Subject-Matter Content: How Does It Assist the Interactional and Linguistic Needs of Classroom Language Learners?

By T. Pica. 2002

191 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f041e9e4905e2f3c22136ff2ef380ffaf17b9975

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

INFORMATION GAP TASKS: Their Multiple Roles and Contributions to Interaction Research Methodology (2006, background): “…many opportunities to produce and modify their output morphosyntactically ~Swain, 1985, 1991! or to be given feedback on their grammatical accuracy ~Pica, 2002; Pica & Washburn, 2003; Pica, Washburn, Evans, & Jo, 1998; Shah, 1999; Swain, 1991!+ Evidence to this effect has been found in…”
12. CONTENT-BASED INSTRUCTION: PERSPECTIVES ON CURRICULUM PLANNING (2004, background): “Pica (2002) explored the extent to which learners and teachers modify their interactions, during classroom discussions, about subject-matter content through negotiation of meaning, form-focused intervention, and form-focused instruction.”
Classroom Learning, Teaching, and Research: A Task‐Based Perspective (2005, background): “They are taken from a database of tape-recorded classes in content areas, including university-level English language courses on literature and culture (BoydKletzander, 2000) and film and culture (Pica, 2002; Pica & Washburn, in press; Pica et al., 1998), which my colleagues and I have gathered over”
Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue (2004, background): “In fact, studies investigating negotiation of meaning and/or focus on form in post-secondary, content-based classes have found low amounts of both (Musumeci, 1996; Pica, 2002).”
DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF PROMPTS AND RECASTS IN FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION (2004, background): “The present study revealed significant improvement in written and oral tasks for all groups receiving FFI+ Their overall success on all measures, including those with high-frequency lexical items as well as one with low-frequency unfamiliar lexical items, suggests that the learning resulting from th”
Isolated and Integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge (2014, background): “…research in content-based language teaching (CBLT) in which a focus on form is provided within subject-matter instruction (Doughty & Varela, 1998; Pica, 2002; Polio & Zyzik, 2009) and in communicative language teaching (CLT) and task-based language teaching (TBLT) where a focus on form is…”
Form‐Focused Instruction: Isolated or Integrated? (2008, background): “Advocates of CBI have increasingly emphasized the importance of planning lessons that have both content objectives and linguistic objectives (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2004; Pica, 2002; Schleppergrell, Achugar, & Oteíza, 2004).”
Semantic Transfer and Its Implications for Vocabulary Teaching in a Second Language (2004, unknown): “…acquisition research, however, there is only limited discussion of form-meaning mapping (e.g., N. Ellis, 1997; Henriksen, 1999; Hulstijn, Hollander, & Greidanus, 1996; Pica, 2002) and semantic/conceptual transfer (e.g., Jarvis, 2000; Jarvis & Odlin, 2000; Pavlenko, 1999) in vocabulary acquisition.”
Pairing learners in pair work activity (2013, unknown): “Porter, 1985; Pica, 2002).”
INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING (2005, background): “…will benefit learners+ However, researchers also acknowledge that negotiation of form can occur in meaning-focused classes, even if there is no breakdown in communication ~Pica, 2002!+ For example, Ellis et al+ ~2001a! found that negotiation resulting from a purely linguistic problem was twice as…”