Abstract
Video Conferencing tools like Zoom have provided new avenues for authentic learner interaction in second language ( L2) learning, supporting research that highlights the role of the interaction in facilitating L2 acquisition. For instance, according to the Interactionist Approach, it is hypothesized that learners acquire language most effectively when they engage in meaningful communication and negotiate meaning with others. Zoom aligns with this approach by providing authentic virtual interaction opportunities. Following the Interactionist Approach, this study conducted an exploratory analysis of how Zoom's features can be leveraged to promote interactions by providing learners with access to the L2 input (e.g., listening) and promoting opportunities for output ( e.g., speaking) and negotiation of meaning (e.g., to solve a communication breakdown). Our feature-based analysis found that most Zoom features fulfill its criteria, demonstrating the tool's potential to provide comprehensible input, foster meaningful output, encourage negotiation of meaning, and facilitate interactive feedback. Our discussion highlights Zoom's potential as a versatile platform, offering benefits for synchronous and asynchronous L2 learning.
References
References
Al-Jarf, R. (2022). Text-to-speech software for promoting EFL freshman students’ decoding skills and pronunciation accuracy. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies, 4(2), 19–30. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6255-1305
Cardoso, W. (2022). Technology for Speaking Development. In T. Derwing, M. Munro, & R. Thomson (Eds), Routledge Handbook on Second Language Acquisition and Speaking (p. 299–313). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Chapelle, C. (2003). English language learning and technology. John Benjamin.
Cheung, A. (2021). Synchronous online teaching, a blessing or a curse? Insights from EFL primary students’ interaction during online English lessons. System, 100, 102566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102566
Dharmawati, D. (2022). The Use of Zoom Application As Teaching Media To Improve Students’ Speaking Skill. Ideas: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(2), 1933-1940. https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v10i2.3164
Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meaning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2), 285–301. doi:10.1017/S0272263199002077
Egbert, J., & Shahrokni, S. A. (2018). CALL principles and practices. Open Text Washington State University.
Fredriksson, C. (2014). The influence of group formation on learner participation, language complexity, and corrective behaviour in synchronous written chat as part of academic German studies. ReCALL, 27, 217 - 238. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000238
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2006). Input, interaction and output: An overview. AILA Review, 19, 3-17.
Goodman, S., & Moore, E. (2023). To Chat or Not To Chat: Text-Based Interruptions From Peers Improve Learner Confidence in an Online Lecture Environment. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v23i2.33413
Kohnke, L., & Moorhouse, B. (2020). Facilitating synchronous online language learning through Zoom. RELC Journal, 53(3), 296–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220937235
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018). Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 51(3), 285–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444818000125
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.413–468). Academic Press.
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–587. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199004027.
Massner, C. K. (2021). Zooming in on Zoom fatigue: A case study of videoconferencing and Zoom fatigue in higher education. Liberty University.
Mpungose, C. B. (2023). Lecturers’ reflections on using Zoom video conferencing technology for e-learning at a South African university in the context of coronavirus. African Identities, 21(2), 266–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/14725843.2021.1902268
Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning: Parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344005000224
Sauro, S., & Smith, B. (2010). Investigating L2 Performance in Text Chat. Applied Linguistics, 31, 554-577. https://doi.org/10.1093/APPLIN/AMQ007.
Sénécal, A-M., & Cardoso, W. (2024). English L2 vocabulary learning with clickers: Investigating pedagogical effectiveness. Language Learning & Technology, 28(1), 1–20. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73566
Smith, J., & Doe, J. (2021). The risks and rewards of disclosure: What to consider when deciding to share your hearing loss. American Journal of Arts and Communication, 6(2), 10-27.
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: theory and research (pp. 495-508). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410612700-38
Wang, S., Li, J., & Liang, Q. (2024). Visual reinforcement through digital Zoom technology in FL pronunciation instruction. Language Learning & Technology, 28(1), 1–26. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73558
Biodata
Nasrin Shamsipour has an MA in Applied Linguistics from Concordia University. Her research explores web-conferencing tools such as Zoom as platforms for L2 pedagogy. She is currently an ESL instructor at a language institution in Montreal.
Walcir Cardoso is a Professor of Applied Linguistics at Concordia University. He conducts research on the L2 acquisition of phonology and the effects of technology (e.g., clickers, TTS, ASR, intelligent personal assistants) on L2 learning.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Author and CALL-EJ