Effects of Peer Interaction Patterns on Learner Engagement

doi:10.12002/j.bisu.589

Abstract

Abstract:

The impact of peer interaction patterns on learner engagement is examined in this study by following Philp & Duchesne’s (2016) framework of learner engagement. Two classes of first-year non-English-major students participated in the research and engaged in topic discussions as required. Based on the analysis of the recorded data obtained from 25 paired interactions, the findings revealed that there were three patterns of paired interactions, with collaborative and passive parallel patterns being the main types. The interaction pattern affected learners’ behavioral, cognitive and social engagement, as evidenced by the significantly more usage of words, turns, idea units, and responsiveness in the collaborative pattern compared to those in the passive parallel pattern. The results of the interviews with six pairs of students showed that cooperative learners exhibited more positive emotions in interactions, while passive parallel learners were relatively negative. The findings indicate that it is necessary for teachers to guide learners to cooperate in order to promote their language learning.

Keywords: interaction patterns; behavioral engagement; cognitive engagement; social engagement; emotional engagement

摘要：

基于Philp & Duchesne（2016）的学习者投入框架，本文考察了同伴互动模式对学习者投入的影响。非英语专业本科一年级两个班的学生参与了本研究，并按要求进行了话题讨论。研究者分析了两人结成一组、共25组学生两次互动的录音数据，发现配对互动共有3种模式，其中合作型和双方被动型为主要互动模式；互动模式影响学习者的行为、认知和社会投入，具体表现为合作型配对小组在单词、话轮、观点单位及回应的使用数量上显著多于双方被动型配对。对其中6组学生的访谈结果显示，合作型学习者在互动中表现出更多的积极情感，双方被动型学习者情感投入相对消极。上述结果表明，教师有必要引导学习者合作，从而促进其语言学习。

关键词: 互动模式, 行为投入, 认知投入, 社会投入, 情感投入

CLC Number:

H319.3

Wang Qing, Zheng Lu, Chen Xiangjun. Effects of Peer Interaction Patterns on Learner Engagement[J]. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2025, 47(3): 90-105.

汪清, 郑璐, 陈向俊. 同伴互动模式对学习者投入的影响研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2025, 47(3): 90-105.

