Young Foreign Language Learners’ Interactions During Task-Based Paired Assessments

Despite the popularity of task-based language teaching (TBLT) in foreign language (FL) education at elementary school, it remains unclear how young learners’ FL abilities can best be evaluated with tasks. The present study seeks to understand developmental differences in interactions among elementary-school students during task-based language assessment (TBLA) and aims to address the possibilities and limitations of introducing paired-TBLA among young FL learners. The participants were 32 fourth-grade students (ages 9–10) and 32 sixth-grade students (ages 11–12) and their teachers from a FL program where TBLT was mandated. The students were engaged in two sets of assessment tasks with their peers. It was found that the interaction patterns were different between the two grade levels. Compared with the sixth-grade dyads, the fourth-grade dyads showed less mutual topic development, used formulaic turn-taking more frequently, and had a harder time taking their partners’ perspectives during the tasks. Consequently, a smaller variety of interactional functions were observed among the fourth graders. The potential for eliciting a wide range of interactional functions, which is a primary advantage of introducing paired assessment, may have limited application for younger dyads. The study also discusses the strategic roles that such interactional characteristics may play among younger learners.

[1]  YouJin Kim,et al.  The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners , 2008 .

[2]  Myriam Met,et al.  Critical Issues in Early Second Language Learning: Building for Our Children's Future. , 1998 .

[3]  Neomy Storch,et al.  Patterns of Interaction in ESL Pair Work , 2002 .

[4]  W. P. Dickson,et al.  Children's oral communication skills , 1981 .

[5]  Giovanna Donzelli,et al.  Teaching Languages to Young Learners , 2003 .

[6]  Micheline Chalhoub-Deville,et al.  Second language interaction: current perspectives and future trends , 2003 .

[7]  Jeff Connor-Linton,et al.  TALKING AND TESTING: DISCOURSE APPROACHES TO THE ASSESSMENT OF ORAL PROFICIENCY.Richard Young and Agnes Weiyun He (Eds.). Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1998. Pp. x + 395. NLG 138 cloth. , 2000, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[8]  P. Glover,et al.  Readers respond. Oral testing in pairs - secondary school perspective , 2001 .

[9]  Evelina D. Galaczi,et al.  Peer–Peer Interaction in a Speaking Test: The Case of the First Certificate in English Examination , 2008 .

[10]  Barry O'Sullivan,et al.  Exploring Gender and Oral Proficiency Interview Performance. , 2000 .

[11]  D. Freeman Reflecting on the Cognitive–Social Debate in Second Language Acquisition , 2007 .

[12]  Marysia Johnson The Art of Non-conversation , 2008 .

[13]  A. Ohta Applying Sociocultural Theory to an Analysis of Learner Discourse: Learner-Learner Collaborative Interaction in the Zone of Proximal Development , 1995 .

[14]  Barry O’Sullivan,et al.  Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance , 2002 .

[15]  R. Johnstone Context-sensitive assessment of modern languages in primary (elementary) and early secondary education: Scotland and the European experience , 2000 .

[16]  R. Oliver Negative Feedback in Child NS-NNS Conversation , 1995, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[17]  Lindsay Brooks,et al.  Interacting in pairs in a test of oral proficiency: Co-constructing a better performance , 2009 .

[18]  Rhonda Oliver,et al.  Negotiation of Meaning in Child Interactions , 1998 .

[19]  Amy Snyder Ohta,et al.  Second Language Acquisition Processes in the Classroom: Learning Japanese , 2001 .

[20]  J. Chatwin Conversation analysis. , 2004, Complementary therapies in medicine.

[21]  Keith Richards,et al.  Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL , 2003 .

[22]  Anne Strauss,et al.  Assessing Young Language Learners , 2016 .

[23]  David Carless,et al.  The communicativeness of activities in a task-based innovation in Guangdong China , 2009 .

[24]  Claire J. Kramsch From Language Proficiency to Interactional Competence , 1986 .

