Home Exploring immediate and prolonged effects of collaborative writing on young learners’ texts: L2 versus FL
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Exploring immediate and prolonged effects of collaborative writing on young learners’ texts: L2 versus FL

  • Izaskun Villarreal ORCID logo EMAIL logo and Amaia Martínez-Sánchez
Published/Copyright: January 19, 2023
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
From the journal International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching Volume 62 Issue 2

Abstract

Context or the teaching/learning environment has only recently been recognized as a mediating variable in L2/FL written performance. These studies are multisite and have not yet targeted another feature of context: the sociolinguistic status of the target language. Likewise, scarce research exists examining the prolonged effects of collaboration. The present classroom-based study fills this void by investigating the effects of collaboration on the (a) jointly written texts; (b) subsequent individual texts; and (c) texts written in two distinct sociolinguistic status target languages of two groups of 11–12-year-old Spanish primary education students. Distributed into a control (CG) (N = 17) and an experimental group (EG) (N = 10 pairs), they wrote three descriptive texts in each language, L2 Basque and FL English: the first and third individually and the second one individually by the CG and in pairs by the EG. The texts were examined qualitatively with a rubric and quantitatively for fluency and accuracy measures. Immediate and prolonged effects of collaboration were observed on accuracy, while fluency decreased and global qualitative scores varied very little. Additionally, unlike in the CG, language-dependent differences were not attested in the EG which suggests that collaborative writing is an expedient tool to increase attention to language and limit the mediating effects of the learning context.

Keywords: collaborative writing (CW); context; English as a foreign language (EFL); quantitative & qualitative measures; second language (L2)
Corresponding author: Izaskun Villarreal, I-Communitas, Public University of Navarre, Campus Arrosadía, Dpto. Filología y Didáctica de la Lengua, 31006 Pamplona, Spain, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the school, the teachers and the children for their willingness and generosity to participate in this project.

Appendix A

Analytic rubric for assessing the compositions based on Villarreal and Munarriz-Ibarrola (2021).

Marks
3 2 1
Task Adequacy

  1. All the points in the instructions are mentioned.

  2. The length of the text is appropriate.

  1. Some points in the instructions are not mentioned.

  2. The text could be longer: Ideas could be more developed.

  1. Notable omission of the content points and/or considerable irrelevance of some of them.

  2. The text is too short: Ideas are not fully developed.
Coherence

  1. The text is clear.

  2. The text is easy to understand.

  1. The text is clear.

  2. The text is easy to understand, although some incoherent points can confuse the reader.

  1. The text is not clear.

  2. The text is difficult to understand.
Language Cohesion

  1. Ideas are well organised.

  2. The use of paragraphs is adequate.

  3. Cohesive devices linking sentences and paragraphs are used.

  1. Ideas are organised.

  2. The paragraphs could be better distributed.

  3. Some cohesive devices linking sentences and paragraphs are used.

  1. There is a lack of organisation.

  2. Paragraphs are too long or there are not well distributed, or there are no paragraphs at all.

  3. There are no linking devices.
Grammatical accuracy

  1. Very few, irrelevant, or no grammar errors at all.

  2. Good command of grammar: Correct use of the verb to be and the third person.

  1. Some acceptable grammar errors.

  2. Fair command of English grammar: use of the verb to be and third person (with some mistakes).

  1. Serious and numerous grammar mistakes.

  2. Does not use correctly the verb to be and the third person.
Mechanics

  1. Most words are written correctly.

  2. There are only some occasional mistakes.

  1. Some spelling mistakes (3–6).

  2. Some mistakes in basic vocabulary.

  1. There are many spelling mistakes.

  2. Invents words.
Lexical range

  1. Rich and varied vocabulary.

  1. Basic vocabulary, enough to convey the message.

  1. Limited range of vocabulary: some words are in Basque-Spanish.

References

Azkarai, Agurtzane & Marta Kopinska. 2020. Young EFL learners and collaborative writing: A study on patterns of interaction, engagement in LREs, and task motivation. System 94. 102338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102338.Search in Google Scholar

Azkarai, Agurtzane & Rhonda Oliver. 2016. Negative feedback on task repetition: ESL vs. EFL child settings. Language Learning Journal 47(3). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1196385.Search in Google Scholar

Ball, Phil, Keith Kelly & John Clegg. 2015. Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ballinger, Susan, Roy Lyster, Andrea Sterzuk & Fred Genesee. 2017. Context-appropriate crosslinguistic pedagogy. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 5(1). 30–57. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.02bal.Search in Google Scholar