Figures/Tables 1

References 40

[1]	AZKARAI A & KOPINSKA M. Young EFL learners and collaborative writing: A study on patterns of interaction, engagement in LREs, and task motivation[J/OL]. System, 2020,94:102338[2024-10-10]. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102338.
[2]	BARALT M, GURZYNSKI-WEISS L & KIM Y. The effects of task complexity and classroom environment on learners’ engagement with the language[C]//SATO M & BALLINGER S. Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning: Pedagogical Potential and Research Agenda. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,2016:209-240.
[3]	BUTLER Y G & ZENG Wei. Young learners’ interactional development in task-based paired-assessment in their first and foreign languages: A case of English learners in China[J]. Education, 2015(3):292-321.
[4]	CAO Yiqian & PHILP J. Interactional context and willingness to communicate: A comparison of behavior in whole class, group and dyadic interaction[J]. System, 2006(4):480-493.
[5]	CHEN Wenxue. Patterns of pair interaction in communicative tasks: The transition process and effect on L2 teaching and learning[J]. ELT Journal, 2018(4):425-434.
[6]	CHRISTENSON S L, RESCHLY A L & WYLIE C. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement[M]. New York: Springer, 2012.
[7]	DAMON W & PHELPS E. Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education[J]. International Journal of Educational Research, 1989(1):9-19.
[8]	DAO P. Effects of task goal orientation on learner engagement in task performance[J]. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 2021(3):315-334.
[9]	DAO P & MCDONOUGH K. Effect of proﬁciency on Vietnamese EFL learners’ engagement in peer interaction[J]. International Journal of Educational Research, 2018(88):60-72.
[10]	DAO P & SATO M. Exploring fluctuations in the relationship between learners’ positive emotional engagement and their interactional behaviours[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2021(6):972-994.
[11]	DÖRNYEI Z & KORMOS J. The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2000(3):275-300.
[12]	ELLIS R & BARKHUIZEN G. Analysing Learner Language[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
[13]	GARCÍA MAYO M D P & AGIRRE A I. Task repetition and its impact on EFL children’s negotiation of meaning strategies and pair dynamics: An exploratory study[J]. The Language Learning Journal, 2016(4):451-466.
[14]	GARCÍA MAYO M D P & AGIRRE A I. Task modality and pair formation method: Their impact on patterns of interaction and LREs among EFL primary school children[J]. System, 2019,80:165-175.
[15]	GARCIA-PONCE E E & TAVAKOLI P. Effects of task type and language proficiency on dialogic performance and task engagement[J/OL]. System, 2022,105:102734[2024-10-10]. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102734.
[16]	HELME S & CLARKE D. Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom[J]. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 2001(2):133-153.
[17]	LAMBERT C, PHILP J & NAKAMURA S. Learner-generated content and engagement in second language task performance[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2017(6):665-680.
[18]	LAMBERT C & ZHANG G. Engagement in the use of English and Chinese as foreign languages: The role of learner-generated content in instructional task design[J]. Modern Language Journal, 2019(2):391-411.
[19]	LANTOLF J P & APPEL G. Theoretical framework: An introduction to Vygotskian perspectives on second language research[M]//LANTOLF J P & APPEL G. Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research. Norwood:Ablex,1994:1-32.
[20]	MACINTYRE P & GREGERSEN T. Emotions that facilitate language learning: The positive-broadening power of the imagination[J]. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2012(2):193-213.
[21]	MERCER S. Language learner engagement: Setting the scene[C]//GAO Xuesong. Second Handbook of English Language Teaching. Cham:Springer,2019:1-19.
[22]	NAKAMURA S, PHUNG L & REINDERS H. The effect of learner choice on L2 task engagement[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2020(2):428-441.
[23]	PHILP J & DUCHESNE S. Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom[J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 2016,36:50-72.
[24]	PHUNG L. Task preference, affective response, and engagement in L2 use in a US university context[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2017(6):751-766.
[25]	QIU Xuyan & CHENG Hong. The effects of task types on L2 oral production and learner engagement[J]. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 2022(4):1063-1088.
[26]	QIU Xuyan & LO Yuen Yi. Content familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engagement in second language use[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2017(6):681-698.
[27]	STORCH N. Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work[J]. Language Learning, 2002(1):119-158.
[28]	STORCH N. Collaborative Writing in L2 Classrooms[M]. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 2013.
[29]	STORCH N & ALDOSARI A. Pairing learners in pair work activity[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2013(1):31-48.
[30]	SVALBERG A M L. Engagement with language: Interrogating a construct[J]. Language Awareness, 2009(3-4):242-258.
[31]	SWAIN M. The inseparability of cognition and emotion in second language learning[J]. Language Teaching, 2013(2):1-13.
[32]	SWAIN M & LAPKIN S. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 1998(3):320-337.
[33]	TAJABADI A, AHMADIAN M, DOWLATABADI H, et al. EFL learners’ peer negotiated feedback, revision outcomes, and short-term writing development: The effect of patterns of interaction[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2023(3):689-717.
[34]	VYGOTSKY L S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1978.
[35]	WATANABE Y & SWAIN M. Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2007(2):121-142.
[36]	ZABIHI R & GHAHRAMANZADEH B. Proficiency pairing and engagement with language in L2 peer interaction[J/OL]. System, 2022,105:102725[2024-10-10]. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102725.
[37]	范玉梅. 任务类型对同伴互动中学习者投入的影响研究[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报, 2019(6):29-37.
[38]	范玉梅, 徐锦芬. 同伴熟悉度对同伴互动中学习者投入的影响研究[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2021(2):82-91.
[39]	徐锦芬, 寇金南. 大学英语课堂小组互动模式研究[J]. 外语教学, 2017(2):65-69.
[40]	徐亚妮, 杨连瑞, 杨向梅. 国外课堂二语习得研究动态(2010—2019)[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2022(44):25-41.

	变量	合作型（n=35）		双方被动型（n=12）		提问/回答型（n=3）		F	p
	变量	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F	p
行为投入	单词	266.63	46.44	223.00	55.51	230.33	4.51	4.117	0.023
	时长（秒）	187.91	40.08	157.08	47.75	171.67	17.62
	话轮	10.20	2.83	5.33	1.371	7.00	2.00	17.410	0.000
认知投入	LREs	11.89	8.41	12.42	12.11	12.00	5.00
认知投入	观点单位	19.97	4.52	15.17	3.46	19.67	4.04	5.707	0.006
社会投入	回应	5.29	3.21	0.25	0.45	2.33	0.58

	变量	合作型（n=35）		双方被动型（n=12）		提问/回答型（n=3）		F	p
	变量	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F	p
行为投入	单词	266.63	46.44	223.00	55.51	230.33	4.51	4.117	0.023
	时长（秒）	187.91	40.08	157.08	47.75	171.67	17.62
	话轮	10.20	2.83	5.33	1.371	7.00	2.00	17.410	0.000
认知投入	LREs	11.89	8.41	12.42	12.11	12.00	5.00
认知投入	观点单位	19.97	4.52	15.17	3.46	19.67	4.04	5.707	0.006
社会投入	回应	5.29	3.21	0.25	0.45	2.33	0.58