Negociación de significado y nivel de inglés al realizar tareas pedagógicas en aulas multilingües de educación primaria

  1. Asunción Martínez Arbelaiz 1
  2. Eider Saragueta 1
  3. Erika J. Leacox 2
  1. 1 Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
    info

    Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

    Lejona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/000xsnr85

  2. 2 Universidad de California, Davis
Revista:
Revista Nebrija de Lingüística aplicada a la enseñanza de Lenguas

ISSN: 1699-6569

Año de publicación: 2023

Volumen: 17

Número: 35

Páginas: 136-154

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Revista Nebrija de Lingüística aplicada a la enseñanza de Lenguas

Resumen

El foco de esta investigación es el efecto de la competencia lingüística y la elección del lenguaje en la interacción infantil mientras se trabaja en tareas de aula (Pica, Kanagy y Falodun, 1993; Seedhouse, 2005). Cuarenta parejas de hablantes no nativos-nativas (NNS) de inglés de 8-12 años completaron una tarea diseñada por su profesora en una escuela en Tolosa (Comunidad Autónoma Vasca). Las parejas se organizaron en niveles de competencia de acuerdo con sus grados y algunas tareas específicas diseñadas por su profesora de inglés, siguiendo a Lesser (2004). Las interacciones se registraron, examinando el efecto de las categorías de nivel de competencia en las instancias de atención a la forma. Se realizaron análisis para ver las variables de atención a la forma y finalización de tareas de cada categoría de nivel de competencia. Nuestros resultados sugieren que el nivel de competencia no tiene un efecto en el número de instancias de atención a la forma. A través de las categorías de nivel de competencia de interacción, se encontró que el alumnado utilizó menos expresiones en euskera, castellano y mixtas en los niveles de competencia más altos. Estos resultados arrojan luz sobre las prácticas docentes actuales con varias implicaciones pedagógicas.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Casamiglia, H. &Tusón. A. (2012). Las cosas del decir. Manual de análisis del discurso. 3ª edición.Ariel Letras.
  • Canals, L. (2021). Multimodality and translanguaging in negotiation of meaning. Foreign Language Annals, 54, 647-670.
  • Cenoz, J. &Gorter, D. (2014). Focus on multilingualism as an approach in educational contexts. In A. Blackledge y A. Creese (Eds.), Heteroglossia as Practice and Pedagogy(pp. 239–254). Springer.
  • Cenoz, J. &Gorter, D. (2015). Towards a holistic approach in the study of multilingual education. In J. Cenoz y D. Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education: Between language learning and translanguaging(pp. 1–15). Cambridge University Press.
  • Cenoz, J. &Gorter, D. (2017). Translanguaging as a pedagogical tool in multilingual education. In J. Cenoz, D. Gorter, &S. May (Eds.), Language Awareness and Multilingualism(pp. 309–321). Springer.
  • Cliff, P.(2011). Cambridge Young Learners English Tests Flyers.Cambridge University Press.
  • Doughty, C. &Williams, J. (1998). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.Cambridge University Press.
  • Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 19-47.
  • Fernández-García, M. &Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in nonnative speaker-nonnative speaker synchronous discussions. CALICO Journal, 19 (2), 279–294.
  • Fernández-García, M. &Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2003). Learners' interactions: A comparison of oral and computer-assisted written conversation. ReCALL Journal, 15 (1), 113–136.
  • García Mayo, M. P. &Imaz Agirre, A. (2019). Task Modality and pair formation method: Their impact on patterns of interaction and LREs among EFL primary school children. System, 80, 165-175.
  • Gass, S. M. &Mackey, A. (2020). Input, interaction, and output in L2 acquisition. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating &S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (3rd ed., pp. 192-222). Routledge.
  • Gobierno Vasco-Eustat. (2022). Estadísticas del sistema educativo. Alumnado por nivel, modelo y red. https://www.euskadi.eus/matricula-2021-2022/web01-a2hestat/es/
  • Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional moves and modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as a foreign language. System, 29, 267-287.
  • Jeong, N. S. (2011). The effects of task type and group structure on meaning negotiation in synchronous computer-mediated communication. In L. Plonsky &M. Schierloh (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 2009 Second Language Research Forum: Diverse Contributions to SLA(pp. 51-69). Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
  • Jørgensen, J. N., Karrebæk, M. S., Madsen, L. M., &Møller, J. S. (2011). Polylanguaging in superdiversity. Diversities, 13, 23–37
  • Keck, C., Iberri-Shea, G., Tracy-Ventura, N. &Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2006). Investigating the empirical link between task-based interaction and acquisition. In L. Ortega &J.M. Norris (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching(pp. 91-131). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Lantolf, J.P. &Appel, G. (1994). Theoretical framework: An introduction to Vygotskyan perspectives on second language research. In J.P. Lantolf &G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskyan approaches to second language research (pp-1-32). Ablex.
  • Lázaro-Ibarrola, A. &Azpilicueta-Martínez, R. (2015). Investigating negotiation of meaning in EFL children with very low levels of proficiency. International Journal of English Studies, 15(1), 1-21.
  • Leonet, O. &Saragueta, E. (2023). The case of a pedagogical translanguaging intervention in a trilingual primary school: the students’ voice. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1-19.
  • Lesser, M. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue.Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55-81.
  • Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie &T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (Vol.2 pp.413-468). Academic Press.
  • Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied linguistics, 27(3), 405-430.
  • Mackey, A. &Goo, J. (2007) Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition.Oxford applied linguistics (pp. 407-453). Oxford University Press.
  • Mackey, A. &Oliver, R. (2002). Interactional feedback and children’s L2 development. System, 30(4), 459-477.
  • Oliver, R. (1998). Negotiation of meaning in child interactions. The relationship between conversational interaction and second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 82,372-386.
  • Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 97-111.
  • Oliver, R. (2009). How young is too young? Investigating negotiation of meaning and feedback inchildren aged five to seven years. In A. Mackey &C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on Interaction. Second Language Research in Honor of Susan M. Gass (pp. 135-156). Routledge.
  • Ortega, L. (2019). SLA and the study of equitable multilingualism. The Modern Language Journal 103(S1), 23-38.
  • Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493–527.
  • Pica, T., Kanagy, R. &Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In Crookes, G. &Gass, S. (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 171-192). Multilingual Matters.
  • Seedhouse, P. (2005). ‘Task’ as research construct. Language Learning, 55(3), 533–70.
  • Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 38–57.
  • Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64-81). Cambridge University Press.
  • Swain, M. (2000). The Output Hypothesis and beyond: Mediating Acquisition through Collaborative Dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford University Press.
  • Swain, M. &Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language.Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 251-274.
  • Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2011). Languaging as agent and constituent of cognitive change in an older adult: An example.Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics,14(1), 104-117.
  • Swain, M. &Lapkin, S. (2013). A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education. The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 101-129.
  • Varonis, E. M. &Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied linguistics, 6(1), 71-90.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet