The effect of input modality on German as a FL learners’ provision of recasts in oral peer interactions

Natalie Kirchhoff, Raúl Dávila-Romero

Abstract


Interaction between learners is proven to be beneficial for second and foreign language acquisition. This article reports on a quasi-experimental study conducted in a German as a foreign language (GFL) classroom in a university in Spain. The study explored the effect of input modality on the provision of recasts in oral peer interactions. Two intact classes of GFL, one with 12 and the other with 16 learners, participated in six oral interaction tasks. The researchers divided the two classes into two groups: one group was only exposed to aural and visual input, while the other also received written input. Audio recordings and full written transcripts of learners’ oral peer interactions in the two groups were made and the frequency and nature of recasts were analysed quantitatively in order to examine the effect of input modality on the production of this corrective feedback type. Results suggested that input modality impacted the way learners interacted with each other. Findings showed that learners who were not provided with written input provided significantly more recasts to each other. Results also revealed that the nature of the recasts (i.e., form-, lexical- and pronunciation-focused recasts) that learners produced was input modality dependent. Since the provision of recasts is beneficial for second and foreign language acquisition, the results indicate that teachers and task designers should consider input modality as a relevant task design variable.


Keywords


Classroom tasks; corrective feedback; foreign language acquisition; input modality; peer interaction

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adams, R., & Oliver, R. (2019). Teaching through peer interaction. Routledge.

Bassetti, B. (2006). Orthographic input and phonological representations in learners of Chinese as a foreign language. Written Language and Literacy, 9(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.9.1.07bas

Bassetti, B., Mairano, P., Masterson, J., & Cerni, T. (2020). Effects of orthographic forms on second language speech production and phonological awareness, with consideration of speaker‐level predictors. Language Learning, 70(4), 1218–1256. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12423

Bowles, M. A., & Adams, R. J. (2015). An interactionist approach to learner-learner interaction in second and foreign language classrooms. In N. Markee (Ed.), The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 198-212). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118531242.ch12

Cerni, T., Bassetti, B., & Masterson, J. (2019). Effects of orthographic forms on the acquisition of novel spoken words in a second language. Frontiers in Communication, 4, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00031

Choi, H., & Iwashita, N. (2016). Interactional behaviours of low-proficiency learners in small group work. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 113-134). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.05cho

Colantoni, L., Steele, J., & Escudero, P. (2015). Second language speech: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.

Collins, L., & White, J. (2019). Observing language-related episodes in intact classrooms. Context matters! In R. DeKeyser & G. Prieto-Botana (Eds.), Doing SLA research with implications for the classroom: Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability (pp. 9-30). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.52.02col

Council of Europe (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume. Cambridge University Press.

Cutler, A. (2015). Representation of second language phonology. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716414000459

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press.

Escudero, P. (2015). Orthography plays a limited role when learning the phonological forms of new words: The case of Spanish and English learners of novel Dutch words. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271641400040X

Escudero, P., Hayes-Harb, R., & Mitterer, H. (2008). Novel second-language words and asymmetric lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 36(2), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2007.11.002

Feng, Y., & Webb, S. (2020). Learning vocabulary through reading, listening, and viewing: Which mode of input is most effective? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(3), 499–523. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000494

Fernández-Dobao, A. (2016). Peer interaction and learning: A focus on the silent learner. In M. Sato, & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 33-61). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.02fer

Fernández-Dobao, A. (2020). Exploring interaction between heritage and second language learners in the Spanish language classroom. In W. Suzuki & N. Storch (Eds.), Languaging in language learning and teaching: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 91-110). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.55.04fer

Fievez, I., Montero Perez, M., Cornillie, F., & Desmet, P. (2020). Vocabulary learning through viewing captioned or subtitled videos and the role of learner- and word-related factors. CALICO Journal, 37(3), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.39370

Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 402–430. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami014

Fujii, A., Ziegler, N., & Mackey, A. (2016). Peer interaction and metacognitive instruction in the EFL classroom. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 63-89). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.03fuj

García-Mayo, M. P. (Ed.). (2021). Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning. De Gruyter Mouton.

