Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching <p><strong>INTRODUCTION:</strong></p> <div class="oczasopismie"> <p>Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching (ISSN 2083-5205) is a refereed journal published four times a year by the Department of English Studies, Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, Poland. The language of publication is English. The journal is devoted to reporting previously unpublished highest quality theoretical and empirical research on learning and teaching second and foreign languages. It deals with the learning and teaching of any language, not only English, and focuses on a variety of topics ranging from the processes underlying second language acquisition, various aspects of language learning in instructed and non-instructed settings, as well as different facets of the teaching process, including syllabus choice, materials design, classroom practices and evaluation. Each issue carries about 6 papers, 6000-8000 words in length, as well as reply articles and reviews. Submissions are subjected to an anonymous review process conducted by at least two referees who may be members of the Editorial Board and other leading specialists in the field. Authors are notified of acceptance or rejection of their papers within three months of the submission date.</p> <ul> <li class="show"><a href="/index.php/ssllt/about" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ABOUT THE JOURNAL</a></li> <li class="show"><a href="/index.php/ssllt/issue/current" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CURRENT ISSUE</a></li> <li class="show"><a href="/index.php/ssllt/issue/archive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ARCHIVES</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>INDEXED IN:</strong></p> <p>Social Sciences Citation Index (WoS Core Collection); Journal Citation Reports Social Sciences (WoS); Scopus; European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH PLUS); Education Resources Information Center (ERIC); Index Copernicus; Central and Eastern European Online Library (CEEOL); The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (CEJSH); The MLA International Bibliography; The MLA Directory of Periodicals; Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ); EBSCO; Linguistic Abstracts;&nbsp; WorldCat (OCLC); Current Contents – Social and Behavioral Sciences (WoS); Essential Science Indicators (WoS)</p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> <p><strong>JOURNAL METRICS:</strong></p> </div> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong> <a title="SCImago Journal &amp; Country Rank" href=";tip=sid&amp;exact=no"><img src="" alt="SCImago Journal &amp; Country Rank" border="0"></a> </strong></div> <div class="oczasopismie">&nbsp;</div> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong><strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"> <img src="/public/site/images/admin/CiteScore2019_Studies_in_Second_La.png"></span></span></span></span></strong></strong></div> <p>CiteScore (2019): 2.2 (89%)<br>CiteScoreTracker: 2.6 (update 08.11.2020)<br>&nbsp;<br>MNiSW: 100</p> <p>Google Scholar Metrics h5: 18 (09.2019)<br>Google Scholar h-index: 23</p> <p><strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;">DOI:</span></span></span></span></strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"> 10.14746 /ssllt</span></span></span></span></p> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;">ISSN:</span></span></span></span></strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"> 2083-5205 </span></span></span></span><strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;">e-ISSN:</span></span></span></span></strong><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"> 2084–1965</span></span></span></span></div> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong>ARTICLES ARE LICENSED UNDER A CREATIVE COMMONS (2016 -):</strong></div> <div class="oczasopismie"><a href="" rel="license"><img style="border-width: 0;" src="" alt="Creative Commons License"></a><a href=""><br></a><a href="" rel="license">&nbsp;Attribution 4.0 International License</a><a href="">.<br></a></div> en-US <p>1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the&nbsp; legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.</p> <p>1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.</p> <p>2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:</p> <p>2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including&nbsp; printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;</p> <p>2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;</p> <p>2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting,&nbsp; made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;</p> <p>2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);</p> <p>2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;</p> <p>2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of&nbsp; the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;</p> <p>2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;</p> <p>2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern <a href="" target="_self">Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)</a>&nbsp;as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.</p> <p>3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.</p> <p>4. The&nbsp; Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.</p> <p>5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:</p> <p>5.1.