Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-2053
  • E-ISSN: 2589-207x
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Previous research shows young learners are indeed able to interact in a foreign language (FL) and negotiate for meaning while also attending to form. One of the variables that has been least studied among young learners (YLs) in FL contexts is the kind of relationships established among the members of a dyad and how the nature of pair dynamics affects the learners’ ability to attend to language. The present study explores the pair dynamics and the frequency and types of language learning opportunities in the form of language-related episodes (LREs) that emerge during peer interaction in a spot-the-differences task completed by young learners in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context. We also examine the effects of age and pair dynamics on the production of these LREs. Results suggest that children interact mainly using collabo­rative patterns and can actually attend to language in episodes which are mainly meaning-focused and are resolved particularly in expert/novice dyads. Age has been found to significantly affect the production of LREs but pair dynamics seems to be less determinant. Findings corroborate the need for YLs to be given the chance to interact with their peers in class to foster learning opportunities.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Adams, R., & Ross-Feldman, L.
    (2008) Does writing influence learner attention to form?InD. Belcher & A. Hirvela (Eds.), The oral-literate connection. Perspectives on L2 speaking, writing, and other media interactions (pp.243–265). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. doi:  10.3998/mpub.231182
    https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.231182 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahmadian, M., & Tajabadi, A.
    (2017) Patterns of interaction in young EFL learners’ pair work: the relationship between pair dynamics and vocabulary acquisition. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), 98–114. doi:  10.17576/3L‑2017‑2301‑08
    https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-08 [Google Scholar]
  3. Azkarai, A., & García Mayo, M. P.
    (2017) Task repetition effects on L1 use in EFL child task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research, 21, 480–495. doi:  10.1177/1362168816654169
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816654169 [Google Scholar]
  4. Azkarai, A., & Imaz Agirre, A.
    (2016) Negotiation of meaning strategies in child EFL mainstream and CLIL settings. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 844–870. doi:  10.1002/tesq.249
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.249 [Google Scholar]
  5. Azkarai, A., & Kopinska, M.
    (2020) Young EFL learners and collabo­rative writing: A study on patterns of interaction, engagement in LREs, and task motivation. System, 94. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2020.102338
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102338 [Google Scholar]
  6. Basterrechea, M., & Leeser, M. J.
    (2019) Language-related episodes and learner proficiency during collabo­rative dialogue in CLIL. Language Awareness, 28(2), 97–113. doi:  10.1080/09658416.2019.1606229
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2019.1606229 [Google Scholar]
  7. Butler, Y. G., & Zheng, W.
    (2015) Young foreign language learners’ interactional development in task-based paired assessment in their first and foreign languages. A case of English learners in China. Education, 3–13, 44, 292–321. doi:  10.1080/03004279.2013.813955
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2013.813955 [Google Scholar]
  8. Calzada, A., & García Mayo, M. P.
    (2020) Child learners’ reflections about EFL grammar in a collabo­rative writing task: When form is not at odds with communication. Language Awareness. doi:  10.1080/09658416.2020.1751178
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2020.1751178 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen, W.
    (2017) The effect of conversation engagement on L2 learning opportunities. ELT Journal, 71, 329–340. doi:  10.1093/elt/ccw075
    https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw075 [Google Scholar]
  10. Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A.
    (2014) Challenges in teaching English to young learners: Global perspectives and local realities. TESOL Quarterly, 48(4), 738–762. doi:  10.1002/tesq.148
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.148 [Google Scholar]
  11. Damon, W., & Phelps, E.
    (1989) Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 9–19. doi:  10.1016/0883‑0355(89)90013‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90013-X [Google Scholar]
  12. Donato, R.
    (1988) Beyond group: A psycholinguistic rationale for collective activity in second-language learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Delaware, Newark.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (1994) Collective scaffolding in second language learning. InJ. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. García Mayo, M. P.