García-Mayo, M. P., & Azkarai, A. (2016). EFL task-based interaction: Does task modality impact on language-related episodes? In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 241-266). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.10gar

García-Mayo, M. P., & Pica, T. (2000). L2 learner interaction in a foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 38(1), 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2000.38.1.35

Gass, S. M. (2018). Input, interaction, and the second language learner (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Gass, S. M., Mackey, A., & Ross-Feldman, L. (2005). Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language Learning, 55(4), 575–611. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00318.x

Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (2nd ed., pp. 180-206). Routledge.

Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 445–474. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000149

Han, Z., & Nassaji, H. (2019). Introduction: A snapshot of thirty-five years of instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818776992

Ioannou, S., & Tsagari, D. (2022). Effects of recasts, metalinguistic feedback, and students’ proficiency on the acquisition of Greek perfective past tense. Languages, 7(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7010040

Iwashita, N., & Dao, P. (2021). Peer feedback in second language oral interaction. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp. 275-299). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789.014

Kartchava, E. (2019). Noticing oral corrective feedback in the second language classroom: Background and evidence. Rowman & Littlefield.

Kim, Y. (2015). The role of tasks as vehicles for language learning in classroom interaction. In N. Markee (Ed.), The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 163-181). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118531242.ch10

Kim, J. H. (2018). Recasts and prompts in dyadic interaction: Explicitness of feedback and learner proficiency. English Teaching, 73(4), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.73.4.201812.3

Kim, J. H. (2021). The relative effect of recasts on L2 Korean learners’ accuracy development of two different forms and its relationship with language analytic ability. Language Teaching Research, 25(3), 451–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216881985991

Kim, J. H., & Han, Z. (2007). Recasts in communicative EFL classes: Do teacher intent and learner interpretation overlap? In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 269-297). Oxford University Press.

Kirchhoff, N. (2020). The impact of input modality on collaborative peer interaction. In J. J. Gázquez-Linares, M. M. Molero-Jurado, A. Martos-Martínez, A. B. Barragán-Martín, M. M. Simón-Márquez, M. Sisto, R. M. del Pino-Salvador, & B. M. Tortosa-Martínez (Eds.), Innovación docente e investigación en arte y humanidades: Avanzando en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje (pp. 591-602). Dykinson.

Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(1), 37–63. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263103000020

Li, H. L. (2018). Recasts and output-only prompts, individual learner factors and short-term EFL learning. System, 76, 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.05.004

Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x

Loewen, S. (2020). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Loewen, S. (2021). Was Krashen right? An instructed second language acquisition perspective. Foreign Language Annals, 54(2), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12550

Loewen, S., Buttiler, M., Kessler, M., & Trego, D. (2022). Conversation and transcription activities with synchronous video computer-mediated communication: A classroom investigation. System, 106, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102760

Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2017). Instructed second language acquisition (ISLA): An overview. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 1-12). Routledge.

Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018). Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 51(3), 285–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000125

Loewen, S., & Wolff, D. (2016). Peer interaction in F2F and CMC contexts. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 163-184). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.07loe

Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379(1), 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb42014.x

Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.126

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 (pp. 413-468). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3

Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Long, M. H. (2017). Instructed second language acquisition (ISLA): Geopolitics, methodological issues, and some major research questions. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 1(1), 7–44. https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.33314

Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48(2), 183–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00039

Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford University Press.

Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R., & Gass, S. M. (2012). Interactionist approach. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 7-23). Routledge.

Mackey, A., Gass, S. M., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471–497. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004010

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: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407-451). Oxford University Press.

