wang, J. (2010). Taking language learning outside the classroom: Learners’ perspectives of etandem learning via Skype. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 181-197.
van der Zwaard, R., & Bannink, A. (2014). Video call or chat? Negotiation of meaning and issues of face in telecollaboration. System, 44, 137-148.
Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation. Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 71-90.
Vinagre, M., & Muñoz, B. (2011). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and language accuracy in telecollaborative exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 72-103.
Ware, P., & O'Dowd. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43-63.
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-340.
Yang, S. (2018). Language learners' perceptions of having two interactional contexts in eTandem learning experiences. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 42-51.
Yang, S.J., & Yi, T. (2017). Negotiating multiple identities through eTandem learning experiences. Calico Journal, 34(1), 97-114.
Yanguas, I. (2010). Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: It's about time! Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 72-93.
Yanguas, I., & Begin, T. (2018). Focus on form in task-based L2 oral computer-mediated communication. Language Learning & Technology, 22(3), 65-81.
Zakir, M.A., Funo, L.B.A., & Telles, J.A. (2016). Focusing on culture-related episodes in a teletandem interaction between a Brazilian and an American student. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 21-33.