Chapter published in:
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. 113126
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System, 64 , 58–73. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Focus-on-form through peer feedback in a Spanish – American telecollaborative exchange. Language Awareness, 20 (4), 343–57. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, R.
(2021) Virtual exchange: Moving forward into the next decade. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34 (3), 209–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, R., Sauro, S., & Spector-Cohen, E.
(2020) The role of pedagogical mentoring in virtual exchange. TESOL Quarterly, 54 (1), 146–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Rourke, B.
(2005) Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 433–466. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sauro, S.
(2009) Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Language Learning & Technology, 13 (1), 96–120. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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 https://​www​.learntechlib​.org​/p​/104277/
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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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 http://​llt​.msu​.edu​/vol12num1​/pdf​/wareodowd​.pdf
Woodin, J.
(2018) Interculturality, interaction and language learning: Insights from tandem partnerships. Routledge. CrossrefGoogle 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