Nabei, T., & Swain, M. (2002). Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL student’s second language learning. Language Awareness, 11(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410208667045

Nassaji, H. (2019). The effects of recasts versus prompts on immediate uptake and learning of a complex target structure. In R. DeKeyser & G. Prieto-Botana (Eds.), Doing SLA research with implications for the classroom: Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability (pp. 107-126). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.52.06nas

Nuevo, A. (2006). Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and development (UMI No. 3247335) [Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

Payant, C. & Kim, Y. (2019). Impact of task modality on collaborative dialogue among plurilingual learners: a classroom-based study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(5), 614–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1292999

Peters, E. (2019). The effect of imagery and on-screen text on foreign language vocabulary learning from audiovisual input. TESOL Quarterly, 53(4), 1008–1032. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.531

Philp, J. J. (2016). New pathways in researching interaction. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 377-395). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.15phi

Pica, T. (1996). Second language learning through interaction: Multiple perspectives. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 12(1), 1–22.

Pica, T. (2013). From input, output and comprehension to negotiation, evidence, and attention: An overview of theory and research on learner interaction and SLA. In M. P. García-Mayo, J. Gutiérrez-Mangado, & M. Martínez-Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 49-70). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.9.06ch3

Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30(1), 59–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587607

Révész, A., Sachs, R., & Mackey, A. (2011). Task complexity, uptake of recasts, and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 203-236). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.14ch8

Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.x

Sato, M. (2017). Oral peer corrective feedback: Multiple theoretical perspectives. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 19-34). Routledge.

Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (2012). Raising language awareness in peer interaction: A cross-context, cross-methodology examination. Language Awareness, 21(1-2), 157–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.639884

Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (2016). Understanding peer interaction: Research synthesis and directions. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 1-30). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.01int

Sato, M., & Loewen, S. (2019a). Methodological strengths, challenges, and joys of classroom-based quasi-experimental research: Metacognitive instruction and corrective feedback. In R. DeKeyser & G. Prieto-Botana (Eds.), Doing SLA research with implications for the classroom: Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability (pp. 31-54). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.52.03sat

Sato, M., & Loewen, S. (2019b). Toward evidence-based second language pedagogy: Research proposals and pedagogical recommendations. In M. Sato & S. Loewen (Eds.), Evidence-based second language pedagogy: A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp. 1-23). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351190558-1

Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 237-322). Newbury House.

Storch, N., & Aldossary, K. (2019). Peer feedback: An activity theory perspective on givers and receivers’ stances. In M. Sato & S. Loewen (Eds.), Evidence-based second language pedagogy: A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp. 123-144). Routledge.

Storch, N., & Alshuraidah, A. (2020). Languaging when providing and processing peer feedback. In W. Suzuki & N. Storch (Eds.), Languaging in language learning and teaching: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 111-128). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.55.05sto

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford University Press.

VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Ablex.

Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective feedback types. Language Awareness, 17(1), 78–93. https://doi.org/10.2167/la429.0

Young-Scholten, M., & Langer, M. (2015). The role of orthographic input in second language German: Evidence from naturalistic adult learners’ production. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716414000447

Zhang, W., Chang, H., & Liao, Y. (2021). Effects of recasts, clarification requests on suprasegment development of English intonation. Porta Linguarum, 35, 311–325. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.v0i35.16949

Ziegler, N. (2016). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 553–586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500025X

PHOTOGRAPHY REFERENCE LIST

Georgiev, I. (2007). Family Game 2 [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/family-game-2-1309400

Krzysiuc. (2005). Spanish Paella [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/spanish-paella-1325065

Marriott, S. (n.d.). Concert 1 [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/concert-1-1461003

Mjimages. (2009). Couch Potato [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/couch-potato-1319240

Mohan, M. (2005). Movie House [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/movie-house-1179538

Selena P. (2007). Party Flutes [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/party-flutes-1419700

Sue Anna Joe. (2006). Field Trip to La Mezquita [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/field-trip-to-la-mezquita-1435485

Weatherbox. (2006). Theater 3 [Photograph]. FreeImages. https://www.freeimages.com/es/photo/theater-3-1228167




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i2.37238

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


View My Stats

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.