Interaction and Second Language Development in EFL Based on Scaffolding Theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v8i.4359Keywords:
Interaction; Scaffolding theory; Second language development.Abstract
How to facilitate English as a Foreign Language (EFL) interaction in the classroom is one of the key subjects of current research. In this area, interactive teaching has an important impact on EFL second language development, but there are still some gaps in specific teaching methods. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore how to effectively interact with EFL to improve their second language development under the guidance of scaffolding theory. This study examines two interactive tactics:1) stopping as a communication tactic; 2) scaffolding as an mistake treatment. Besides, this study also reviews two teaching methods including language tasks and willingness to communicate based on scaffolding theory. By analyzing the characteristics of the four strategies, the researcher tries to find out appropriate teaching strategies that could be used, targeting at improving EFL’s second language development. The study shows that error treatment and pausing can broaden EFL’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) and language tasks such as role plays and improving willingness to communicate can facilitate interaction to promote L2 development.
Downloads
References
Vygotsky, L.(1987). "The collected works of L.S Vygotsky."Volume 1.Thinking and Speaking. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Sarikas, C. (2020, January 4). Vygotsky Scaffolding: What It Is and How to Use It. PrepScholar.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning,44,493-527
Mackey, A. (1999). INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT: An Empirical Study of Question Formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–587.
Bridgid Finn and Janet Metcalfe. Memory& Cognition,2010, 38(7): 951-961.
LaScotte, D.K. (2018), Strategies, scaffolding, and social positioning in interaction. TESOL Journal, 9: 261-277.
Xie, W. Y. (2005). On the Adjustment of teacher's Speech from the perspective of English phonetics[j]. Audio-visual teaching of foreign languages, 2005(06):65-68
Oxford, R. L. (1997). Cooperative Learning, Collaborative Learning, and Interaction: Three Communicative Strands in the Language Classroom. The Modern Language Journal,81(4), 443–456.
Scarcella, R., & Crookall, D. (1990). Simulation/gaming and language acquisition. In D. Crookall &R.L. Oxford (Eds.), Simulation, gaming, and language learning (pp.223-230). Boston: Heinle
Wenxue Chen, Patterns of pair interaction in communicative tasks: the transition process and effect on L2 teaching and learning, ELT Journal, Volume 72, Issue 4, October 2018, Pages 425–434.
McCroskey, J. C. (1984). The communication apprehension perspective. In J. A. Daly & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and communication apprehension (pp.13-38). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.
Richard R. Day (1981). Silence and the ESL Child. TESOL Quarterly, 15(1), 35-39.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
