The current study examines the impact of pretask modelling on the collaborative learning opportunities that occurred when Korean learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) carried out three tasks: dictogloss, decision-making, and information-gap. Forty-four adolescents who were enrolled in a required English course at a middle school in Korea completed the tasks over a two-week period. Half of the learners viewed videotaped models of collaborative interaction prior to carrying out the tasks, while the other learners did not receive pretask modelling. The interaction between the learners was analysed in terms of the type and resolution of language related episodes (LREs) and the learners’ pair dynamics. Results indicated that learners who received pretask modelling produced more LREs and correctly resolved a greater proportion of those LREs than learners who did not receive any models. They also demonstrated more collaborative pair dynamics than learners who did not receive models. Trends in the data are discussed in terms of the potential benefits of pretask modelling for encouraging collaboration between young learners in EFL settings.
Adams, R. ( 2007). Do second language learners benefit from interacting with each other? In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 29-51). Oxford : Oxford University Press.
2.
Alcón Soler, E. & García Mayo, M. ( 2008). Incidental focus on form and learning outcomes with young foreign language classroom learners. In J. Philp, R. Oliver, & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner: Child’s play? (pp. 173-92). Amsterdam : John Benjamins.
3.
Alegría de la Colina, A. & García Mayo, M. (2007). Attention to form across collaborative tasks by low-proficiency learners in an EFL setting. In M. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 91-116).
4.
Antón, M. & DiCamilla, F. ( 1999). Socio-cognitive functions of Ll collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 233-47.
5.
Boston, J.S. ( 2008). Learner mining of pre-task and task-input. ELT Journal, 62, 66-76.
6.
Bouffard, L. & Sarkar, M. ( 2008). Training 8-Year-Old French immersion students in metalinguistic analysis: An innovation in form-focused pedagogy. Language Awareness, 17, 3-24.
7.
Brooks, F.B. & Donato, R. ( 1994). Vygotskyan approaches to understanding foreign language learner discourse during communicative tasks. Hispania, 77, 262-74.
8.
Carless, D. ( 2003). Factors in the implementation of task-based teaching in primary schools. System, 31, 485-500.
9.
Ellis, R. ( 2003). Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foster, P. ( 1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning . Applied Linguistics, 19, 1-23.
10.
García Mayo, M.P. ( 2002). The effectiveness of two form-focused tasks in advanced EFL pedagogy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics , 12, 156-75.
11.
Kim, Y. ( 2008). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 58, 285-325.
12.
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, 211-34.
13.
Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Smith, M. ( 2002). Reformulation and the learning of French pronominal verbs in a Canadian French immersion context. Modern Language Journal , 86, 485-507.
14.
Leeser, M.J. ( 2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8, 55-81.
15.
McDonough, K. ( 2004). Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities in a Thai EFL context. System, 32, 207-24.
16.
McDonough, K. & Sunitham, W. ( 2009). Collaborative dialogue between Thai EFL learners during self-access computer activities. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 231-54.
17.
Newton, J. ( 1991). Options for vocabulary learning through communication tasks. ELT Journal, 55, 30-37.
18.
Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. ( 2006). The impact of planning time on children’s task-based interactions. System, 34, 547-65.
19.
Pica, T. & Doughty, C. ( 1985). The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition . Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 233-48.
20.
Slimani-Rolls, A. ( 2005). Rethinking task-based language learning: What we can learn from the learners. Language Teaching Research, 9, 195-218.
21.
Storch, N. ( 2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 5, 29-53.
22.
Storch, N. ( 2002a). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52, 119-58.
23.
Storch, N. ( 2002b). Relationships formed in dyadic interaction and opportunity for learning. International Journal of Educational Research , 37, 305-22.
24.
Storch, N. ( 2008). Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness , 17, 95-114.
25.
Storch, N. & Wigglesworth, G. ( 2003). Is there a role for the use of the L1 in an L2 setting ? TESOL Quarterly, 37, 760-70.
26.
Suzuki, W. & Itagaki, N. ( 2007). Learner metalinguistic reflections following output-oriented and reflective activities. Language Awareness, 16, 131-46.
27.
Swain, M. ( 1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64-81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. ( 1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-37.
29.
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. ( 2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251-74.
30.
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. ( 2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks (pp. 99-118). Harlow : Longman.
31.
Tocalli-Beller, A. & Swain, M. ( 2007). Riddles and puns in the ESL classroom: Adults talk to learn. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 143-67). Oxford : Oxford University Press.
32.
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, 121-42.
33.
Watanabe, Y. & Swain, M. ( 2008). Perception of learner proficiency: Its impact on the interaction between an ESL learner and her higher and lower proficiency partners . Language Awareness, 17, 115-30.
34.
Williams, J. ( 1999). Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, 51, 303-46.
35.
Williams, J. ( 2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-40.
36.
Willis, D. & Willis, J. ( 2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
37.
Zhao, S. & Bitchener, J. ( 2007). Incidental focus on form in teacher-learner and learner-learner interactions. System, 35, 431-47.
