Resumo (PT):
Abstract (EN):
The quasi-experimental classroom study reported in this paper
compared the eff ectiveness of three adult EFL course delivery modes –
face-to-face group classes, one-to-one private tutoring and online selfstudy – by analysing learners’ cognitive engagement, understood as the
level of participation, involvement and eff ort of learners in each mode as
they completed the same language tasks. The study was conducted within a
Vygotskian sociocultural theoretical framework in which language serves as
a mediational tool in dyadic interaction and also as a means of cognitive selfregulation in inner speech during independent study.
Data included the transcribed talk of learner-learner and learner-teacher
dyads, and think-aloud protocols produced by online self-study learners.
These were analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively for the presence of
Language-Related Episodes (LREs), instances in which learners talk about the
language they are producing and other- or self-correct. Each LRE was then
further analysed for evidence of limited cognitive engagement, where linguistic
preferences were stated without further deliberation, or elaborate cognitive
engagement, where there was evidence of a cognitive self-regulation strategy.
Results suggest that elaborate cognitive engagement, evidenced in episodes
where participants notice and refl ect on language forms, test hypotheses,
generate rules or options from which to choose, and seek or provide
justifi cations, occurs to a similar extent in face-to-face group classes, oneto-one private tutoring and online self-study. Task design appears to aff ect
cognitive engagement, with most instances of engagement in the formfocussed passage editing task being elaborate rather than limited, while a
greater prevalence of limited engagement was observed in the meaningfocussed written composition. Slightly less limited engagement was observed
in one-to-one tuition, where teachers tended to “add” elaborate engagement
to episodes which would otherwise have displayed limited engagement only.
That elaborate engagement characterised LREs to a similar extent between
teacher-learner and learner-learner dyads suggests that a teacher is not
required in dyadic interaction for elaborate cognitive engagement to occur.
Learners in student-student dyads in group classes talk to test hypotheses and
generate options and justifi cations, although their dialogue tends to be less interrogative of each other than teacher-learner talk. This fi nding adds to the
considerable body of work that supports peer interaction as an opportunity
for learners to experiment with language and debate form and meaning.
Learners studying in group classes therefore appear to benefi t from cognitive
engagement that is quantitively, albeit not qualitatively, comparable to private
tuition contexts.
In peer-peer interaction, the prominence of LREs characterised by limited
engagement in one learner and elaborate engagement in the other suggests
it is unnecessary for both participants to be elaborately engaged for episodes
to be languaged and resolved. This suggests that dyadic interaction that is
asymmetrical in terms of cognitive engagement is not necessarily a problem
for teachers to address. While asymmetric interaction has been previously
observed in the literature in one-to-one tuition, and also in the higher
proportion of teacher-engaged episodes in the one-to-one mode in the present
study, the fi nding that asymmetricity in cognitive engagement is also a
feature of learner pairwork is a novel contribution of the present study to the
(...)
Language:
English
Type (Professor's evaluation):
Scientific
Contact:
Disponível em: https://ojs.letras.up.pt/index.php/LinguarumArena/article/view/13008