Metalanguage in Focus on Form in the Communicative Classroom

120 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners (2007, background): “Since several studies agreed that LREs represent L2 learning in progress (e.g. Basturkmen et al., 2002; Leeser, 2004; Swain, 1998; Swain and Lapkin, 1998; Williams, 2001), this could suggest that the core participants benefited more from working with their higher proficiency partner.”
Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue (2004, methodology): “…could also employ dyad specific pretests and post-tests (e.g., Swain and Lapkin, 1998) or analyse learners’ uptake of specific forms in subsequent tasks (e.g., Basturkmen et al., 2002; Donato, 1994; Storch, 2002) in order to determine the relative benefits of LREs for different types of learners.”
Learners’ Use of Metalanguage in Collaborative Form-focused L2 Output Tasks (2005, background): “Basturkmen et al. (2002) also looked at the use of metalinguistic terms in form-focused episodes, but in a very different context.”