&nbsp; allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the&nbsp;<a href="" target="_self">Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)</a>&nbsp;Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;</p> <p>5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;</p> <p>5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).</p> <p>6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).</p> <p>7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis</p> <p>7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.</p> <p>7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> (Mirosław Pawlak) (Pressto) Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0000 OJS 60 Notes on Contributors Copyright (c) 2020 ssllt Wed, 30 Sep 2020 19:56:39 +0000 Editorial: Introduction to the special issue on English language learning in primary schools <p>The early introduction of foreign languages, mainly English, in pre-primary and primary education in different parts of the world is an undisputable fact in today’s world, as clearly illustrated in Enever (2018). One of the reasons for this educational change is the belief in “the earlier the better” notion, which has already been shown not to hold true when linguistic outcomes are assessed in foreign language settings (see García Mayo &amp; García Lecumberri, 2003; Huang, 2015). Age is just one variable among many others that need to be taken into account when assessing child language learning in educational contexts (see Butler, 2019), and that is the reason why more research on identifying those other variables is necessary.</p> María del Pilar García Mayo, M. Juncal Gutierrez-Mangado Copyright (c) 2020 María del Pilar García Mayo, M. Juncal Gutierrez-Mangado Wed, 30 Sep 2020 19:53:31 +0000 Language-related episodes and pair dynamics in primary school CLIL learners: A comparison between proficiency-matched and student-selected pairs <p>A considerable body of research within the interaction framework (Long, 1996) has centred on the language-related episodes (LREs) which occur when learners topicalize a specific linguistic item while they are engaged in meaning-focused tasks. Several studies have shown that the production of LREs may be influenced by the proficiency level of the learners (Kim &amp; McDonough, 2008; Leeser, 2004). Sociocultural theory (Lantolf &amp; Appel, 1994) has also explored collaborative work and the effect that pairing learners with the same proficiency levels or different <em>patterns of interaction </em>(Storch, 2002) has on the production of LREs (e.g., Mozaffari, 2017; Storch &amp; Aldosari 2013), but little research has compared the effect of the pair formation method (student-selected vs. proficiency-matched) on young learners’ production of LREs and pair dynamics. This study compares young CLIL learners (aged 10-12) in student-selected and proficiency-matched pairs in task-based interaction. Results indicate that learners produce more meaning-based than form-based LREs, regardless of their pair formation method. The percentage of meaning-based LREs which are resolved accurately is much higher in proficiency-matched dyads than in student-selected ones. As for the patterns of interaction (Storch, 2002), the dynamics of proficiency-matched dyads are of a more collaborative nature than those of self-selected pairs.</p> María Basterrechea, Francisco Gallardo-del-Puerto Copyright (c) 2020 María Basterrechea, Francisco Gallardo-del-Puerto Wed, 30 Sep 2020 20:12:51 +0000 EFL child peer interaction: Measuring the effect of time, proficiency pairing and language of interaction <p>Child peer interaction in English as a foreign language (EFL) settings has recently received increasing attention with respect to age, instruction type and first language (L1) use, but longitudinal studies remain scarce and the effects of proficiency pairing and language choice on meaning negotiation strategies are still rather unexplored. Within a primary school EFL context, this paper aims to explore the amount and types of meaning negotiation, and the effects of time, proficiency pairing and language choice in a spot-the-differences task. Forty Catalan/Spanish bilingual children were paired into mixed and matched proficiency dyads, and their oral production was analyzed twice over the course of two years (i.e., 9-10 and 11-12 years old). The analysis included conversational adjustments, self- and other-repetition and positive and negative feedback in the learners’ L1 and second language (L2). Our data show that the amount of meaning negotiation is low, although L2 meaning negotiation is higher than L1 meaning negotiation, and all the strategies are present in the data except for comprehension checks. Time effects are hardly observed. However, proficiency pairing and language effects are more generally found, whereby mixed proficiency dyads tend to negotiate for meaning more than matched dyads and meaning negotiation instances are more frequent in the L2 than in the L1.