learner-learner interaction

The Role of Learner-learner Interaction

In Language Learning

I. Introduction

is focused on conveying and receiving authentic messages ( that is,

messages

that

contain

information

of

interest

to

speaker

and

listener in a situation of importance to both). This is interaction.

( Rivers 1987 p4)

It

is

generally

believed

that

the

learner- learner

interaction,

as

defined by Rivers in the above statement, is of vital importance in

language

learning

classroom.

Many

teachers

currently

are

very

enthusiastic

about

classroom

social

interactions

in

various

participation

patterns

including

pair

work

and

small-group

work.

The

aim

of

this

paper

is

to

discuss

the

role

of

learner-learner

interaction

for

language

learning

from

two

points

of

view-

pedagogic

and

psycholinguistic.

It

will

first

explore

the

pedagogical

role

of

small

groups

(including

pairs).

Then

it

will

discuss the importance of interlanguage talk in terms of its nature,

its

association

with

comprehensible

input

and

comprehensible

output.

II. The Psycholinguistic Role of Learner-learner Interaction

1. The Nature of Interlanguage Talk

Despite

the

pedagogical

role

of

small

group

work,

the

interlanguage

talk,

that

is,

the

talk

among

the

learners,

is

widely

believed to aid language learning in many aspects. An early study

of interlanguage talk was carried out by Long . (1976), which

has

been

mentioned

in

this

essay

before,

in

intermediate-level,

adult

ESL

classes

in

Mexico.

The

researchers

first

coded

moves

according

to

a

special

category

system

designed

for

the

study.

Quality

of

speech

was

defined

by

the

variety

of

moves,

and

quantity

of

speech

was

defined

by

the

number

of

moves.

They

found

that

both

the

amount

and

variety

of

students

talk

were

significantly

greater

in

the

small

groups

than

in

the

teacher- led

discussions. In other words, students not only talked more, but also

used

a

wider

range

of

speech

acts

in

the

small-group

context,

which can also be seen in the following extract from a audio-taped

classroom pair work on a picture ordering task between Zhang Li

and

Yang

Xiao- feng.

(writer's

own

data

1997)

The

function

column

below

indicates

the

purpose

that

the

utterance(s)

seem

to

perform

in

this

context.

It

is

not

intended

to

be

an

exhaustive

categorical description, but

merely

to

facilitate

our

understanding

of the variety of language functions taking place. Z refers to Zhang

Li; Y refers to Yang Xiao-feng.

Discourse Function

1.Z: He's painting the wall and he fall fell down and

2.Y:

But

er

which

one

is

the

first?

Proposing

3.Z: I think ... Maybe telephone, yeah?

4.Y: Number 3, yeah.

5.Y:

Maybe

someone

called

him.

Making a suggestion

6.Z:

Yeah.

Acknowledging

7.Y:

And

that

he

maybe

go

to

his

friend's

ho

home

to...

um

Suggesting

do some housework... help his friend to do...

8.Z:

Maybe...

his

work...

do

you

think

so?

Making alternative

2

suggestion

9.Y:

Yeah,

yeah,

yeah.

Agreeing

10.Z: His work.

11.Y:

His

attention

you

mean?

Checking confirmation

As we can see from the above analysis, students performed a wide

variety of language function, for example, asking for suggestions,

agreeing

or

disagreeing

with

each

other,

and

proposing,

most

of

which

are

absent

in

a

teacher-fronted

classroom

which

is

dominated

by

teacher

question-

students

response-

teacher

feedback interaction.

2. Interlanguage Talk and Comprehensible Input

There is a substantial amount of evidence consistent with the idea

that

the

more

language

that

learners

hear

and

understand

or

the

more comprehensible input they receive, the faster and better they

learn. Krashen (1982) has proposed an explanation for this, which

he

calls

the

Input

Hypothesis,

claiming

that

learners

improve

acquisition

of

second

language

by

understanding

language

which

contains

some

target

language

forms

(phonological,

lexical

morphological,

or

syntactic)

which

are

a

little

ahead

of

their

current

knowledge

and

which

they

could

not

understand

in

isolation. Many researches have shown that the speech of NSs or

language teachers has to be modified in a variety of ways to make

the input comprehensible. On the basis of some recent studies, the

interlanguage

talk

has

also

been

found

to

contribute

to

second

language acquisition as comprehensible input to other learners.

3

Porter (1983 cited in Wesche 1994 p236), studying adult Hispanic

ESL

learners,

discovered

that

non-NSs

negotiated

repairs

to

conversational

breakdown

with

other

Spanish-speaking

non-NSs

similarly

to

the

way

NSs

did

this

(

e.g.

using

such

strategies

as

clarification

requests,

confirmation

and

comprehension

checks,

repetition

and

reformulations),

thus

gaining

practice

in

conversation

management.

