Promoting Learners Language Production through ComputerMediated Interactive Tasks

1
Promoting Learners Language Production through
Computer-Mediated Interactive Tasks

• Ali Hussain Al-Bulushi

2
Content
1. Learner-learner interaction
2. The role of TBLT in interaction
3. Interactive tasks in CMC
4. Research
5. Data Analysis
6. Some initial findings
7. Conclusion
3
Learner-Learner Interaction

• The Interaction Hypothesis postulates that a
  crucial ground for language development is when
  L2 learners are engaged in negotiating meaning
  and resolving communication breakdowns while
  interacting among each other (Long Robinson,
  199822).

4
Learner-Learner Interaction cont.

• The notion of negotiation of meaning while
  interacting around a language learning task has
  been investigated extensively in relation to
  various areas.

5
The Role of TBLT in Interaction

• In a classroom setting, research has shown that
  well-designed and implemented tasks can engage
  learners in meaningful interaction and that
  negotiation can occur through these interactions
  (see Pica, 1994).
• Pica, Kanagy, and Falodun (1993) established four
  main categories of task features.
• interactant relationship,
• interactional goal,
• communication goal, and
• outcome option.

6
The Role of TBLT in Interaction cont.
(Table 1 Communication task types for L2
research and pedagogy analysis, Adapted from Pica
et al. 1993 17)
7
The Role of TBLT in Interaction cont.

• According to the four characteristics, jigsaw
  tasks are the most conducive to the negotiation
  of meaning whereas opinion-exchange tasks are the
  least conducive to negotiation of meaning.

8
Interactive Tasks in CMC

• CMC is basically a type of CALL environments that
  refers to a situation in which L2 learners use
  the computer to pedagogically communicate via
  emails, bulletin boards, chat lines, and within
  MOO (Multi-user domains, Object Oriented)
  environments (Beatty, 2003).
• Why CMC
• Rapid increase in the use of CMC in education and
  EFL/ESL

9
Interactive Tasks in CMC cont.

• More equitable learner participation and better
  quality language than that found in face-to-face
  interaction (Smith, 2003)
• CMC interaction creates less threatening and less
  stressful environment
• Logging makes it easier to capture and assess the
  interaction for research and pedagogical
  purposes.
• CMC can promote TBLT/TBLL and interaction-oriented
  approach to SLA.

10
Interactive Tasks in CMC cont.

• Conducting network-based discussions entails
  meaningful use of the TL and encourages teachers
  and learners to treat language as a medium of
  communication rather than an object.
• Other benefits mentioned by (Mydlarski, 1998)
  include
• Learners contributions (amount, pace, time)
• The interactivity of the writing and the
  learner-centred orientation of CMC enable the
  learners to take control of their interaction.

11
Interactive Tasks in CMC cont.

• In asynchronous communication, learners can
  utilize the time to plan their messages and edit
  them before posting which would enhance their
  productive L2 strategies and processes.
• Exposure to a substantial amount of
  comprehensible input produced by peers of a
  similar level and shared background.

12
Interactive Tasks in CMC cont.

• The implementation of computer-based activities
  in the EFL classroom should be based on sound SLA
  theory that can facilitate language learning.
• Based on the principles of TBLT, using CMC
  synchronously or asynchronously appears to have
  potentials for language learning and teaching.

13
Research

• Research Questions
• How do learners negotiate for meaning during
  task-based CMC?
• Does the task type affect how learners negotiate
  for meaning during CMC? If so, how?
• Do L2 students believe that online interactive
  tasks actually benefit their language reception
  and production?

14
Research cont.

• Participants
• Students doing an intensive English language
  program in the language centre at SQU.
• First pilot (21 learners) but the second pilot
  (one dyad)
• Instruments
• Pre-treatment questionnaire
• WebCT

15
Research cont.

• The Tasks

• Semi-structured interviews

16
Research cont.

• Procedures
• Participants randomly chosen and met at least
  once a week during their scheduled computer lab
  session.
• First session theyll do the pre-treatment
  questionnaire
• They will do 2 warming-up activities namely
  chatting with each other about their plans for
  the rest of the day and doing an example task
  from each task type chosen for the main
  treatment.

17
Research cont.

• Each student will be allocated a partner to do
  the online tasks
• After each session, all the chat scripts will be
  compiled and saved
• Eventually interviews will be conducted

18
Data Analysis

• Varonis and Gass (1985) of NfM was used to
  identify the NfM incidents

Trigger
Indicator
Response
Reaction to the Response
19
Data Analysis cont.

• First pilot study
• Yielded only 9 incidents of NfM. This paucity can
  be attributed to
• Tasks language level may have not corresponded
  with the participants proficiency level.
• The characteristics of the tasks lacked some
  linguistic challenges (lexical, structural,
  discoursal, or instructional)
• The participants shared background helped them
  in anticipating discourse especially in the
  opinion-exchange task.
• Same pairs lessened the collaboration towards NfM

20
Data Analysis cont.

• Second pilot study
• The discourse produced tends to follow pedagogic
  tasks format over the real-world format.
• Example
• (Excerpt from the pen pal gift jigsaw task)

21
Data Analysis cont.
Excerpt (1) Participants avoiding the task roles
(Names are pseudonyms)
22
Some Initial Findings

• Amount of NfM ? calculate negotiated turns and
  compare it to the total turns for the dyad across
  the 3 task types

23
Some Initial Findings cont.

• Findings run contrary to Pica et al.s (1993) and
  reveal that DMT helped the learners initiate 6
  more negotiations than the jigsaw task.
• Triggers are basically the catalyst of
  interaction which spur the NfM incidents among
  learners.

24
Some Initial Findings cont.
Triggers initiated the NfM incidents and their
percentages in the task types
25
Some Initial Findings cont.

• Not all the NfM routines went through the same
  phases of the model.

Exerpt (2) The task as a trigger rather than an
explicit utterance
26
Some Initial Findings cont.
Stages of Negotiation Routines Completed by Dyads
27
Some Initial Findings cont.

• 17 of the negotiated turns are NfM incidents
• Although IGT did initiate a couple of NfM
  incidents, the majority of them are found in the
  DMT and jigsaw task types.
• Task-dependency seems to help online
  interlocutors to produce more negotiated
  routines.
• pen pal gift jigsaw task

28
Conclusion

• Comparisons with other studies or generalizations
  should be warranted.
• More data is needed to make strong claims about
  the conduciveness of task types as well as the
  different possible phases of NfM in a CMC-based
  interaction.

29
(No Transcript)