Abstract
This study aims to explore the capabilities of videoconferencing for providing L2 learners with input modification, feedback, and opportunities to produce output through negotiation. The potential of videoconferencing for language learning has already been discussed in literature. Its greatest advantage might lie in giving learners numerous opportunities to come into authentic contact and to interact in real time with native speakers and speakers of other languages. However, unlike most of the studies on videoconferencing and language learning that have focused on interactive contexts with native speakers or with expert speakers, in the present article I would like to discuss the potential of videoconferencing for negotiated interaction among foreign language learners. The students who participated in this investigation, which resulted from collaboration between the University of Bielsko-Biala (Poland) and the University of León (Spain), were from Poland and Spain, respectively (English majors in both cases). Beside the fact that videoconferenced spoken interactions between the students from two different countries were highly valued by the participants, the findings confirm claims made by Courtney (1996) and suggest that also in this particular context, the quantity of negotiation of meaning seems to depend on the particular type of task.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Berkenkotter, C., and T. Huckin. 1995. Genre knowledge and disciplinary communication: Culture/cognition/power. Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bloom, B., and D. Krathwohl. 1977. Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
Brock, C. 1986. The effect of referential questions on ESL classroom discourse. TESOL Quarterly 20: 47–59.
Bygate, M. 1987. Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carter, R.A., and M.J. McCarthy. 2006. Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide to spoken and written grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chapelle, C.A. 2001. Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Colwell O’Callaghan, V. 2012. Engaging L2 undergraduates in relevant project work and interaction: A role for video conferencing. Language Learning in Higher Education 2: 441–461.
Council of Europe. 2001. The common European framework of references for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf. Accessed 1 Apr 2013.
Courtney, M. 1996. Talking to learn: Selecting and using peer group oral task. English Language Teaching 50: 318–326.
Ellis, R. 1994. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foster, P. 1998. A classroom perspective on negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics 19: 1–23.
Fraser, B. 1999. What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31: 931–52.
Fung, L., and R. Carter. 2007. Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics 28: 410–439.
Katz, S. 2001. Videoconferencing with the French-speaking world: A user’s guide. Foreign Language Annals 34: 152–157.
Kern, R., P. Ware, and M. Warschauer. 2004. Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24: 243–260.
Kim, J., and D. Craig. 2012. Validation of a videoconferenced speaking test. Computer Assisted Language Learning 25: 257–275.
Kinginger, C., and J.A. Belz. 2005. Sociocultural perspectives on pragmatic development in foreign language learning: Microgenetic case studies from telecollaboration and residence abroad. Intercultural Pragmatics 2: 369–422.
Lawson, T., Ch. Comber, J. Gage, and A. Cullum-Hanshaw. 2010. Images of the future for education? Videoconferencing: A literature review. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 19: 295–314.
Lee, Y. 2007. Fostering second language oral communication through constructivist interaction in desktop videoconferencing. Foreign Language Annals 40: 635–649.
Levy, M., and G. Stockwell. 2006. CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer assisted language learning. Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Long, M. 1996. The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Handbook of second language acquisition, vol. 2, ed. W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia, 413–478. San Diego, CA: Academic.
Loranc-Paszylk, B. 2011. Exploring the potential of videoconferencing in foreign language teaching for speaking skills development: evidence from a case study. Scientific Bulletin - Education Sciences Series 2: 37–58.
Martin, M. 2005. Seeing is believing: The role of videoconferencing in distance learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 36: 397–405.
O’Dowd, R. 2000. Intercultural learning via videoconferencing: A pilot exchange project. ReCALL 12: 49–63.
Ozcelik, H., and Z. Zoltay-Paprika. 2010. Developing emotional awareness in cross-cultural communication: A videoconferencing approach. Journal of Management Education 34: 671–699.
Phillips, M. 2010. The perceived value of videoconferencing with primary pupils learning to speak a modern language. Language Learning Journal 38: 221–238.
Pica, T. 1987. Interlanguage adjustments as an outcome on NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning 37: 563–593.
Pica, T., and C. Doughty. 1985. Input and interaction in the communicative language classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In Input in second language acquisition, ed. S.M. Gass and C.G. Madden, 115–136. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Pica, T., R. Kanagy, and J. Falodun. 1993. Choosing and using communicative tasks for second language instruction. In Tasks in a pedagogical context, ed. G. Crookes and S.M. Gass, 9–34. Cleveland, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics 11: 129–158.
Schwartz, J. 1980. Error correction as an interactional resource. In Discourse analysis in second language research, ed. D. Larsen-Freeman, 138–153. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Smith, S. 2003. Online videoconferencing: An application to teacher education. JSTE E Journal 18: 62–65.
Swain, M. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Input in second language acquisition, ed. S.M. Gass and C. Madden, 235–256. New York: Newbury House.
Swain, M. 2000. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In Sociocultural theory and second language learning, ed. J.P. Lantolf, 97–114. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Varonis, E., and S. Gass. 1985. Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics 6: 71–90.
Wang, Y. 2006. Negotiation of meaning in desktop videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. ReCALL 18: 122–145.
Wang, Y. 2007. Task design in videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. CALICO Journal 24: 590–630.
White, C. 2003. Language learning in distance education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. 1991. Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yanguas, I. 2010. Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: It’s about time! Language Learning and Technology 14: 72–93.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Loranc-Paszylk, B. (2015). The Foreign Language Classroom in the New Media Age: Videoconferencing and Negotiated Interaction Among L2 Learners. In: Piasecka, L., Adams-Tukiendorf, M., Wilk, P. (eds) New Media and Perennial Problems in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07686-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07686-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07685-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07686-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)