</p> Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester, Alexandra Vraciu Copyright (c) 2020 Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester, Alexandra Vraciu Wed, 30 Sep 2020 20:23:23 +0000 The interface between task-modality and the use of previously known languages in young CLIL English learners <p>This article contributes to the scarcity of research on the interface between task-modality and the use of previously known languages (PKL) in young learners. It examines the use of Basque/Spanish by CLIL learners (aged 10-11) during oral interaction while completing two collaborative tasks in English: a speaking task and a speaking + writing task. Findings indicate that these learners are extensive users of their PKL. Task-modality is particularly evident in the case of amount of PKL use, as a higher number of PKL turns are obtained in the speaking + writing task. However, task-modality has a limited effect on the functions of PKL, which contrasts with previous studies with adults. Despite the extensive use of their PKL, these young and low-proficient learners employ them as cognitive tools that facilitate the organization of the tasks, the co-construction of meaning and the attention to formal aspects of language such as mechanics.</p> María Martínez-Adrián, Izaskun Arratibel-Irazusta Copyright (c) 2020 María Martínez-Adrián, Izaskun Arratibel-Irazusta Wed, 30 Sep 2020 20:40:32 +0000 Task repetition and collaborative writing by EFL children: Beyond CAF measures <p>Research into the potential of collaborative writing is relatively new. Similarly, task repetition (TR), which has been claimed to be a valuable tool for language learning, has been rarely explored in the context of writing. Therefore, little is known about the potential of combining TR and collaborative writing, and even less if we focus on young learners (YLs), who constitute a generally under-researched population. With these research gaps in mind, the present study examines the compositions of 10 pairs of learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) (aged 12) who write the same text in response to the same picture prompt three times over a three-week period. Our analysis includes the language-related episodes (LREs) that learners generate while writing collaboratively and, also, a thorough analysis of the three drafts that students produce, including quantitative (complexity, accuracy and fluency (CAF)) and holistic measures. Results show that learners’ compositions improve with repetition when measured by holistic ratings although CAF measures fail to grasp this improvement. As for the LREs, a great amount was found, most of the episodes were focused on form, most were successfully resolved and their amount declined with TR. In light of these results we argue in favor of the inclusion of holistic measures when analyzing students’ productions and discuss the positive effects of collaborative writing in the context of TR with YLs.</p> María Ángeles Hidalgo, Amparo Lázaro-Ibarrola Copyright (c) 2020 María Ángeles Hidalgo, Amparo Lázaro-Ibarrola Wed, 30 Sep 2020 20:57:01 +0000 Oral English performance in Danish primary school children: An interactional usage-based approach <p>Following the call in Sandlund, Sundqvist, and Nyroos (2016) for incorporating discursive approaches into the field of oral second language (L2) testing, this paper proposes an interactional usage-based approach to the analysis of oral L2 performance. Based on Eskildsen (2018a), we combine analytic tools from usage-based linguistics and conversation analysis. We draw on usage-based linguistics to analyze performance in terms of test-takers’ inventories of linguistic constructions and on conversation analysis to understand their interactional competence in terms of the relation between the linguistic constructions and the actions they are used to accomplish. Performance assessment is thus constructional <em>and</em> interactional. Participants in this pilot study were two Danish primary school children who performed two consecutive oral tasks: a semi-guided interview and a picture-elicited narrative task. Data were analyzed by means of cross-child comparisons and cross-task comparisons within each child. Our data confirm the observation from previous research that simple question-answer(-assessment) sequences dominate oral test formats, but also that the format is sometimes abandoned, which allows for the accomplishment of new social actions. Moreover, the picture-description task affords a different speech exchange system with the interviewer participating more as an active listener when the children do not voluntarily carry out the requested task.</p> Søren W. Eskildsen, Teresa Cadierno Copyright (c) 2020 Søren W. Eskildsen, Teresa Cadierno Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:05:59 +0000 The ability of young learners to construct word meaning in context <p>This study examines young English readers’ ability to infer word meanings in context and to use metacognitive knowledge for constructing word meanings in relation to their reading performance. The participants were 61 fourth-grade students in the United States, comprising 24 monolingual English-speaking (ME) students and 37 English-as-a-second-language (L2) students; each group was also divided into strong and emergent readers in English. Participants were asked to read aloud paragraphs containing words unfamiliar to them in two different contextual conditions (i.e., explicit and implicit conditions), to guess the unfamiliar word meanings, and to tell a teacher how they arrived at the inferred meanings. Quantitative analyses found significant differences between strong and emergent readers in their oral fluency as well as in their ability to infer word meanings and articulate their use of metacognitive knowledge. Although significant differences were found in the ability to infer word meanings and the use of metacognitive reasoning between ME and L2 students, such differences disappeared after controlling for the size of students’ receptive vocabulary. Qualitative analyses also revealed differences in the kinds of knowledge and strategies that strong and emergent readers relied on when constructing the meaning of unknown words in both explicit and implicit contexts.