Bueno‐Alastuey, Camino Maríá & Rodero Albaiceta Sheila. 2019. The effects of using collaborative writing vs. peer review treatments on subsequent individual writings. Huarte de San Juan. Filología y Didáctica de la Lengua 193. 32–61.Search in Google Scholar

Bueno-Alastuey, María Camino & Patricia Martínez de Lizarrondo Larumbe. 2017. Collaborative writing in the EFL Secondary Education classroom comparing triad, pair and individual work. Huarte de San Juan. Filología y Didáctica de La Lengua 17. 254–275.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Wenting. 2019. An exploratory study on the role of L2 collaborative writing on learners’ subsequent individually composed texts. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 28. 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00455-3.Search in Google Scholar

Decreto Foral 60/2014, de 16 de julio, por el que se establece el currículo de las enseñanzas de Educación primaria en la Comunidad Foral de Navarra [Regional Decree 60/2014, of July 16, which establishes the curriculum of primary education in the Chatered Community of Navarra]. Boletín Oficial de Navarra. Pamplona, 5 September 2014, number 174, pp. 1–181.Search in Google Scholar

Council of Europe. 2001. Common european framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/Framework_EN.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

De Guerrero, María & Olga S. Villamil. 2000. Activating the ZPD: Mutual Scaffolding in L2 Peer Revision. The Modern Language Journal 84. 521–568.10.1111/0026-7902.00052Search in Google Scholar

Department of Culture and Language Policy of the Basque Government. 2019. Sixth sociolinguistic survey 2016. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Eusko Jaurlaritzen Argitalpen Zerbitzu Nagusia.Search in Google Scholar

Donato, Richard. 1994. Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In James P. Lantolf & Appel Gabriela (eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research, 33–56. Norwood: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltan & Judit Kormos. 2000. The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research 4(3). 275–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880000400305.Search in Google Scholar

Enever, Janet. 2018. Policy and politics in global primary English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Fernández Dobao, Ana. 2012. Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing 21(1). 40–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002.Search in Google Scholar

García Mayo, María Pilar (ed.). 2017. Learning foreign languages in primary schools. Research insights. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783098118Search in Google Scholar

García Mayo, María Pilar & Agurtzane Azkarai. 2016. EFL task-based interaction: Does task modality impact on language-related episodes? In Masatoshi Sato & Susan Ballinger (eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda, 241–266. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/lllt.45.10garSearch in Google Scholar

García Mayo, María Pilar & Izaskun Villarreal. 2011. The development of suppletive and affixal tense and agreement morphemes in the L3 English of Basque–Spanish bilinguals. Second Language Research 27(1). 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310386523.Search in Google Scholar

García Mayo, María Pilar & María Luisa García Lecumberri. 2003. Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.10.21832/9781853596407Search in Google Scholar

García Mayo, María Pilar & Ruth Milla. 2021. Corrective feedback in second versus foreign language contexts. In Hossein Nassaji & Eva Kartchava (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching, 473–494. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108589789.023Search in Google Scholar

Hidalgo, María Ángeles & Amparo Lázaro-Ibarrola. 2020. Task repetition and collaborative writing by EFL children: Beyond CAF measures. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 10(3). 501–522. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.5.Search in Google Scholar

Imaz Agirre, Ainara & María Pilar García Mayo. 2020. The impact of agency in pair formation on the degree of participation in young learners’ collaborative dialogue. In Craig Lambert & Rhonda Oliver (eds.), Using tasks in second language teaching: Practice in diverse contexts, 306–323. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar

Ikaselkar. n.d. Eki proiektua [The Eki project]. http://www.ikaselkar.eus/en/eki/eki-information/?atala=ezaugarri-bereizgarriak-en (accessed 12 March 2021).Search in Google Scholar

Kasares, Paula. 2013. Euskararen belaunez belauneko jarraipena eta hizkuntza sozializazioa Nafarroako familia euskaldunetan (1970–2012) [Generational transmission and linguistic socialisation of the Basque language in Basque-speaking families in Navarre (1970–2012)]. Fontes Linguae Vasconum 116. 209–233.Search in Google Scholar

Kim, YouJing & Kim McDonough. 2011. Using pretask modelling to encourage collaborative learning opportunities. Language Teaching Research 15(2). 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810388711.Search in Google Scholar

Kopinska, Marta & Agurtzane Azkarai. 2020. Exploring young EFL learners’ motivation: Individual vs. pair work on dictogloss tasks. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 10(3). 607–630. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.10.Search in Google Scholar

