A Social Constructivist Model:

Long’s Interaction Hypothesis

The Social constructivist perspectives emphasize the
dynamic nature of the interplay between learners,
their peers and their teachers and others with whom
they interact.
The interaction
between learners
and others is the
focus of observation
and explanation.
Michael Long (1985 – 1996) evolved
the work of Hatch (1978) on the
importance of conversation to
develop grammar and Krashen
(1985), that comprehensible input
is necessary condition for SLA. He
posits in what has come to be
called the interaction hypothesis.
He sees interaction as a very
important facilitating factor in L2
acquisition’s success.
This theorizes that face-
to-face oral interaction
and communication could
boost the proficient skill
of language for the sake
of helping learners
maximize acquisition of
input for second
language learning.
Learners learn new forms in a
language through the negotiation
around meaning that occurs when
they engage in communication
and communicative learning
activities. Specifically, negotiation
for meaning takes place between
learners and interlocutors during
the course of their interaction
when either one signals with
questions or comment that the
other’s preceding message has not
been successfully conveyed.
When learners are
conversing with each
other. They make
modifications such as
asking for
clarification and
rephrasing that help
them acquire the
desired language
quicker.
 Two Hypotheses

Input Hypothesis Output Hypothesis

– a beginner or L2 will – a beginner or L2 will

learn by listening to learn by practicing
others speaking the language
 Input Hypothesis

 Interaction For example:

between native
speakers Babies imitate their parents:
“The cat fat”

Parents might correct: No we

don’t say that. We say: “The fat
cat”.
 Input Hypothesis

 Interaction
between native
speakers with For example:
nonnative NS: Go down to the subway –
speakers or NNS: What?
second language NS: Do you know the word Subway or
at least where is it? (and he will
learners explain)
Note: But the native speakers often slow down speech to second
language learners (modifications also include comprehension checks).
 Input Hypothesis
 Interaction For example:
between L2
advanced with A: I went to a New Year’s Eve
beginner. party.
B: What is New Year’s Eve?
A: You know, the night before the
first day of a new year.
B: Ah, when there are lots of foods
and drinks?
A: Oh yes!
 Things to Remember
 In a heterogeneous class
(L1 and L2), you would
pair native speakers with
non-native speakers.

 In a homogeneous class (All

L2s), you would pair
advanced with beginners.
 Things to Remember
Comprehensible is very
important.

The modifications that students make

enable them to get the input they
need and make language learning
much easier which is evident in the
negotiation interaction.
Output Hypothesis

For example:
B: Do you have a PEECELL?
A: What?
B: The thing you write with. A PEENCIL.
A: Ah, a PENCIL (with proper pronunciation). Oh
yes, here it is.
B. Thank you.
 Things to Remember

 In a homogeneous
class (All L2s). You
would pair advanced
with beginners.

 In a heterogeneous class
(L1 and L2). You would
pair native speakers with
non-native speakers.
 Things to Remember

 Comprehensible output
is very important
because it pushes
students to think about
syntax and the meaning
of the words they use.
 It helps to promote
communication.

It enables
It helps learners to
acquisition receive
where feedback
vocabulary Effects of Negotiation for Meaning through
is on Second Language Acquisition direct and
concerned. indirect
evidence.

What are the strengths of the interaction hypothesis?

Through interactions, learners have opportunities to understand and use

the language that was once incomprehensible.

Engages learners in meaningful interaction, which is believed to promote

opportunities for L2 learning.

Learners may receive more/different input and have more opportunities

for output.

Provides a general framework for language acquisition, which made a

valuable contribution for second language research.
What are the weaknesses of the interaction hypothesis?

Success depends on the amount of input, production and

feedback learners receive.

Some interactions are negative, which would negatively affect

language learning.

Sometimes input is too complicated for some students to learn.

Too much input may overwhelm some students.

 Activities for Interactive Classroom

Tasks for real-world situation Authentic language input

Tips for Interactive Integration

Involve all students actively

Be sure that groups are either homogenous or heterogeneous

Scaffold students who may be above or below the norm

Balance the time that they interact and the time that you
instruct and talk (two much of one can be harmful.

Be sure that the entire class period is being used to reach objectives
 The Situation

When Integrating
The Interactive Your
Needed Activities/Tasks Method of
Materials into your lesson be Assessment
sure to analyze

The Needs of All of

the Students
 Prepared by:

Reynaldo C. Tondo, Jr.

Revax Balansag