{"title":"青年学习者的合作写作与互动模式:LRE生产中配对动态与配对方法的相互作用","authors":"María Basterrechea, Francisco Gallardo-del-Puerto","doi":"10.35869/vial.v0i20.4354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A considerable body of research within the Socio-cultural theory (Lantolf & Appel, 1994) examines how learners express their linguistic gaps verbally, or question their own or others’ language use when writing collaboratively, i.e., produce Languagerelated episodes (LREs; Swain & Lapkin, 1998). Several studies have also explored the effect that different patterns of interaction (Storch, 2002) have on the production of LREs with adult learners (e.g., Mozaffari, 2017; Storch & Aldosari 2013), but little research has compared the effect of these patterns of interaction and pair formation method (i.e., student-selected and proficiency-matched) on young EFL learners’ ability to attend to language, and much less on the type of grammatical features they focus on in LREs. \nThis study examines young EFL learners’ (aged 10-12) production of LREs and pair dynamics in student-selected vs. proficiency-matched groups while completing a collaborative writing task. It was found that young EFL learners mainly exhibit a collaborative type of dynamics and resolved more LREs accurately, together with expert-novice groups. Matched proficiency was more beneficial, as these groups produced more target-like LREs. As per the type of form-focused LREs produced, these young learners focused primarily on spelling issues and less on grammatical knowledge-induced ones.","PeriodicalId":42598,"journal":{"name":"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Collaborative writing and patterns of interaction in young learners: The interplay between pair dynamics and pairing method in LRE production\",\"authors\":\"María Basterrechea, Francisco Gallardo-del-Puerto\",\"doi\":\"10.35869/vial.v0i20.4354\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A considerable body of research within the Socio-cultural theory (Lantolf & Appel, 1994) examines how learners express their linguistic gaps verbally, or question their own or others’ language use when writing collaboratively, i.e., produce Languagerelated episodes (LREs; Swain & Lapkin, 1998). Several studies have also explored the effect that different patterns of interaction (Storch, 2002) have on the production of LREs with adult learners (e.g., Mozaffari, 2017; Storch & Aldosari 2013), but little research has compared the effect of these patterns of interaction and pair formation method (i.e., student-selected and proficiency-matched) on young EFL learners’ ability to attend to language, and much less on the type of grammatical features they focus on in LREs. \\nThis study examines young EFL learners’ (aged 10-12) production of LREs and pair dynamics in student-selected vs. proficiency-matched groups while completing a collaborative writing task. It was found that young EFL learners mainly exhibit a collaborative type of dynamics and resolved more LREs accurately, together with expert-novice groups. Matched proficiency was more beneficial, as these groups produced more target-like LREs. As per the type of form-focused LREs produced, these young learners focused primarily on spelling issues and less on grammatical knowledge-induced ones.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35869/vial.v0i20.4354\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35869/vial.v0i20.4354","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Collaborative writing and patterns of interaction in young learners: The interplay between pair dynamics and pairing method in LRE production
A considerable body of research within the Socio-cultural theory (Lantolf & Appel, 1994) examines how learners express their linguistic gaps verbally, or question their own or others’ language use when writing collaboratively, i.e., produce Languagerelated episodes (LREs; Swain & Lapkin, 1998). Several studies have also explored the effect that different patterns of interaction (Storch, 2002) have on the production of LREs with adult learners (e.g., Mozaffari, 2017; Storch & Aldosari 2013), but little research has compared the effect of these patterns of interaction and pair formation method (i.e., student-selected and proficiency-matched) on young EFL learners’ ability to attend to language, and much less on the type of grammatical features they focus on in LREs.
This study examines young EFL learners’ (aged 10-12) production of LREs and pair dynamics in student-selected vs. proficiency-matched groups while completing a collaborative writing task. It was found that young EFL learners mainly exhibit a collaborative type of dynamics and resolved more LREs accurately, together with expert-novice groups. Matched proficiency was more beneficial, as these groups produced more target-like LREs. As per the type of form-focused LREs produced, these young learners focused primarily on spelling issues and less on grammatical knowledge-induced ones.