    (2017) Learning foreign languages in primary school. Research insights. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. doi:  10.21832/9781783098118
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783098118 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2018) Child task-based interaction in EFL Settings: Research and challenges. International Journal of English Studies, 18(2), 119–143. doi:  10.6018/ijes/2018/2/319731
    https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2018/2/319731 [Google Scholar]
  16. García Mayo, M. P., & Azkarai, A.
    (2016) EFL task-based interaction: Does task modality impact on language-related episodes?InM. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning: Research Agenda and Pedagogical Implications (pp.241-266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/lllt.45.10gar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.10gar [Google Scholar]
  17. García Mayo, M. P., & Imaz Agirre, A.
    (2016) Task repetition and its impact on EFL children’s negotiation of meaning strategies and pair dynamics. An exploratory study. The Language Learning Journal, 44, 451–466. doi:  10.1080/09571736.2016.1185799
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1185799 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2017) Child EFL interaction; age, instructional setting and development. InJ. Enever & E. Lindgren (Eds.), Researching the complexity of early language learning in instructed contexts (pp.249–268). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. doi:  10.21832/9781783098323‑016
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783098323-016 [Google Scholar]
  19. (2019) Task modality and pair formation method: Their impact on patterns of interaction and LREs among EFL primary school children. System, 80, 165–175. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2018.11.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.11.011 [Google Scholar]
  20. García Mayo, M. P., & Lázaro Ibarrola, A.
    (2015) Do children negotiate for meaning in task-based interaction? Evidence from CLIL and EFL settings. System, 54, 40–54. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2014.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Garton, S., & Copland, F.
    (Eds.) (2019) The Routledge handbook of teaching English to young learners. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Gass, S., & Mackey, A.
    (2007) Input, interaction and output in SLA. InB. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp.175–199). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ives, D.
    (2004) Three NS-NNS upper primary school pairs: A case study. Australian Language & Literacy Matters, 1(4), 11–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kim, Y., & McDonough, K.
    (2008) The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collabo­rative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 211–234. doi:  10.1177/1362168807086288
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807086288 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lázaro Ibarrola, A., & Hidalgo, M. A.
    (2017) Benefits and limitations of conversational interactions among young learners of English in a CLIL context. InM. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school. Research insights (pp.86–102). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. doi:  10.21832/9781783098118‑007
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783098118-007 [Google Scholar]
  26. Leeser, M. J.
    (2004) Learner proficiency and focus on form during collabo­rative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8, 55–81. doi:  10.1191/1362168804lr134oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168804lr134oa [Google Scholar]
  27. Lockhart, C., & Ng, P.
    (1995) Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups: Stances, functions and content. Language Learning, 45, 605–655. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00456.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00456.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Mackey, A.
    (2012) Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Mackey, A., & Goo, J.
    (2007) Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. InA. Mackey (Ed.). Conversational interaction and second language acquisition (pp.407–453). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. MacWhinney, B.
    (2000) The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (third edition): Volume I: Transcription format and programs, Volume II: The database. Computational Linguistics, 26(4), 657. doi:  10.1162/coli.2000.26.4.657
    https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.2000.26.4.657 [Google Scholar]
  31. Moranski, K., & Toth, P. D.
    (2016) Small-group meta-analytic talk and Spanish L2 development. InM. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.) Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp.291–316). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/lllt.45.12mor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.12mor [Google Scholar]
  32. Murphy, V., & Evangelou, M.
    (2016) Early childhood education in English for speakers of other languages. London: British Council.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Navés, T., Miralpeix, I., & Celaya, M. L.
