Cover not available
Part of
Second Language Acquisition Theory: The legacy of Professor Michael H. Long
Edited by Alessandro G. Benati and John W. Schwieter
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 14] 2022
► pp. 113–126

Chapter 6
Tandem interaction enhancement

Manipulating NS-NNS semi-spontaneous conversation to promote focus on form

| Università Roma Tre, Italy
This chapter discusses the applicability of the construct of focus on form, one of Michael Long’s most prominent contributions to the field of instructed second language acquisition, in the very particular context of tandem learning. In tandem interactions, two partners learning each other’s language assume in turn the role of the native-speaker teacher. These low-structured learning environments would benefit from the implementation of focus-on-form pedagogical procedures including, but not limited to, corrective feedback. An external manipulation on the part of the tandem organizer, which I call ‘interaction enhancement’, is needed to push the partners to systematically and confidently apply focus-on-form techniques to their exchanges.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Tandem learning contexts
  • 3.Focus on form
  • 4.Interaction enhancement
  • 5.Empirical evidence and further research
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 11 August 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.14.06nuz
References (57)
References
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.), Engaging language learners through technology integration: Theory, applications, and outcomes (pp. 181–209). IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System, 64, 58–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belz, J. (2006). At the intersection of telecollaboration, learner corpus analysis, and L2 pragmatics: Considerations for language program direction. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 207–246). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Bower, J. & Kawaguchi, S. (2011). Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese/English eTandem. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 41–71.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar
Brammerts, H. (1996). Language learning in tandem using the internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 121–130). University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Brammerts, H., & Calvert, M. (2003). Learning by communicating in tandem. In T. Lewis & L. Walker (Eds.), Autonomous language learning in tandem (pp. 45–59). Academy Electronic Publications.Google Scholar
Debras, C., Horgues, C., & Scheuer, S. (2015). The multimodality of corrective feedback in tandem interactions. In S. Molina-Plaza (Ed.), Multimodal communication in the 21st Century: Professional and academic challenges. Procedia: Social and Behavioural Sciences, 212, 16–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 256–310). Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–261). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dussias, P. E. (2006). Morphological development in Spanish-American telecollaboration. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 121–146). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Giguère, C., & Parks, S. (2018). Child-to-child interaction and corrective feedback during eTandem ESL–FSL chat exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 22(3), 176–192.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar
Helmling, B. (2002). L’apprentissage autonome des languages en tandem [Autonomous language learning in tandem]. Didier.Google Scholar
Hilton, H. E. (2020). A psycholinguistic perspective on “tandem learning” in the foreign language classroom. In C. Tardieu & C. Horgues (Eds.), Redefining tandem language and culture learning in higher education (pp. 46–59). Routledge.Google Scholar
Horgues, C., & Scheuer, S. (2015). Why some things are better done in tandem? In J. A. Mompean & J. Fouz-Gonzalez (Eds.), Investigating English pronunciation: Current trends and directions (pp. 47–82). Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hylthenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2022). The ‘nativelikeness paradigm’ in CPH research. In A. G. Benati & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory: The legacy of professor Michael Long. John Benjamins. (this volume).Google Scholar
Kessler, G. (2009). Student-initiated attention to form in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 79–95.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar
Kramsch, C. (2009). The multilingual subject. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2014). Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization. Introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 98(1): 296–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
La Russa, F., & Nuzzo, E. (2021). Peer corrective feedback as an opportunity for metalinguistic reflection in tandem telecollaboration. EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages, 8(2), 87–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, L. (2006). A study of native and nonnative speakers’ feedback and responses in Spanish-American networked collaborative interaction. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 147–176). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
(2008). Focus-on-form through collaborative scaffolding in expert-to-novice online interaction. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 53–72.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar
(2011). Focus-on-form through peer feedback in a Spanish – American telecollaborative exchange. Language Awareness, 20(4), 343–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, T. (2020). From tandem learning to e-tandem learning: How languages are learnt in tandem exchanges. In S. Gola, M. Pierrard, E. Tops, & D. Van Raemdonck (Eds.), Enseigner et apprendre les langues au XXIe siècle. Méthodes alternatives et nouveaux dispositifs d’accompagnement. Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Little, M., & Brammerts, H. (1996). A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet (CLCS Occasional Paper 46). Trinity College, Center for Communication and Language Studies.Google Scholar