</p> Yuko Goto Butler Copyright (c) 2020 Yuko Goto Butler Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:15:33 +0000 Effects of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension in children with English as an additional language <p>Vocabulary plays an important role in reading comprehension in both the L1 and the L2 (Murphy, 2018). In measuring vocabulary knowledge, however, researchers typically focus on mono-lexical units where vocabulary assessments tend not to take into account multi-word expressions which include phrasal verbs, collocations, and idioms. Omitting these multi-word lexical items can lead to an over-estimation of comprehension skills, particularly in reading. Indeed, adult learners of English comprehend texts containing a larger number of multi-word expressions less well compared to texts containing fewer of these expressions, even when the same words are used in each text (Martinez &amp; Murphy, 2011). To investigate whether children learning English as an additional language (EAL) face a similar challenge, two reading comprehension tests were administered to EAL and monolingual (non-EAL) English-speaking children in primary school. Both tests contained the same common words, but whereas in one test some of the words occurred in multi-word expressions, in the other test they did not. Reading comprehension was significantly reduced for both groups of children when multi-word expressions were included. Monolingual participants generally performed better than children with EAL on both tests further suggesting that children with EAL may face a particular disadvantage in English reading comprehension. These results are discussed within the context of the importance of developing rich vocabulary knowledge in all children, and especially emergent bilingual children, within primary school and beyond.</p> Rachel T. Y. Kan, Victoria A. Murphy Copyright (c) 2020 Rachel T. Y. Kan, Victoria A. Murphy Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:27:20 +0000 Exploring young EFL learners’ motivation: Individual versus pair work on dictogloss tasks <p>Motivation has been widely considered one of the most influential variables in the field of second language learning. Motivation may vary throughout the years, even within the duration of a single language class, and this might occur due to different factors, such as the choice of tasks or the activity type (i.e., collaborative or individual). These two factors have not been investigated in depth with young learners in foreign language settings, and from a task-based perspective. Thus, this paper addresses this gap, and explores the potential changes in motivation of 64 Spanish young learners of English as a foreign language who worked on a number of dictogloss tasks in pairs and individually over the span of a school year. Data was collected several times by means of different tools that measured students’ general and more specific task motivation, as well as their attitudes towards individual/pair work. The findings revealed that, overall, these children’s motivation was high and consolidated with time, while their level of anxiety decreased. Their attitudes towards the dictogloss were positive from the beginning to the end of the school year, and more so when they carried out the task in pairs. These findings support the benefits of collaborative work, and the dictogloss, as an appropriate task that engages children in their learning of a foreign language.</p> Marta Kopinska, Agurtzane Azkarai Copyright (c) 2020 Marta Kopinska, Agurtzane Azkarai Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:37:24 +0000 Teachers’ self‐reported L1 and L2 use and self‐assessed L2 proficiency in primary EFL education <p>This study investigates teachers’ first language (L1, German) and second language (L2, English) use in the primary English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom in two federal German states. It particularly focuses on the question of whether a more frequent, (self-reported) use of the L2 is positively correlated to teachers’ professional qualification as well as (self-assessed) L2 proficiency. To this end, data was collected in 2017 through an online survey among German primary teachers teaching EFL in year 4 (<em>N</em> = 844). L2 use was assessed through a 4-point Likert scale comprising 16 items on various classroom situations. L1 use was surveyed with an open question on situations of L1 use in the L2 classroom. Moreover, teachers self-assessed their L2 proficiency with a 4-point Likert scale and adapted CEFR descriptors for speaking. Findings indicate that teachers claim to use the L2 more in L2-related situations and the L1 more in classroom management situations. The study shows that teachers with a higher formal qualification tend to assess their L2 proficiency higher and claim to use the L2 more often in the primary EFL classroom. In contrast, teachers with a lower formal qualification tend to assess their L2 proficiency lower and claim to use the L1 more frequently in the L2 classroom.</p> Eva Wilden, Raphaela Porsch Copyright (c) 2020 Eva Wilden, Raphaela Porsch Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:53:08 +0000