Premium
Task‐Based Interactions in Classroom and Laboratory Settings
Author(s) -
Gass Susan,
Mackey Alison,
RossFeldman Lauren
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
language learning
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.882
H-Index - 103
eISSN - 1467-9922
pISSN - 0023-8333
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00646.x
Subject(s) - psychology , task (project management) , mathematics education , foreign language , empirical research , language acquisition , task analysis , applied linguistics , pedagogy , linguistics , philosophy , management , epistemology , economics
This study was originally motivated by claims by a few classroom researchers (e.g., Foster, 1998, see Foster & Ohta, 2005) that the findings of laboratory‐based studies of second‐language interaction cannot automatically be applied to classroom language learning settings. Instead of simply accepting this assumption, we treated it as an empirical question. Our study was designed to examine the impact of setting—classroom and laboratory—on task‐based interactions. We worked with learners of Spanish as a foreign language. Seventy‐four university‐level learners in dyads completed three interactive tasks. The tasks were designed in partnership with their instructors to be consistent with activities that these learners would do as part of their regular instruction. They were also consistent with activities that second language researchers typically use to elicit data in experimental work. Half of the learners worked in the classroom with their regular teacher and the other half met in a laboratory and were supervised by a researcher. Our findings indicated that there were significant differences in the incidence of interactional modifications among tasks. Interestingly, however, these differences were found in both the classroom and laboratory settings. No significant differences in interactional patterns were found between the two settings. Our finding that there were no significant differences between classroom and laboratory settings has been widely cited in publications on task‐based language learning (e.g., Bygate & Samuda, 2009; Eckerth, 2009; Ellis, 2010; Fujii, Obata, Takahashi, & Tanabe, 2008; Jenks, 2009; Johnstone, 2006; Nassaji, 2007; Philp, Oliver, & Mackey, 2006; Révész, 2009). Subsequent work in the field has continued to find similar task effects on interaction in other learner populations and instructional settings (e.g., Eckerth, 2009; Fujii & Mackey, 2009; Gilabert, Baron, & Llanes, 2009). In summary then, a major contribution of our study was to raise awareness that the effects of setting on interactional processes cannot simply be assumed and claimed but should be empirically demonstrated. The onus is on both classroom and laboratory researchers to determine whether setting has influenced their findings, and if so, how and to what degree.