Both types of interactive language learning, teacher–student interaction, and peer interaction, have been confirmed to contribute to language students’ ability
development and knowledge improvement, as well as their learning experience (e.g., Bloch, 2002; Hung, Young, & Lin, 2015; Wang, 2014; Soler, 2005; Suh, 2005). Interactive learning with peer learners is described as a learning approach that is “engaging, challenging and interesting” (Wang, 2014, p. 389). Studies have found that peer interaction employed in EFL students’ learning process makes learning
interesting and attractive, encouraging students to take a more active participation in learning (e.g., Fuji & Mackey, 2009; Ishikawa, Tsubota, & Smith, 2016; Liang, 2010; Peterson, 2012; Putera, Latief, & Saukah, 2016). Learning from previous studies, peer interaction is investigated in the current one, for the purpose of revealing its influence on EFL students’ perceptions of language learning, as well as on their engagement in interaction that occurs in a new CALL context.
Suh (2005) conducted a study to investigate the effectiveness of peer interaction on EFL students’ writing improvement. Data were collected via a questionnaire and
journal writing from six college EFL students in South Korea. Results indicated that peer interaction could be an appropriate, effective tool to promote EFL students’ writing performance. EFL students also considered it as an interesting approach, which motivated them to take a more active engagement in learning activities. Interaction to motivate EFL students’ engagement in learning needs more
investigation in a Chinese university context. Whether Chinese EFL students have positive perceptions of this learning approach should be also examined, for revealing its employment in this educational system.
Another study focused on the employment of a peer interaction community to promote the development of EFL students’ learning motivation in the online context (Razak, Saeed, & Ahmad, 2013). Twenty-four EFL learners in Arab countries participated in the study by being enrolled in an online interactive community. A questionnaire and the records of participants’ interaction exchanges in their learning process were used as instruments for data collection. Results of this case study indicated that language learners could be motivated by peer interactive activities in their learning process. L2 learners also perceived that their English language skills were enhanced by engaging in interactive learning practices.
Moreover, Hung, Young, and Lin’s study (2015) conducted in Taiwan also investigated the effects of peer interaction on EFL students’ motivation to achieve
their learning goals. Thirty EFL students participated in this experimental study. Data were collected through surveys, interviews, observations and video-recordings. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed to analysis these gathered data. Results indicated that peer interaction, including collaborative and competitive
interaction, could effectively enhance EFL students’ performance in English learning. For those disadvantaged EFL students, peer interaction motivated them to actively engage in learning.
These studies suggested that EFL students with different language levels, and different education backgrounds, may have different views of peer interaction, leading to different engagement and outcomes of learning as well. Interactive learning may motivate these students in different ways with different outcomes as well. This study needs to take EFL students’ individual differences into consideration when
investigating their perceptions of and engagement in peer interactive learning, which contributes to a deeper understanding of it through more information about this approach.
Teacher involvement in interaction is important to language learning (Ahmad, 2016; Bloch, 2002; Miao, Badger, & Zhen, 2006; Soler, 2002). Teacher–student interaction has been also confirmed to be effective to promote EFL students’ language
development, as well as their motivation of learning (e.g., Huang & Hong, 2016; Gray et al., 2005; Goodison, 2003; Kazemifar & Chakigar, 2016; Sharma & Pooja, 2016).
Teacher–student interaction was beneficial to EFL students’ language
development, as a study indicated (Bloch, 2002). A total of 120 emails of teacher– student interaction from 26 EFL students were gathered and analysed. Results stressed the importance of interaction between teachers and students in English language learning, particularly after the class. Teacher–student interaction itself was also considered as effective practice of EFL students’ language development. As the study employed limited sources of data, the results might be biased. This study expands the use of tools for data collection, and gathers data from a wider range of participants. It provides more information about teacher–student interaction in EFL learning in a different context of EFL learning and teaching.
Another study focused on the comparison between teacher–student interaction and peer interaction in terms of students’ pragmatic knowledge development (Soler, 2002). Participants of this qualitative study were 24 Spanish EFL students. Pre- and post-tests were employed as instruments for data collection. The study indicated that EFL students’ pragmatic knowledge could emerge from their interaction with both teachers and peer students. EFL students intended to focus more on grammatical and lexical issues in their interaction with teachers. This study shows the difference
between teacher–student interaction and peer interaction, which needs more
investigate to reveal their different influences on EFL learning in practice, particularly in a Chinese university context, where teachers may play a different role in EFL education. It should be noted that Asian students usually rely on teachers in their interactive language learning (Liang & McQueen, 1999; Xie, 2016). Since this study focuses on a Chinese university context, it needs more investigation of EFL students’ learning practice with teacher–student interaction from different participant
perspectives, for finding out whether these students keep a reliance on teachers in interactive learning.
Actual language learning usually takes place through social interaction (Lantolf, 2000; Liu & Lan, 2016; Zhou, 2016), emphasising the importance of interaction in the process of language acquisition (Chapelle, 2005). The theory of ZPD (Cao & Philp, 2006; Kuo, 2011; Lee, 2007), scaffolding (Chen, 2012; De Guerrero & Villamil, 2000; Storch, 2002), L1 mediation (Guk &Kellogg, 2007; Kang, 2005; Yang, 2006; 2014), and imitations (Chang, 2015; Sasaki & Takeuchi, 2010), which are largely
underpinned in the framework of SCT, have been found to be closely related with interactive language learning.