Lázaro-Ibarrola, Amparo. 2021. Models in collaborative and individual writing among EFL children: Noticing, incorporations and draft quality. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching.10.1515/iral-2020-0160Search in Google Scholar

Llinares, Ana & Roy Lyster. 2014. The influence of context on patterns of corrective feedback and learner uptake: A comparison of CLIL and immersion classrooms. Language Learning Journal 42(2). 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889509.Search in Google Scholar

Long, Michael H. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodologyKees de Bot, Ralph B. Ginsberg, & Claire Kramsch. In de Bot Kees, Ralph B. Ginsberg & Claire Kramsch (eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective, 39–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Long, Michael H. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In William C. Ritchie & Tej K. Bhatia (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition, 413–468. San Diego: Academic Press.10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3Search in Google Scholar

López-Flamarique, Maite, Mónica Aznárez-Mauleón & Isabel García del Real. 2022. ¿Cómo planifica y revisa el alumnado de primaria? Un estudio a partir de una tarea de escritura colaborativa. Didáctica. Lengua y literatura 35.10.5209/dill.81810Search in Google Scholar

Lyster, Roy & Hirohide Mori. 2006. Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28(2). 269–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263106060128.Search in Google Scholar

Manchón, Rosa María. 2014. The distinctive nature of task repetition in writing. Implications for theory, research, and pedagogy. Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada ELIA 14. 13–41. https://doi.org/10.12795/elia.2014.i14.02.Search in Google Scholar

McDonough, Kim & César García Fuentes. 2015. The effect of writing task and task conditions on Colombian EFL learners’ language use. TESL Canada Journal 32(2). 67–79. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v32i2.1208.Search in Google Scholar

McDonough, Kim & Jindarat De Vleeschauwer. 2019. Comparing the effect of collaborative and individual prewriting on EFL learners’ writing development. Journal of Second Language Writing 44(April). 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.04.003.Search in Google Scholar

McDonough, Kim & William J. Crawford. 2020. Identifying effective writing tasks for use in EFL write-to-learn language contexts. Language Learning Journal 48(4). 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1465990.Search in Google Scholar

Milla, Ruth. 2017. Corrective feedback episodes in CLIL and EFL classrooms: Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs and classroom behaviour. Vitoria, Spain: University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) Unpublished doctoral thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Muñoz, Carmen (ed.). 2006. Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853598937Search in Google Scholar

Muñoz, Carmen. 2014. Exploring young learners’ foreign language learning awareness. Language Awareness 23(1–2). 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.863900.Search in Google Scholar

Muñoz, Carmen. 2017. The development of language awareness at the transition from primary to secondary school. In María Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights, 49–68. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783098118-005Search in Google Scholar

Nassaji, Hossein. 2016. Anniversary article: Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research 20(4). 535–562.10.1177/1362168816644940Search in Google Scholar

Pallotti, Gabrielle. 2009. CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics 30(4). 590–601. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp045.Search in Google Scholar

Sato, Masatoshi. 2017. Interaction mindsets, interactional behaviors, and L2 development: An affective-social-cognitive model. Language Learning 67(2). 249–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12214.Search in Google Scholar

Sato, Masatoshi & Neomy Storch. 2020. Context matters: Learner beliefs and interactional behaviors in an EFL vs. ESL context. Language Teaching for Young Learners 26(5). 919–942. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820923582.Search in Google Scholar

Seals, Corinne A., Jonathan Newton, Madeline Ash & Bao Trang Thi Nguyen. 2020. Translanguaging and task based language teaching: Crossovers and challenges. Educational Linguistics 45(August). 275–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47031-9_13.Search in Google Scholar

Storch, Neomy. 2002a. Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning 52(1). 119–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179.Search in Google Scholar

Storch, Neomy. 2002b. Relationships formed in dyadic interaction and opportunity for learning. International Journal of Educational Research 37(3–4). 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00007-7.Search in Google Scholar

Storch, Neomy. 2005. Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing 14(3). 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002.Search in Google Scholar

Storch, Neomy. 2013. Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847699954Search in Google Scholar

Storch, Neomy. 2019. Collaborative writing as peer feedback. In Ken Hyland & Fiona Hyland (eds.), Feedback in second language writing (contexts and issues), 143–162. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108635547.010Search in Google Scholar

Storch, Neomy & Masatoshi Sato. 2019. Comparing the same task in ESL vs. EFL learning contexts: An activity theory perspective. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (United Kingdom) 30(1). 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12263.Search in Google Scholar

