Negociación de significado y nivel de inglés al realizar tareas pedagógicas en aulas multilingües de educación primaria

  1. Asunción Martínez Arbelaiz 1
  2. Eider Saragueta 1
  3. Erika J. Leacox 2
  1. 1 Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
    info

    Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

    Lejona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/000xsnr85

  2. 2 Universidad de California, Davis
Journal:
Revista Nebrija de Lingüística aplicada a la enseñanza de Lenguas

ISSN: 1699-6569

Year of publication: 2023

Volume: 17

Issue: 35

Pages: 136-154

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Revista Nebrija de Lingüística aplicada a la enseñanza de Lenguas

Abstract

The effect of language proficiency and language choice on child interaction while working on classroom tasks is the focus of this research. Forty dyads mostly of nonnative speakers of English aged 8-12 years completed a task designed by their teacher in a school in Gipuzkoa (Basque Autonomous Community). The dyads were organized into proficiency levels according to their grades and some specific tasks designed by their English teacher. The interactions were recorded, examining the effect of proficiency level categories on instances of attention to form. Analyses for variables of attention to form and task completion of each proficiency level category were performed. Our results suggest that the proficiency level does not have an effect on the number of instances of attention to form. Across proficiency level categories of interaction, it was found that the learners used less Basque, Spanish, and Mixed utterances in the higher proficiency levels. These results shed some light on the current teaching practices with several pedagogical implications for the multilingual classroom.

Bibliographic References

  • Casamiglia, H. &Tusón. A. (2012). Las cosas del decir. Manual de análisis del discurso. 3ª edición.Ariel Letras.
  • Canals, L. (2021). Multimodality and translanguaging in negotiation of meaning. Foreign Language Annals, 54, 647-670.
  • Cenoz, J. &Gorter, D. (2014). Focus on multilingualism as an approach in educational contexts. In A. Blackledge y A. Creese (Eds.), Heteroglossia as Practice and Pedagogy(pp. 239–254). Springer.
  • Cenoz, J. &Gorter, D. (2015). Towards a holistic approach in the study of multilingual education. In J. Cenoz y D. Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education: Between language learning and translanguaging(pp. 1–15). Cambridge University Press.
  • Cenoz, J. &Gorter, D. (2017). Translanguaging as a pedagogical tool in multilingual education. In J. Cenoz, D. Gorter, &S. May (Eds.), Language Awareness and Multilingualism(pp. 309–321). Springer.
  • Cliff, P.(2011). Cambridge Young Learners English Tests Flyers.Cambridge University Press.
  • Doughty, C. &Williams, J. (1998). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.Cambridge University Press.
  • Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 19-47.
  • Fernández-García, M. &Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in nonnative speaker-nonnative speaker synchronous discussions. CALICO Journal, 19 (2), 279–294.
  • Fernández-García, M. &Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2003). Learners' interactions: A comparison of oral and computer-assisted written conversation. ReCALL Journal, 15 (1), 113–136.
  • García Mayo, M. P. &Imaz Agirre, A. (2019). Task Modality and pair formation method: Their impact on patterns of interaction and LREs among EFL primary school children. System, 80, 165-175.
  • Gass, S. M. &Mackey, A. (2020). Input, interaction, and output in L2 acquisition. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating &S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (3rd ed., pp. 192-222). Routledge.
  • Gobierno Vasco-Eustat. (2022). Estadísticas del sistema educativo. Alumnado por nivel, modelo y red. https://www.euskadi.eus/matricula-2021-2022/web01-a2hestat/es/
  • Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional moves and modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as a foreign language. System, 29, 267-287.
  • Jeong, N. S. (2011). The effects of task type and group structure on meaning negotiation in synchronous computer-mediated communication. In L. Plonsky &M. Schierloh (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 2009 Second Language Research Forum: Diverse Contributions to SLA(pp. 51-69). Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
  • Jørgensen, J. N., Karrebæk, M. S., Madsen, L. M., &Møller, J. S. (2011). Polylanguaging in superdiversity. Diversities, 13, 23–37
  • Keck, C., Iberri-Shea, G., Tracy-Ventura, N. &Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2006). Investigating the empirical link between task-based interaction and acquisition. In L. Ortega &J.M. Norris (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching(pp. 91-131). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Lantolf, J.P. &Appel, G. (1994). Theoretical framework: An introduction to Vygotskyan perspectives on second language research. In J.P. Lantolf &G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskyan approaches to second language research (pp-1-32). Ablex.
  • Lázaro-Ibarrola, A. &Azpilicueta-Martínez, R. (2015). Investigating negotiation of meaning in EFL children with very low levels of proficiency. International Journal of English Studies, 15(1), 1-21.
  • Leonet, O. &Saragueta, E. (2023). The case of a pedagogical translanguaging intervention in a trilingual primary school: the students’ voice. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1-19.
  • Lesser, M. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue.Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55-81.
  • 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 (Vol.2 pp.413-468). Academic Press.
  • Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied linguistics, 27(3), 405-430.
  • Mackey, A. &Goo, J. (2007) Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition.Oxford applied linguistics (pp. 407-453). Oxford University Press.
  • Mackey, A. &Oliver, R. (2002). Interactional feedback and children’s L2 development. System, 30(4), 459-477.
  • Oliver, R. (1998). Negotiation of meaning in child interactions. The relationship between conversational interaction and second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 82,372-386.
  • Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 97-111.
  • Oliver, R. (2009). How young is too young? Investigating negotiation of meaning and feedback inchildren aged five to seven years. In A. Mackey &C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on Interaction. Second Language Research in Honor of Susan M. Gass (pp. 135-156). Routledge.
  • Ortega, L. (2019). SLA and the study of equitable multilingualism. The Modern Language Journal 103(S1), 23-38.
  • Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493–527.
  • Pica, T., Kanagy, R. &Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In Crookes, G. &Gass, S. (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 171-192). Multilingual Matters.
  • Seedhouse, P. (2005). ‘Task’ as research construct. Language Learning, 55(3), 533–70.
  • Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 38–57.
  • 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 University Press.
  • Swain, M. (2000). The Output Hypothesis and beyond: Mediating Acquisition through Collaborative Dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford University Press.
  • Swain, M. &Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language.Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 251-274.
  • Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2011). Languaging as agent and constituent of cognitive change in an older adult: An example.Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics,14(1), 104-117.
  • Swain, M. &Lapkin, S. (2013). A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education. The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 101-129.
  • Varonis, E. M. &Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied linguistics, 6(1), 71-90.
Data source: Dialnet