Abstract
This chapter discusses some of the ideas of social interaction as a resource for learning. To begin, it outlines the role of interaction and how the frequency of available interactions may afford active participants valuable means for learning. Further, Vygotsky’s notions of play are presented to demonstrate how it can create optimal situations for the generation of zones of proximal development (ZPDs). The term “scaffolding” represents the aid and support that is needed within the ZPD to help novice learners reach a higher level of understanding and maintain intersubjectivity. Next, this chapter explores some of the theoretical underpinnings of language learning through interaction and by talking. Finally, it reviews some of the current research on spoken language use and interactions in a variety of CLIL contexts. Some quasi-experimental studies and other classroom research suggest that CLIL learners are generally more linguistically proficient than their non-CLIL peers are. However, other studies point out that more rigorous and robust empirical research must be conducted in order for these claims to be substantiated. Meanwhile, recent research using conversation analysis (CA) in CLIL classrooms provides qualitative evidence of what teachers and learners are capable of achieving in joint interactions. It additionally indicates that content learning can occur during peer interactions despite limited foreign language proficiency.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
References
Atkinson, D. (2011). Introduction: Cognitivism and second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 1–23). New York: Routledge.
Basterrechea, M., & García Mayo, M. (2013). Language-related episodes during collaborative tasks: A comparison of CLIL and EFL learners. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 25–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2009). Communicative competence in the CLIL lesson. In Y. R. de Zarobe & R. M. J. Catalàn (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 197–214). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U. (Eds.). (2010). Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
De Graaff, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y., & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool for effective L2 pedagogy in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 603–624.
De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51–68.
Donato, R. (2000). Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second language classroom. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 27–50). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Duran, R. T., & Gauvain, M. (1993). The role of age versus expertise in peer collaboration during joint planning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55(2), 227–242.
Ellis, R. (1998). The evaluation of communicative tasks. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials development in language teaching (pp. 217–238). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evnitskaya, N., & Morton, T. (2011). Knowledge construction, meaning-making and interaction in CLIL science classroom communities of practice. Language and Education, 25(2), 109–127.
Gass, S. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Gassner, D., & Maillat, D. (2006). Spoken competence in CLIL: A pragmatic take on recent Swiss data. Vienna English Working Papers VIEWS, 15(3), 15–22.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gibson, E. J. (1984). Perceptual development from the ecological approach. In M. Lamb, A. L. Brown, & B. Rogoff (Eds.), Advances in developmental psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 243–286). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Holzman, L. (2010). Without creating ZPDs there is no creativity. In M. C. Connery, V. P. John-Steiner, & A. Marjanovic-Shane (Eds.), Vygotsky and creativity: A cultural-historical approach to play, meaning making, and the arts (pp. 27–39). New York: Peter Lang.
Jakonen, T., & Morton, T. (2015). Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 73–94.
Krashen, S. (1983). Newmark’s “Ignorance Hypothesis” and current second language acquisition theory. In S. M. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer and language learning (pp. 135–153). Rowley: Newbury House.
Kurata, N. (2011). Foreign language learning and use: Interaction in social networks. London: Continuum.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J. P. (2011). The sociocultural approach to second language acquisition: Sociocultural theory, second language acquisition, and artificial L2 development. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 24–47). New York: Routledge.
Lantolf, J. P., & Appel, G. (1994). Theoretical framework: An introduction to Vygotskian approaches to second language research. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 1–32). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education. New York: Routledge.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language earning (pp. 201–224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition [Special section]. Annals New York Academy of Sciences, 379, 259–278.
Long, M. H. (1983a). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177–193.
Long, M. H. (1983b). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126–141.
Long, M. H. (1985). Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 377–393). London: Newbury.
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). San Diego: Academic Press.
Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 207–228.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalance approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–587.
Maillat, D. (2010). The pragmatics of L2 in CLIL. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 39–58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Markee, N. (2005). Conversation analysis for second language acquisition. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 355–374). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher-learner negotiations in content-based instruction: Communication as cross-purposes? Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 286–325.
Nikula, T. (2005). English as an object and tool of study in classrooms: Interactional effects and pragmatic implications. Linguistics and Education, 16(1), 27–58.
Nikula, T. (2007). The IRF pattern and space for interaction: Observation on EFL and CLIL classrooms. In C. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp. 179–204). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Norton, B., & McKinney, C. (2011). An identity approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 73–94). New York: Routledge.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345–375.
Reed, E. S. (1993). The intention to use a specific affordance: A conceptual framework for psychology. In R. Wozniak & K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Development in context: Acting and thinking in specific environments (pp. 45–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rumlich, D. (2013). Students’ general English proficiency prior to CLIL: Empirical evidence for substantial differences between prospective CLIL and non-CLIL students in Germany. In S. Breidbach & B. Viebrock (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) in Europe: Research perspectives on policy and practice (pp. 181–201). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Rumlich, D. (forthcoming). Evaluating the effects of bilingual education in Germany: The development of NRW CLIL students’ general English language proficiency and their affective-motivational dispositions (DENOCS) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University Duisburg-Essen, Essen.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language acquisition. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles & practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M., Kinnear, P., & Steinmann, L. (2011). Sociocultural theory in second language education: An introduction through narratives. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Takahashi, E. (1998). Language development in social interactions: A longitudinal study of Japanese FLES program from a Vygotskyan approach. Foreign Language Annals, 31(3), 392–406.
Tudge, J., & Rogoff, B. (1999). Peer influences on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives. In P. Lloyd & C. Fernyhough (Eds.), Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments (Vol. 3, pp. 32–56). London: Routledge.
Urmeneta, C. E., & Evnitskaya, N. (2014). ‘Do you know Actimel?’ The adaptive nature of dialogic teacher-led discussions in the CLIL science classroom: A case study. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 165–180.
Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy & authenticity. New York: Longman.
Van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245–259). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Van Lier, L. (2007). Action-based teaching, autonomy and identity. Innovations in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 46–65.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet Psychology, 5(3), 6–18.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London: Routledge.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Whittaker, R., & Llinares, A. (2009). CLIL in social science classrooms: Analysis of spoken and written production. In Y. R. de Zarobe & R. M. J. Catalàn (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 215–234). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Wood, D. (1999). Teaching the young child: Some relationships between social interaction, language, and thought. In P. Lloyd & C. Fernyhough (Eds.), Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments (Vol. 3, pp. 259–275). London: Routledge.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.
Zydatiß, W. (2007). Die Gerechtigkeitsfalle bilingualer Bildungsgänge. In D. Caspari, W. Hallet, A. Wegner, & W. Zydatiß (Eds.), Bilingualer Unterricht macht Schule (pp. 161–173). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Zydatiß, W. (2012). Linguistic threshold in the classroom? The threshold hypothesis revisited. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4), Article 2. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/14/article2.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Devos, N.J. (2016). Exploring Social Interaction as a Resource in CLIL. In: Peer Interactions in New Content and Language Integrated Settings. Educational Linguistics, vol 24. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22219-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22219-6_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22218-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22219-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)