The Role of Scaffolding in L2 Learners’ Dialogic Reflections

Year 2022, Volume: 11 Issue: 3, 485 - 498, 13.10.2022

Tugce Temir , Hatice Ergül

https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.954650

Cited By: 1

Abstract

This article examines (1) the role of scaffolding and (2) scaffolding patterns that emerged in L2 learners’ dialogic reflections on their spoken performances. Dialogic reflection has recently become a vital concept in teacher development studies (Mann & Walsh, 2017), however, the role of dialogic reflection on learner empowerment has not been investigated. In this study, the term “dialogic reflection” is used to define 24 tertiary level L2 learners’ reflections on their spoken performances after they conduct six different paired speaking tasks which last 17 hours in total.
The present study observes these dialogic reflections of the students under the scope of Sociocultural Theory, which posits human mental functioning as a mediated process that occurred with the help of others (Ratner, 2002). The data is gathered from these reflection sessions, and it is analyzed through sociocultural discourse analysis (Mercer, 2004). Thanks to microanalysis of the data, the findings show that learners use scaffolding to be able to establish mutual understanding between each other (Musiol & Trognon, 1999) in terms of word search, grammatical correction, and content development, and they used three different patterns to reach their aim; asking for help, intentional intervention, and showing joint effort.

Keywords

scaffolding, sociocultural theory, dialogic reflection

İkinci Dil Öğrenenlerinin Yansıtıcı Dialoglarındaki Birbirlerini Desteklemenin Rolü

Abstract

Bu makale ikinci yabancı dil öğrencilerinin kendi konuşma performansları üzerine yaptıkları yansıtıcı diyaloglarda görülen birbirlerini desteklemenin rolünü ve birbirlerini desteklerken ortaya çıkan desenleri incelemektedir. Literatür incelendiğinde birlikte yapılan yansıtıcı konuşmanın daha çok öğretmen eğitiminde kullanıldığı gözlenmektedir (Mann & Walsh, 2017). Fakat bu çalışmamızda birlikte yansıma kelimesi ikinci dil öğrenen 24 öğrencinin 17 saatlik performansları üzerine yaptıkları konuşmalar olarak kullanılmıştır.
Bu çalışma, öğrencilerin yansıtıcı konuşmalarını sosyokültürel teori bağlamında insanın zihinsel işleyişini başkalarının yardımıyla gerçekleşmesine olanak sağlamasını esas alarak incelemektir. Veriler öğrencilerin yapmış olduğu yansıtıcı konuşma toplantılarından alınmış ve sosyokültürel söylem analizi yoluyla incelenmiştir (Mercer, 2004). Verilerin mikro analizi sayesinde, bulgular, birlikte yansıtma oturumlarında birbirlerini desteklemenin rolünü ve öğrencilerin birbirlerini desteklerken ne tür desenler ortaya çıktığını göstermektedir.

Keywords

Birbirini destekleme, Sosyokültürel Teori, Yansıtıcı Diyalog

References

• Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (4), 465-483.
• Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching principles of language learning and teaching White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
• Bruner, J. (1978). The role of dialogue in language acquisition. In S. R. J. Jarvella & W. J. M. Levelt (Eds.), The child’s conception of language (pp. 214–256). New York: Max-Plank-Institut for Psycholinguistic.
• Carson, J. Nelson, G. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction Journal of Second Language Writing, 5 (1996), pp. 1-19
• De Guerrero, M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84 (1), 51-68.
• Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Donato, R., & McCormick, D. (1994). A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of mediation. Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.2307/328584.
• Guerrero, M. C. M. de, & Villamil, O. S. (1994). Social-cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision. Modern Language Journal, 78, 484–496.
• Jefferson, G. (1984). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.191–222). Cambridge University Press.
• Johnson, M. & Mercer, N. (2019). Using sociocultural discourse analysis to analyze professional discourse Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 21 (2019) 267–277.
• Hellermann, J. & Pekarek Doehler, H. (2010) On the contingent nature of language‐learning tasks, Classroom Discourse, 1:1, 25-45.
• Karimi L. & Jalilvand M. (2014). The Effect of Peer and Teacher Scaffolding on the Reading Comprehension of EFL Learners in Asymmetrical and Symmetrical Groups, The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS) 5 (4), Winter 2014, Ser. 73/4 ISSN: 2008-8191. pp. 1-17.
• Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning Research in E. Hinkel, Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning,(pp. 355-365). London, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2008).Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second language, London, Equinox.
• Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Lesser, M. J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55-81.
• Lidz, C. S. (1991). Practitioner’s guide to dynamic assessment. New York: Guilford Press.
• Long, M. H. (1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, D. Coste, R. Ginsberg, and C. Kramsch (eds) Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspectives (p.39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Mann, S. & Walsh, S. (2017) Reflective Practice in English Language Teaching London: Routledge.
• McGroarty, M. E., & Zhu, W. (1997). Triangulation in classroom research: A study of peer revision. Language Learning, 47, 1-43.
• Mercer, N. (2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 137–168. https://doi. org/10.1558/japl.v1i2.137.
• Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2013). Second language learning theories (3rd Ed.). London: Routledge.
• Musiol, M., and A. Trognon (1999) Echec de la communication et réussite de la conversation en interaction pathologique. Verbum XXI.2: 207-232.
• Nelson, G. & Murphy J. (1992). An L2 writing group: Task and social dimensions Journal of Second Language Writing, 1 (1992), pp. 171-193.
• Ohta, A. (1995). Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of learner discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6 (2), 93–121.
• Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second- language-learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
• Ratner, C. (2002). Cultural psychology: Theory and method. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.
• Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 217-233.
• Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency, and collaboration in advanced second language learning. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). London, England: Continuum.
• Swain, M. (2007). Talking-it-through: Languaging as a source of learning. Plenary paper presented at the Social and Cognitive Aspects of Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
• Swain, M. & Deter, P. (2007). New Mainstream SLA theory: Expanded and Enriched, The Modern Language Journal, 91, Focus Issue, 0026-7902/07/820–836.
• Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99–118). London, England: Longman.
• Thorne, S. L. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language Learning and Technology, 7, 38-67.
• Thorne, S. L. (2009). ‘Community’, Semiotic Flows, and Mediated Contribution to Activity. Language Teaching, 42, 81-94.
• Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Van de Pol. J. & Volman M. & Beishuizen J. (2010) Scaffolding in Teacher-Student Interaction: A Decade of Research Educ Psychol Rev (2010) 22:271–296 DOI 10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6.
• van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. New York: Longman.
• VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (2015). Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Villamil, O. S., & Guerrero, M. C. M. de. (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19, 491–514.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Wertsch, J. V. (1979). From social interaction to higher psychological processes: A clarification and application of Vygotsky's theory. Human Development, 22(1), 1 22. https://doi.org/10.1159/000272425
• Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.