Login | Register

Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing


Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing

Neumann, Heike ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8977-7219 and McDonough, Kim (2014) Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27 . pp. 84-104. ISSN 10603743

[thumbnail of accepted manuscript]
Text (accepted manuscript) (application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document)
JSLW_2518R3_SPECTRUM.docx - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.009


In second language (L2) writing classrooms, prewriting discussions are one of the most commonly used collaborative activities (Fernández Dobao, 2012; Storch, 2005), yet there has been little research about their relationship to students’ written texts. Recent L2 writing research has examined the textual features of co-constructed texts (e.g., Elola & Oskoz, 2010; Kuiken & Vedder, 2002; Storch & Wigglesworth, 2007), whereas the pretask planning literature has focused mainly on the effect of individual planning (e.g., Ellis & Yuan, 2004; Kroll, 1990; Ojima, 2006). The current study investigates the relationship between interaction during collaborative prewriting tasks and students’ written texts in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course. The findings indicate that structured collaborative prewriting tasks elicited student talk about content and organization, but only a moderate relationship between these prewriting discussions and the students’ written texts was observed. Implications for the use of collaborative prewriting discussions in EAP contexts are discussed.

Divisions:Concordia University > Faculty of Arts and Science > Education
Item Type:Article
Authors:Neumann, Heike and McDonough, Kim
Journal or Publication:Journal of Second Language Writing
Date:4 November 2014
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.009
Keywords:Second language writing; Second language interaction; Collaboration; Group work; Prewriting tasks
ID Code:985476
Deposited By: Heike Neumann
Deposited On:06 Jun 2019 17:53
Last Modified:06 Jun 2019 17:53


Abadikhah, S., & Mosleh, Z. (2011). EFL learners' proficiency level and attention to linguistic features during collaborative output activities. The Iranian EFL Journal, 7, 179-198.
Alegría de la Colina, A., & García Mayo, M. d. P. (2007). Attention to form across collaborative tasks by low-proficiency learners in an EFL setting. In M. d. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 91-116). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
DiCamilla, F. J., & Anton, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609-633.
Donato, R. (1988). Beyond group: A psycholinguistic rationale for collective activity in second language learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Delaware, Newark. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/303711939
Donato, R. (1994a). 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. (1994b). Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second language classroom. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 27-50). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). The Differential Effects of Three Types of Task Planning on the Fluency, Complexity, and Accuracy in L2 Oral Production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474-509. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp042
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 59-84. doi: 10.1017/S0272263104026130
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning and Technology, 14(3), 51-71.
Fernández Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40-58. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002
Fernández Dobao, A. (2014). Attention to form in collaborative writing tasks: Comparing pair and small group interaction. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 70(2), 158-187.
Fernández Dobao, A., & Blum, A. (2013). Collaborative writing in pairs and small groups: Learners' attitudes and perceptions. System, 41(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.02.002
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(03), 299-323. doi: doi:10.1017/S0272263100015047
García Mayo, M. d. P. (2002). The effectiveness of two form-focused tasks in advanced EFL pedagogy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12, 156-175.
Gutiérrez, X. (2008). What does metalinguistic activity in learners' interaction during a collaborative L2 writing task look like? Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 519-537. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00785.x
Higgins, L., Flower, L., & Petraglia, J. (1992). Planning text together. Written Communication, 9(1), 48-84. doi: 10.1177/0741088392009001002
Ismail, L., & Samad, A. A. (2010). The effect of tasks on language-related episodes (LREs) during focus-on-form instruction. Language Education in Asia, 1, 87-98.
Kagan, S. (1995). Group grades miss the mark. Educational Leadership, 52(8), 68-71.
Kim, Y. (2008). The contribution of collaborative and individual tasks to the acquisition of L2 vocabulary. The Modern Language Journal, 92(1), 114-130. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00690.x
Kim, Y. (2009). The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37, 254-268.
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
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2011). Using pretask modelling to encourage collaborative learning opportunities. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 183-199. doi: 10.1177/1362168810388711
Kroll, B. (1990). What does time buy? ESL student performance on home versus class composition. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing research: Insights for the classroom (pp. 140-154). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2002). Collaborative writing in L2: The effect of group interaction on text quality. In S. Randsdell & M.-L. Barbier (Eds.), New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 169-188). Dordrecht / Boston / London: Kluwer.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2005). Noticing and the role of interaction in promoting language learning. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 353-381). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Leeser, M. J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8, 55-81.
Manchón, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (2007). On the temporal nature of planning in L1 and L2 composing. [Article]. Language Learning, 57(4), 549-593. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00428.x
McDonough, K., Neumann, H., & Trofimovich, P. (in press). Eliciting production of L2 target structures through collaborative priming activities. Canadian Modern Language Review.
Ojima, M. (2006). Concept mapping as pre-task planning: A case study of three Japanese ESL writers. System, 34(4), 566-585. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2006.08.003
Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(01), 109-148.
Roberts, T. S. (2006). Self, peer and group assessment in E-Learning: An introduction. In T. S. Roberts (Ed.), Self, peer and group assessment in E-Learning. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Shehadeh, A. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(4), 286-305. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010
Shi, L. (1998). Effects of prewriting discussions on adult ESL students' compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 319-345. doi: 10.1016/s1060-3743(98)90020-0
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183-205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Storch, N. (2002a). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119-158. doi: 10.1111/1467-9922.00179
Storch, N. (2002b). Relationships formed in dyadic interaction and opportunity for learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 305-322. doi: 10.1016/s0883-0355(03)00007-7
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153-173. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
Storch, N. (2007). Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 143-159. doi: 10.1177/1362168807074600
Storch, N. (2008). Metatalk in a Pair Work Activity: Level of Engagement and Implications for Language Development. Language Awareness, 17(2), 95-114. doi: 10.1080/09658410802146644
Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2013). Pairing learners in pair work activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31-48. doi: 10.1177/1362168812457530
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Writing tasks: The effects of collaboration. In M. d. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 157-177). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Strauss, P., & U, A. (2007). Group assessments: Dilemmas facing lecturers in multicultural tertiary classrooms. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(2), 147-161. doi: 10.1080/07294360701310789
Suzuki, W., & Itagaki, N. (2007). Learner metalinguistic reflections following output-oriented and reflective activities. Language Awareness, 16(2), 131-146. doi: 10.2167/la392.0
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320-337.
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 (pp. 99-118). Harlow, England: Longman.
Sweigart, W. (1991). Classroom talk, knowledge development, and writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(4), 469-496.
Trofimovich, P., McDonough, K., & Neumann, H. (2013). Using collaborative tasks to elicit auditory and structural priming. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 177-186. doi: 10.1002/tesq.78
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121-142. doi: 10.1177/136216880607074599
Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2008). Perception of learner proficiency: Its impact on the interaction between an ESL learner and her higher and lower proficiency partners. Language Awareness, 17(2), 115-130. doi: 10.1080/09658410802146651
Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14(1), 85-106. doi: 10.1177/026553229701400105
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445-466. doi: 10.1177/0265532209104670
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2012). What role for collaboration in writing and writing feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 364-374. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.005
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Downloads per month over past year

Research related to the current document (at the CORE website)
- Research related to the current document (at the CORE website)
Back to top Back to top