Swain, Merrill. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Susan Gass & Carolyn G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition, 235–253. Rowley/MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar

Swain, Merrill. 2000. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In James P.2 Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning, 97–114. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Swain, Merrill & Sharon Lapkin. 1998. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal 82. 320–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01209.x.Search in Google Scholar

Swain, Merrill & Yuko, Watanabe. 2012. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Social, dynamic and complexity theory approaches to second language acquisition. Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0664.Search in Google Scholar

Talib, Tarmizi & Yin Ling Cheung. 2017. Collaborative writing in classroom instruction: A synthesis of recent research. The English Teacher 46(2). 43–57.Search in Google Scholar

Tellier, Angela & Karen Roehr-Brackin. 2017. Raising children’s metalinguistic awareness to enhance classroom second language learning. In María Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights, 22–48. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783098118-004Search in Google Scholar

Torres, Julio & Bianca Cung. 2019. A comparison of advanced heritage language learners’ peer interaction across modes and pair types. The Modern Language Journal 103(4). 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12594.Search in Google Scholar

UCLES, Cambridge English Placement test. 2019. Test your English. Cambridge English assessment. Available at: https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/test-your-english/for-schools/.Search in Google Scholar

Villarreal, Izaskun & Nora Gil-Sarratea. 2020. The effect of collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting. Language Teaching Research 24(6). 874–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819829017.Search in Google Scholar

Villarreal, Izaskun & Miren Munarriz-Ibarrola. 2021. “Together we do better”: The effect of pair and group work on young EFL learners’ written texts and attitudes. In María Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning, 89–115. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501511318-005Search in Google Scholar

Villarreal, Izaskun, María Camino Bueno-Alastuey & Raquel Sáez-León. 2021. Computer-based collaborative writing with young learners: Effects on text quality. In María Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning, 89–115. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501511318-008Search in Google Scholar

Villarreal, Izaskun & Amparo Lázaro-Ibarrola. 2022. Models in collaborative writing among CLIL learners of English in primary school: Linguistic outcomes and motivation matters. System 110. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102922.Search in Google Scholar

Vold, Eva Thue. 2022. Learner spoken output and teacher response in second versus foreign language classrooms. Language Teaching Research. Online first https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211068610.Search in Google Scholar

Vygotsky, Levy. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wigglesworth, Gillian & Neomy Storch. 2009. Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing 26(3). 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2022-03-18
Accepted: 2022-12-22
Published Online: 2023-01-19
Published in Print: 2024-06-25

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Consolidating EFL content and vocabulary learning via interactive reading
  4. Understanding salient trajectories and emerging profiles in the development of Chinese learners’ motivation: a growth mixture modeling approach
  5. Multilingual pedagogies in first versus foreign language contexts: a cross-country study of language teachers
  6. Classroom assessment and learning motivation: insights from secondary school EFL classrooms
  7. Interculturality and Islam in Indonesia’s high-school EFL classrooms
  8. Collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting: the role of task complexity
  9. Spanish heritage speakers’ processing of lexical stress
  10. Effectiveness of second language collocation instruction: a meta-analysis
  11. Understanding the Usefulness of E-Portfolios: Linking Artefacts, Reflection, and Validation
  12. Syntactic prediction in L2 learners: evidence from English disjunction processing
  13. The cognitive construction-grammar approach to teaching the Chinese Ba construction in a foreign language classroom
  14. The predictive roles of enjoyment, anxiety, willingness to communicate on students’ performance in English public speaking classes
  15. Speaking proficiency development in EFL classrooms: measuring the differential effect of TBLT and PPP teaching approaches
  16. L2 textbook input and L2 written production: a case of Korean locative postposition–verb construction
  17. What does the processing of chunks by learners of Chinese tell us? An acceptability judgment investigation
  18. Comparative analysis of written corrective feedback strategies: a linear growth modeling approach
  19. Enjoyment in language teaching: a study into EFL teachers’ subjectivities
  20. Students’ attitude and motivation towards concept mapping-based prewriting strategies
  21. Pronunciation pedagogy in English as a foreign language teacher education programs in Vietnam
  22. The role of language aptitude probed within extensive instruction experience: morphosyntactic knowledge of advanced users of L2 English
  23. The impact of different glossing conditions on the learning of EFL single words and collocations in reading
  24. Patterns of motivational beliefs among high-, medium-, and low-achieving English learners in China
  25. The effect of linguistic choices in note-taking on academic listening performance: a pedagogical translanguaging perspective
  26. A latent profile analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ enjoyment and anxiety in reading and writing: associations with imaginative capacity and story continuation writing performance
  27. Effects of monolingual and bilingual subtitles on L2 vocabulary acquisition
  28. Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: exploring interactions in the TBLT domain
  29. Expansion of verb-argument construction repertoires in L2 English writing
  30. Immediate versus delayed prompts, field dependence and independence cognitive style and L2 development
  31. Aural vocabulary, orthographic vocabulary, and listening comprehension
  32. The use of metadiscourse by secondary-level Chinese learners of English in examination scripts: insights from a corpus-based study
  33. Scoping review of research methodologies across language studies with deaf and hard-of-hearing multilingual learners
  34. Exploring immediate and prolonged effects of collaborative writing on young learners’ texts: L2 versus FL
  35. Discrepancy in prosodic disambiguation strategies between Chinese EFL learners and native English speakers
  36. Exploring the state of research on motivation in second language learning: a review and a reliability generalization meta-analysis
  37. Japanese complaint responses in textbook dialogues and ordinary conversations: learning objects to expand interactional repertoires
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0062
Keywords for this article
collaborative writing (CW); context; English as a foreign language (EFL); quantitative & qualitative measures; second language (L2)