Little, D., Ushioda, E., Appel, M. C., Moran, J., O’Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K. (1999). Evaluating tandem language learning by e-mail: Report on a bilateral project (CLCS Occasional Paper 55, pp. 1–54). Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018). Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 51(3), 285–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In L. M. Beebe (Ed.), Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives (pp. 115–141). HarperCollins.Google Scholar
(1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, C. Kramsch, & R. Ginsburg (Eds.), Foreign language research in a cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Emerald.Google Scholar
(2009). Methodological principles in language teaching. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 373–394). Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M. H., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 27–56. Reprinted in K. Van den Branden, M. Bygate, & J. M. Norris (Eds.), Task Based Language Teaching: A reader (pp. 57–81). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp. 15–41). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Muñoz, B. (2008). Análisis y corrección de errores en un intercambio tandem español-alemán a través del correo electrónico (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad Nebrija, Madrid.
Muranoi, H. (2000). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 50(4), 617–673. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nuzzo, E., & Cortés Velásquez, D. (2021). Minding the gap: A small-scale study on negotiation of form in telecollaborative tasks. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 232–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, R. (2021). Virtual exchange: Moving forward into the next decade. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 209–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, R., Sauro, S., & Spector-Cohen, E. (2020). The role of pedagogical mentoring in virtual exchange. TESOL Quarterly, 54(1), 146–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Rourke, B. (2005). Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 433–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reymond, C., & Tardieu, C. (2001). Guide tandem pour l’apprentissage des langues en binôme dans le secondaire. IUFM et CRDP de l’académie de Haute-Normandie/CNDP, Coll. Chemin faisant.Google Scholar
Saito, K., & Akiyama, Y. (2017). Video-based interaction, negotiation for comprehensibility, and second language speech learning: A longitudinal study. Language Learning, 67(1), 43–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Suzuki, S., Oyama, T., & Akiyama, Y. (2021). How does longitudinal interaction promote second language speech learning? Roles of learner experience and proficiency levels. Second Language Research, 37(4), 547–571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sauro, S. (2009). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 96–120.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar
Scheuer, S., & Horgues, C. (2020). Corrective feedback in English/French spoken tandem interactions. In C. Tardieu & C. Horgues (Eds.), Redefining tandem language and culture learning in higher education (pp. 146–160). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Sotillo, M. S. (2005). Corrective feedback via instant messenger learning activities in NS-NNS and NNS-NNS dyads. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 467–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sotillo, S. M. (2006). Using instant messaging for collaborative learning: A case study. Journal of Online Education, 2(3). Retrieved on 9 August 2021 from [URL]
Tardieu, C., & Horgues, C. (2020a). Introduction. In C. Tardieu & C. Horgues (Eds.), Redefining tandem language and culture learning in higher education (pp. 1–12). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
(2020b). Conclusion. In C. Tardieu, & C. Horgues (Eds.), Redefining tandem language and culture learning in higher education (pp. 270–280). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Telles, J. A., & Vassallo, M. L. (2006). Foreign language learning in-tandem: Teletandem as an alternative proposal in CALLT. The ESPecialist, 27(2), 189–212.Google Scholar
Vinagre, M., & Corral Esteban, A. (2020). Tracing the development of intercultural competence in telecollaborative interaction: An analysis of evaluative language in eTandem exchanges. In C. Tardieu & C. Horgues (Eds.), Redefining tandem language and culture learning in higher education (pp. 95–113). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Vinagre, M., & Lera, M. (2008). The role of error correction in online exchanges. In F. Zhang & B. Barber (Eds.), Handbook of research on computer-enhanced language acquisition and learning (pp. 326–341). IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vinagre, M., & Maíllo, C. (2007). Focus on form in on-line projects: Linguistic development in e-mail tandem exchanges. In C. Periñán (Ed.), Revisiting language learning resources (pp. 91–112). Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Vinagre, M., & Muñoz, B. (2011). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and language accuracy in telecollaborative exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 72–103.Google Scholar
Ware, P. D., & Pérez-Cañado, L. (2007). Grammar and feedback: Turning to language form in telecollaboration. In R. O’Dowd (Ed.), Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language teachers (pp. 107–126). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ware, P. D., & O’Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43–63. Retrieved on 9 August 2021 from [URL]
Woodin, J. (2018). Interculturality, interaction and language learning: Insights from tandem partnerships. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woodin, Jane. (2020). From a cultural to an intercultural approach. Tandem learning and the intercultural speaker. In C. Tardieu & C. Horgues (Eds.), Redefining tandem language and culture learning in higher education (pp. 30–46). Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Nuzzo, Elena & Clorinda Donato
2023. Investigating L2 Pragmatic Development in Tandem Telecollaboration. In Telecollaboration Applications in Foreign Language Classrooms [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ], ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. 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.