Group Work, Interlanguage Talk, and Second Language Acquisition
Open accessAbstract
The use of group work in classroom second language learning has long been supported by sound pedagogical arguments. Recently, however, a psycholinguistic rationale for group work has emerged from second language acquisition research on nonnative speaker/non-native speaker conversation, or interlanguage talk. Provided careful attention is paid to the structure of tasks students work on together, the negotiation work possible in group work makes it an attractive alternative to the teacher-led, "lockstep" mode, and a viable classroom substitute for individual conversations with native speakers.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
L1 interlocutors can interact with L2 learners in positive ways, but it is not always the case that interaction with L1 speakers is better than interaction with L2 peers.
“In sum, these studies indicate that L1 interlocutors can interact with L2 learners in positive ways, but it is not always the case that interaction with L1 speakers is better than interaction with L2 peers.”
From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Long & Porter 1985
L2 speakers can sometimes be better for interlocutors than L1 speakers.
“Indeed, L2 speakers can sometimes be better for interlocutors than L1 speakers, something that should perhaps be stressed in the classroom as support for interactive tasks (Long & Porter 1985).”
From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Long & Porter 1985
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 25 · Cited by 901
- Authors
- Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
- San Francisco State University (US)
- Venue
- TESOL Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1985-06
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 207
- ISSN
- 0039-8322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2131207094
- Cited by
- 901
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 30
- FWCI
- 72.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- TESOL Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
- 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 › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Second Language Learning and Teaching
- Keywords
- group work, second language acquisition, negotiation of meaning, task structure, classroom interaction, native speaker model, cooperative learning
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
