Cited by 340EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

9. PEER-PEER DIALOGUE AS A MEANS OF SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Swain, Merrill, Brooks, Lindsay, Tocalli-Beller, Agustina·2002·Annual Review of Applied Linguistics

Abstract

From the theoretical perspective of a sociocultural theory of mind, cognition and knowledge are dialogically constructed. Embedded in this theoretical framework, this chapter reviews research studies in which peer-peer dialogue is linked to second language learning as students engage in writing, speaking, listening and reading activities. The review takes the stance that the type of dialogue of particular significance in the language learning process is collaborative dialogue, or that which occurs when learners encounter linguistic problems and attempt to solve them together. In such conditions language is used both as a communicative and cognitive tool. From the studies reviewed, we conclude that peer-peer collaborative dialogue mediates second language learning. We also conclude that although the studies reported few adverse effects of peer collaboration, teaching learners how and why to collaborate may be important to enhance peer-mediated learning. The chapter calls for more research which provides clear evidence of the connections between peer-peer dialogue and second language learning and more studies which investigate longer term learning. Such studies linking peer-peer dialogue to language learning can be instructive for teachers, researchers, and learners, and make us all more aware of the process of learning a second language.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0267190502000090

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Students, including those of the same L2 proficiency, can and do learn from one another when working in pairs or small groups.

    “Moreover, contra Bruton, students, including those of the same L2 proficiency, can and do learn from one another when working in pairs or small groups (Eckerth, 2008;Swain, Brooks, & Tocalli-Beller, 2002).”

    From In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016) · cites this paper as Swain, Brooks, & Tocalli-Beller, 2002

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A.
Venue
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
Published
2002-03
Volume
22
Pages
171-185
ISSN
  • 0267-1905 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6356
OpenAlex
W2149205793
Cited by
340
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 20
FWCI
45.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
second language acquisition, collaborative dialogue, peer-mediated learning, peer collaboration, learning mediation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review