    (2005) Who transfers more…and what? Cross-linguistic influence in relation to school grade and language dominance in EFL. International Journal of Multilingualism, 2(2), 113–134. doi:  10.1080/14790710508668380
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710508668380 [Google Scholar]
  34. Oliver, R., & Azkarai, A.
    (2019) Patterns of interaction and young ESL learners: What is the impact of proficiency and task type?Language Teaching for Young Learners, 1(1),82–102. doi:  10.1075/ltyl.00006.oli
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.00006.oli [Google Scholar]
  35. Oliver, R. & Bogachenko, T.
    (2019) Children and tasks. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 12, 48–65. doi: 10.32038/ltrq.2019.12.04.pdf
    https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2019.12.04.pdf [Google Scholar]
  36. Payant, C., & Kim, Y. K.
    (2017) Impact of task modality on collabo­rative dialogue among plurilingual learners: A classroom-based study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(5), 614–627. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2017.1292999
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1292999 [Google Scholar]
  37. Philp, J., & Tognini, R.
    (2009) Language acquisition in foreign language contexts and the differential benefits of interaction. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(3–4), 245–266. doi:  10.1515/iral.2009.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.011 [Google Scholar]
  38. Philp, J., Adams, R., & Iwashita, N.
    (2014) Peer interaction and second language learning. London: Routledge. doi:  10.4324/9780203551349
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203551349 [Google Scholar]
  39. Pinter, A.
    (2007) Some benefits of peer-peer interaction: 10-year-old children practicing with a communication task. Language Teaching Research, 11, 189–207. doi:  10.1177/1362168807074604
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074604 [Google Scholar]
  40. Pladevall-Ballester, E., & Vraciu, A.
    (2017) Exploring early EFL: L1 use in oral narratives by CLIL and non-CLIL primary school learners. InM. P. García-Mayo (Ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights (pp.124–148). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783098118‑009
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783098118-009 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2020) EFL child peer interaction: Measuring the effect of time, proficiency pairing and language of interaction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching (Special Issue), 10(3), 449–472. doi:  10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.3
    https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.3 [Google Scholar]
  42. Ross-Feldman, L.
    (2007) Interaction in the L2 classroom: Does gender influence learning opportunities?InA. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp.52–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Rokita Raśkow, J., & Ellis, M.
    (2019) Early instructed second language acquisition. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/ROKITA2500
    https://doi.org/10.21832/ROKITA2500 [Google Scholar]
  44. Rouhshad, A., & Storch, N.
    (2016) A focus on mode. Patterns of interaction in face-to-face and computer-mediated contexts. InM. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp.267–289). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/lllt.45.11rou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.11rou [Google Scholar]
  45. Sato, M., & Ballinger, S.
    (2016) Understanding peer interaction: Research synthesis and directions. InM. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp.1–30). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/lllt.45.01int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.01int [Google Scholar]
  46. Storch, N.
    (2002) Patterns of interaction in ESL pairwork. Language Learning, 52, 119–158. doi:  10.1111/1467‑9922.00179
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2008) Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness, 17, 95–114. doi:  10.1080/09658410802146644
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410802146644 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2009) The nature of pair interaction: learners’ interaction in an ESL class: its nature and impact on grammatical development. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Storch, N., & Aldosari, A.
    (2013) Pairing learners in pair work activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31–48. doi:  10.1177/1362168812457530
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812457530 [Google Scholar]
  50. Swain, M.
    (1998) Focus on form through conscious reflection. InC. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.64–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
    (1998) Task-based second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1998.tb01209.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01209.x [Google Scholar]
  52. (2001) Focus on form through collabo­rative dialogue: Exploring task effects. InM. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second-language learning, teaching and testing (pp.99–118). London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Tan, L., Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N.
    (2010) Pair interactions and mode of communication: Comparing face-to-face and computer mediated communication. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 27.1–27.24. doi:  10.2104/aral1027
    https://doi.org/10.2104/aral1027 [Google Scholar]
  54. Vraciu, A., & Pladevall-Ballester, E.
    (2020) L1 use in peer interaction: Exploring time and proficiency pairing effects in primary school EFL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2020.1767029
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1767029 [Google Scholar]
  55. Vygotsky, L. S.
    (1978) Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M.
    (2007) Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogues between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121–42. doi:  10.1177/136216880607074599
    https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880607074599 [Google Scholar]
  57. Williams, J.
    (1999) Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, 49(4), 583–625. doi:  10.1111/0023‑8333.00103
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00103 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): child EFL; LREs; pair dynamics; peer interaction
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error