Cover not available
Article published In:
Language Teaching for Young Learners
Vol. 5:2 (2023) ► pp.170–195

A teacher-researcher snapshot of task-based peer interactions in EFL secondary school classrooms in Germany

| Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

This article reports a small classroom-based study that has explored task-based peer interactions among grade 9 secondary school students (N = 14) of middle and low relative proficiency. Drawing primarily on audio recordings of peer interactions, oral presentations, and post-task interviews, and conducted by the teacher-researcher, it investigated how students interacted on an output task that was embedded in regular EFL lessons and designed to wrap up the unit work centered around the topic Down Under. A particular focus was on exploring to what extent and how students used the language that the task was meant to trigger, namely future tense and unit-related vocabulary. The aim was to inquire whether the task worked in the way it was designed for. The findings have shown that although students were involved with the task and with each other’s contributions, the use of the targeted structure elicited by the task remained limited. Pedagogical implications are discussed.

Keywords: task-based peer interactions, task design, task implementation, secondary classrooms, classroom-based study
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Task-based vs. task-supported language teaching
    • 2.2Task type, task modality and language use in young learners’ peer interaction
    • 2.3Task-as-work plan vs. Task-in-process
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Research questions
    • 3.2Context and participants
    • 3.3Data collection
    • 3.4Task
      • Plan a trip to Australia
      • 3.5Data analysis
  • 4.Findings
  • 5.Discussion and pedagogical implications
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Transcription conventions
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 17 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.00039.kos
References
Adams, R., & Oliver, R.
(2019) Teaching through peer interaction. Routledge: New York, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adams, R., & Ross-Feldman, L.
(2008) Does writing influence learner attention to form? In D. Belcher, Hirvela, A. (Eds.), The oral/literate connection: Perspectives on L2 speaking/writing connections (pp. 243–267). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Breen, M.
(1987) Learner contributions to task design. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks (pp. 23–46). London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Calzada, A., & García Mayo, M. P.
(2020a) L2 grammar learning through a collaborative writing task. In W. Suzuki & N. Storch (Eds.), Languaging in language learning and teaching (pp. 20–39). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calzada, A., & García Mayo, M. del P.
(2020b) Child EFL learners’ attitudes towards a collaborative writing task. Language Teaching for Young Learners, 2 (1), 52–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calzada, A., & García Mayo, M. P.
(2021) Child learners’ reflections about EFL grammar in a collaborative writing task: when form is not at odds with communication, Language Awareness, 30 (1), 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, W.
(2020) Disagreement in peer interaction: Its effect on learner task performance. System, 88 1, 102–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, L. & J. White
(2014) The quantity and quality of language practice in typical interactive pair/group tasks. TESL Canada Journal, 31 (8), 47–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R.
(2015) Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition. An introduction (pp. 94–112). Routledge.Google Scholar
De Marco, H., & Rutledge, E.
(2009) Orange Line 5. Grundkurs. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(2007) Research methods in applied linguistics: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duchesne, S., McMaugh, A., Bochner, S., & Krause, K.
(2013) Educational psychology for learning and teaching (4th ed.). Melbourne: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2019) Towards a modular language curriculum for using tasks. Language Teaching Research, 23 (4), 454–475. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford.Google Scholar
(2016) Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research, 20 (3), 405–428. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017a) Task-based language teaching. In Loewen, S., and M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (pp. 108–125) New York, USA; Oxon, UK: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017b) Position paper: Moving task-based language teaching forward. Language Teaching, 50 (4), 507–526. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Li, S., & Zhu, Y.
(2019) The effects of pre-task explicit instruction on the performance of a focused task. System, 80 1, 38–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallardo-del-Puerto, F., & Martínez-Adrián, M.
(2022) Task-modality effects on young learners’ language-related episodes in collaborative dialogue. Revista Española de Lingüistica Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35 (2), 480–512. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Mayo, M. P. & Imaz Agirre, A.
(2019) Task modality and pair formation method:their impact on patterns of interaction and attention to form among EFL primary school children. System, 80 1, 175-185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., & Ross-Feldman, L.
(2005) Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language learning, 55 (4), 575–611. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo, M. A. & García Mayo, M. P.
(2021) The influence of task repetition type on young learners’ attention to form. Language Teaching Research, 25 (4), 565-586. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kos, T.
(2019) Peer assistance among mixed-age pairs in mixed-age EFL secondary school classrooms in Germany. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 61-112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S., & Sato, M.
(2018) Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language teaching, 51 (3), 285–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R.
(1993) Grammar and task-based methodology. Multilingual Matters, 123–123.Google Scholar
Martínez Adrián, M. & Gallardo del Puerto, F.
(2021) Task modality and language-related episodes in young learners: An attempt to manage accuracy and editing. Language Teaching Research, 0 (0). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Philp, J., Adams, A., & Iwashita, N.
(2014) Peer interaction and second language learning. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Sample, E. & Michel, M.
(2014) An exploratory study into trade-off effects of complexity, Accuracy and fluency in young learners’ oral task repetition. TESL Canada Journal, 31 1, 23–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samuda, V.
(2013) Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks (pp. 119–140). Routledge.Google Scholar
Samuda, V., & Bygate, M.
(2008) Tasks in Second Language Learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, M.
(2016) Collaborative mindset, collaborative interaction, and L2 development: An affective-social-cognitive model. Language Learning, 67 (2). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shak, J., & Gardner, S.
(2008) Young learner perspectives on four focus-on-form tasks. Language Teaching Research, 12 (3), 387–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P.
(1996) A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17 1, 38–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M.
(2008) Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated?. TESOL quarterly, 42 (2), 181–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Storch, N.
(1999) Are two heads better than one? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System, 27 (3), 363–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Patterns of Interaction in ESL Pair Work. Language Learning, 52 (1), 119–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language awareness, 17 (2), 95–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
(1998) Interaction and Second Language Learning: Two Adolescent French Immersion Students Working Together. The Modern Language Journal, 82 1, 320–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. M. Bygate, P. Skehan, M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99–118). Longman: Harlow, England.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(1990) Attending to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12 (3), 287–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017) Processing instruction. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 166–180). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wajnryb, R.
(1990) Grammar dictation (Vol. 31). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, J.
(2012) The potential role (s) of writing in second language development. Journal of second language writing, 21 (4), 321–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yalçın, Ş., & Spada, N.
(2016) Language aptitude and grammatical difficulty: An EFL classroom-based study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(2), 239–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar