Há negociação de sentidos nas interações em fóruns educacionais online?

Abstract

Based on sociointeractionist theories of second language acquisition, this study aimed at investigating the negotiation of meaning that takes place in online forums of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) courses. Data were collected using aqualitative research methodology which had included some statiscal treatment. First, an instrument was elaborated to analyze the interactions and the negotiation of meaning that take place in online language learning forums. The elaboration of the instrument employed categories borrowed from Conversation Analysis (SEEDHOUSE, 2004), Interaction Patterns (SPADA & FRÖHLICH, 1995), Meaning Negotiation (GASS & e VARONIS, 1985) and Feedback Analysis(BARBOSA, 2011). Next the instrument was tested for its validity. Ten EFL teachers used the elaborated instrument to analyze forum posts of an EFL course organized in 15 (fifteen) interaction blocks of interaction. The answers given by the ten teachers were submitted to two statistical procedures: Cronbach Alpha and Friedman ANOVA. During the validation process, a few modifications were made to the elaborated instrument. The final version obtained the following results: Cronbach Alpha of 0.786 and 0.025–0.031 ANOVA. The final version used in the quantitative analysis served as the starting point for the qualitative analysis of the interactions and of the negotiation of meaning that took place in the online forums of 06 (six) courses of an online English Teaching Certificate Program at UFC-UAB. These courses were grouped into 02 (two) language courses, 02 (two) metalanguage courses and 02 (two) literature courses. Three forums of each course were analyzed for a total of 18 analyzed forums. Results indicated that, in relation to Conversation Patterns, most conversation turns in the analyzed forums were initiated by the tutors, 64.7% of the time (sixty four point seven percent), and conversation sequence was not maintained in most of the forums. In all analyzed forums, only two presented instances of meaning negotiation, and these two instances occurred in forums of the same course. These instances of meaning negotiation happened as the result of either a pseudo inquiry or a true inquiry, or as a response to either some predictable or unpredictable information. In both instances of negotiation, discourse was maintained and unrestricted forms of language were used. Also, in the two instances of meaning negotiation, corrective feedback occurred in one, while in the other there was no corrective feedback. The results of this study support the argument that, in online educational forums, two types of negotiation of meaning can occur: one which is restricted to specific instances of negotiation of the meaning of one word or language form, which interrupts the communication flow of an interaction; and the other, of a broader type (proposed by this researcher), in which two or more participants interact while trying to understand the meaning of a concept or idea. This broader type of negotiation does not depend on feedback to be triggered. In fact, there is no need of a specific trigger, since negotiation can happen as the result of a doubt raised by a student or of a question asked by the tutor or by another student. Results also indicated that corrective feedback, especially of the explicit type, favors a more restricted type of negotiation of the meaning, than of a specific word or language form.