[25]  A. Pinter Some benefits of peer–peer interaction: 10-year-old children practising with a communication task , 2007 .

[26]  R. Weinert The Role of Formulaic Language in Second Language Acquisition: A Review , 1995 .

[27]  Michael H. Long The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition , 1996 .

[28]  R. Oliver Age Differences in Negotiation and Feedback in Classroom and Pairwork , 2000 .

[29]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  The evolution of research on collaborative learning , 1996 .

[30]  Lynne Cameron,et al.  Teaching Languages to Young Learners: Frontmatter , 2001 .

[31]  Vivien Berry Personality Differences and Oral Test Performance , 2007 .

[32]  Richard Donato,et al.  A Tale of Two Schools: Developing Sustainable Early Foreign Language Programs , 2010 .

[33]  Marianne Celce-Murcia,et al.  Rethinking the Role of Communicative Competence in Language Teaching , 2008 .

[34]  Merrill Swain,et al.  Examining dialogue: another approach to content specification and to validating inferences drawn from test scores , 2001 .

[35]  L. L. Tan PAIR INTERACTIONS AND MODE OF COMMUNICATION COMPARING FACE-TO-FACE AND COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION , 2016 .

[36]  J. Sidnell Conversation Analysis: Sociological , 2015 .

[37]  Ildikó Csépes Measuring Oral Proficiency through Paired-Task Performance , 2009 .

[38]  Tim McNamara,et al.  "The devil is in the detail": Researching gender issues in language assessment , 2004 .

[39]  R. Young Interactional Competence in Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing , 2011 .

[40]  J. Norton,et al.  The paired format in the Cambridge Speaking Tests , 2005 .

[41]  R. Young,et al.  Language Proficiency Interviews: A Discourse Approach , 2012 .

[42]  Tim McNamara,et al.  ‘Interaction’ in second language performance assessment: Whose performance?1 , 1997 .

[43]  Dolors Girbau,et al.  Accurate Referential Communication and its Relation with Private and Social Speech in a Naturalistic Context , 2004, The Spanish Journal of Psychology.

[44]  K. Carpenter,et al.  An oral interview procedure for assessing second language abilities in children , 1995 .

[45]  Willis Edmondson,et al.  The study of second language acquisition , 1995 .

[46]  Diana Masny,et al.  Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity , 1998 .

[47]  Merrill Swain,et al.  Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners , 2007 .

[48]  R. Weinert Formulaicity and usage-based language: linguistic, psycholinguistic and acquisitional manifestations , 2010 .

[49]  Lyn May,et al.  Co-constructed interaction in a paired speaking test: The rater's perspective , 2009 .

[50]  Rhonda Oliver,et al.  The Patterns of Negotiation for Meaning in Child Interactions , 2002 .

[51]  Carsten Roever,et al.  Language testing: The social dimension , 2006 .

[52]  E. Schegloff Reflections on Quantification in the Study of Conversation , 1993 .

[53]  David Carless,et al.  From Testing to Productive Student Learning: Implementing Formative Assessment in Confucian-Heritage Settings , 2010 .

[54]  Alison Mackey,et al.  Interactional input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child dyads , 2003 .

[55]  L Taylor,et al.  THE PAIRED SPEAKING TEST FORMAT: RECENT STUDIES , 2001 .

[56]  Michael Milanovic,et al.  Continuity and innovation : revising the Cambridge Proficiency in English Examination, 1913-2002 , 2003 .

[57]  Leo Van Lier,et al.  Reeling, Writhing, Drawling, Stretching, and Fainting in Coils: Oral Proficiency Interviews as Conversation , 1989 .

[58]  Z. Dörnyei,et al.  Communicative Competence: A Pedagogically Motivated Model with Content Specifications , 1995 .

[59]  Larry Davis,et al.  The influence of interlocutor proficiency in a paired oral assessment , 2009 .

[60]  Rod Ellis,et al.  The Study of Second Language Acquisition , 1994 .