Porter

concluded

that

while

NSs

offer

more accurate target language input, non-NS learners can, without

increased

performance

errors,

offer

each

other

genuine

communicative practice, including the negotiation for meaning that

is believed to aid second language acquisition.

Pica

&

Doughty

(1985

p115-130)

compared

the

discourse

produced by low-intermediate ESL students in both teacher-fronted

and small group discussion, using one-way tasks. They found that

while

students

were

equally

grammatical

in

both

contexts,

individual

students

produce

significantly

more

input

directed

toward them in group than in the teacher-fronted interaction. In a

similar study, Doughty & Pica (1986 p305-323) found that when

an

exchange

of

information

is

guaranteed,

a

great

deal

of

modification can be

generated

in

a

non-NSs

group

discussion.

In

keeping

with

second

language

acquisition

theory,

such

modified

interaction is claimed to make input comprehensible to learner and

to

lead

ultimately

to

successful

classroom

second

language

acquisition.

3. Interlanguage Talk and Comprehensible Output

It

is

true

that

one

function

of

output

is

that

it

provides

the

opportunity

for

meaningful

use

of

one's

linguistic

resources.

However,

many

teachers

frequently

overlook

how

much

students

learn

from

each

other.

Through

interaction,

students

can

increase

language store as they listen to or read authentic linguistic material,

or

even

the

output

of

their

fellow

students

in

discussions,

skits,

4

joint

problem- solving

tasks.

As

what

Swain

states

(1985

p249):

learners to pay attention to the means of expression needed in order

to successfully convey his or her own intended meaning.

Recent research carried out in England found that certain types of

pair

and

group

work

create

conditions

for

interaction

in

which

learners push each other to speak more comprehensibly and more

accurately.

According

to

Shehadeh's

study

(1991

cited

in

Lynch

1996 p77), in response to signals of comprehension difficulty from

their partner(s), the learners were able to correct their own speech

to

make

it

more

comprehensible.

What

is

more,

this

happened

whether

they

were

talking

to

NSs

or

non-NSs.

Even

in

non-NSs

and non-NSs interaction, the listeners' signals of a comprehension

problem

led

their

partners

to

produce

more

accurate

output

eight

times

out

of

ten.

This

has

also

been

noticed

in

my

teaching

experience that when doing pair or group interactive activities, the

students

tend

to

self-correct

their

output

in

order

to

convey

their

messages

successfully.

Shehadeh's

finding

is

of

particular

importance,

since

it

suggest

that

pair

and

group

work

in

the

classroom

can

result

in

greater

accuracy,

provided

the

task

is

demanding enough to require real negotiation of meaning.

III. The Pedagogical Role of Learner- learner Interaction

1.

Group

work

increases

the

quantity

of

language

practice

opportunities.

Second

language

acquisition

research

has

identified

a

variety

of

factors which are claimed to affect the proficiency level attained by

language

learners.

Among

these

factors

is

the

use

of

the

target

language.

It

is

widely

assumed

that

the

use

of

target

language

is

one

of

the

crucial

variables

in

the

successful

acquisition

of

the

5

target language. The more often students use or practice the second

or foreign language, the more likely they are to learn it. However,

in

the

teacher- fronted

lockstep

or

teacher-directed

interactions,

students

do

not

have

enough

opportunity

to

practice

the

target

language, as teacher talk takes up on average more than one thirds

of the classroom talk ( Flanders 1970 cited in Long & Porter 1985).

Long and Porter (1985 p209) observe that in a fifty-minute lesson

of a class of thirty students in a public secondary school classroom,

the

opportunity

to

speak

for

each

student

is

thirty

seconds

per

lesson

or

one

hour

per

year.

They

point

out

that

the

lack

of

opportunity to practise the new language, especially the oral-aural

skills, is one of the main reasons for the low achievement of many

classroom second-language learners.

The

most

distinctive

advantage

of

small

group

work

is

that

it

increases language practice opportunities. Long .(1976 cited in

Allwright and Bailey 1991 p147) found some striking quantitative

and

qualitative

differences

in

the

amount

and

types

of

the

target

language

used

by

the

learners

in

pairs

(called

'dyads')

compared

with the lockstep class. Not only did the learners in pairs get more

turns,

but

they

also

performed

a

wide

range

of

communicative

functions with the language. In the study carried out by Pica and

Doughty (1985 p115-132), in which small group interactions were

compared

with

the

more

traditional

teacher-fronted

format,

they

found that

to

use

the

target

language

in

group

than

in

teacher- fronted

activities,

through

either

taking

more

turns

or

producing

more

samples of their interlanguage.

2. Group Work Provides a Natural Setting for Communication

In

many

language

classes,

it

is

hardly

surprising

to

find

that

interactions between teacher and students or between students and

students in front of the class do not work very well because many

6