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Consolidating EFL content and vocabulary learning via interactive reading
  4. Understanding salient trajectories and emerging profiles in the development of Chinese learners’ motivation: a growth mixture modeling approach
  5. Multilingual pedagogies in first versus foreign language contexts: a cross-country study of language teachers
  6. Classroom assessment and learning motivation: insights from secondary school EFL classrooms
  7. Interculturality and Islam in Indonesia’s high-school EFL classrooms
  8. Collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting: the role of task complexity
  9. Spanish heritage speakers’ processing of lexical stress
  10. Effectiveness of second language collocation instruction: a meta-analysis
  11. Understanding the Usefulness of E-Portfolios: Linking Artefacts, Reflection, and Validation
  12. Syntactic prediction in L2 learners: evidence from English disjunction processing
  13. The cognitive construction-grammar approach to teaching the Chinese Ba construction in a foreign language classroom
  14. The predictive roles of enjoyment, anxiety, willingness to communicate on students’ performance in English public speaking classes
  15. Speaking proficiency development in EFL classrooms: measuring the differential effect of TBLT and PPP teaching approaches
  16. L2 textbook input and L2 written production: a case of Korean locative postposition–verb construction
  17. What does the processing of chunks by learners of Chinese tell us? An acceptability judgment investigation
  18. Comparative analysis of written corrective feedback strategies: a linear growth modeling approach
  19. Enjoyment in language teaching: a study into EFL teachers’ subjectivities
  20. Students’ attitude and motivation towards concept mapping-based prewriting strategies
  21. Pronunciation pedagogy in English as a foreign language teacher education programs in Vietnam
  22. The role of language aptitude probed within extensive instruction experience: morphosyntactic knowledge of advanced users of L2 English
  23. The impact of different glossing conditions on the learning of EFL single words and collocations in reading
  24. Patterns of motivational beliefs among high-, medium-, and low-achieving English learners in China
  25. The effect of linguistic choices in note-taking on academic listening performance: a pedagogical translanguaging perspective
  26. A latent profile analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ enjoyment and anxiety in reading and writing: associations with imaginative capacity and story continuation writing performance
  27. Effects of monolingual and bilingual subtitles on L2 vocabulary acquisition
  28. Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: exploring interactions in the TBLT domain
  29. Expansion of verb-argument construction repertoires in L2 English writing
  30. Immediate versus delayed prompts, field dependence and independence cognitive style and L2 development
  31. Aural vocabulary, orthographic vocabulary, and listening comprehension
  32. The use of metadiscourse by secondary-level Chinese learners of English in examination scripts: insights from a corpus-based study
  33. Scoping review of research methodologies across language studies with deaf and hard-of-hearing multilingual learners
  34. Exploring immediate and prolonged effects of collaborative writing on young learners’ texts: L2 versus FL
  35. Discrepancy in prosodic disambiguation strategies between Chinese EFL learners and native English speakers
  36. Exploring the state of research on motivation in second language learning: a review and a reliability generalization meta-analysis
  37. Japanese complaint responses in textbook dialogues and ordinary conversations: learning objects to expand interactional repertoires
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 26.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/iral-2022-0062/html
Scroll to top button