Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published online by De Gruyter Mouton December 14, 2021

Tracking telecollaborative tasks through design, feedback, implementation, and reflection processes in pre-service language teacher education

  • Semih Ekin EMAIL logo , Ufuk Balaman and Fatma Badem-Korkmaz


Telecollaborative exchanges between students from different countries are increasingly becoming a common practice in foreign language education and calling for new teacher competences for task design in order to maximize interactional opportunities in these settings. Considering that tasks are dynamic in nature and subject to constant change from their initial design to implementation by L2 learners, there is a need for teacher training activities promoting opportunities for improving the required digital and pedagogical competences. With this in mind, this paper sets out to explore the interactional architecture of the multiple steps involved in the training of pre-service language teachers in pedagogical task design for telecollaboration-oriented video-mediated interactional settings. We describe the procedural unfolding of the telecollaborative tasks by analyzing (i) pre-service teachers’ collaborative design meetings and (ii) written design reports; (iii) peer and mentor evaluation of these design ideas in whole-class feedback sessions in teacher training classrooms; (iv) written reports of redesigns after the feedback session, (v) video-mediated implementation by telecollaborative task participants, and finally (vi) pre-service teachers’ written reflections based on the implementation of their own designs. We use Conversation Analysis to closely examine audio and screen-recording data and draw on the textual data to present the procedural unfolding of two tasks over multiple phases, namely design, feedback, implementation, and reflection. The findings show that a telecollaborative task is a co-construction by the pre-service teachers as task designers, the teacher trainer as the mentor, and the L2 learners as the end users in interactionally trackable ways across the teacher education events. The results bring insights into the novel sets of digital, pedagogical, and interactional competencies in L2 contexts. We conclude that task enhanced telecollaboration holds great potential to critically advance research and practice in L2 teaching and teacher education worldwide.

Corresponding author: Semih Ekin, Faculty of Education, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey, E-mail:

Appendix: Reflection paper

ELT.382 Instructional Technology and Materials Development



Group No:


Group Members (names and student numbers):

  1. How was your task implemented by the project participants? (Write a 200-word description of the task implementation. Provide a brief summary of how they started, proceeded, and completed the task with reference to length and engagement)

  2. Were there any misfits between your projection of task design and its implementation? (Write a 200-word critique of your task design with reference to how you designed and how it did not work in some specific parts of the implementation)

  3. Can you spot any interactional outcomes of the implementation of your task design? (Choose an extract from your transcriptions of min. 20 s — max 1 min which is rich in terms of meaning negotiation. Write a 200-word description of the extract with reference to the interactional outcome you spot)

  4. Can you spot any interactional troubles due to your task design? (Choose an extract from your transcriptions of min. 20 s – max 1 min which includes a sample of interactional trouble that occurred due to your task design. Write a 200-word description of the extract with reference to the interactional outcome you spot)

  5. What were the strong and weak points of your task design? (Write a 200-word long overall evaluation for your task design. You can design this as a conclusion paragraph.)


Arcario, P. Joseph. 1995. Post-observation conferences in TESOL teacher education programs. New York: Teachers College Columbia University Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Badem-Korkmaz, Fatma, Semih Ekin & Ufuk Balaman. Pre-service language teachers’ resistance to teacher trainer advice on task design for video-mediated L2 interaction. Classroom Discourse, in press.10.1080/19463014.2021.2020144Search in Google Scholar

Baecher, Laura & Bede McCormack. 2015. The impact of video review on supervisory conferencing. Language and Education 29(2). 153–173. in Google Scholar

Belz, Julie & Andreas Müller-Hartmann. 2003. Teachers as intercultural learners: Negotiating German-American telecollaboration along the institutional fault line. The Modern Language Journal 87(1). 71–89. in Google Scholar

Brandt, Caroline. 2008. Integrating feedback and reflection in teacher preparation. ELT Journal 62(1). 37–46. in Google Scholar

Breen, Michael P. 1987. Contemporary paradigms in syllabus design. Part I. Language Teaching 20(2). 81–92. in Google Scholar

Chun, Dorothy M. 2015. Language and culture learning in higher education via telecollaboration. Pedagogies: An International Journal 10(1). 5–21. in Google Scholar

Copland, Fiona, Georgina Ma & Steve Mann. 2009. Reflecting in and on post-observation feedback in initial teacher training on certificate courses. English Language Teacher Education and Development 12(Winter). 14–23.Search in Google Scholar

Dewey, John. 1933. How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking on the educative process. Boston, MA: DC Heath and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Dooly, Melinda. 2011. Divergent perceptions of tellecollaborative language learning tasks: Task-as-workplan vs. task-as-process. Language Learning & Technology 15(2). 69–91.Search in Google Scholar

Dooly, Melinda & Vincenza Tudini. 2016. ‘Now we are teachers’: The role of small talk in student language teachers’ telecollaborative task development. Journal of Pragmatics 102. 38–53. in Google Scholar

El-Hariri, Yasmin. 2016. Learner perspectives on task design for oral-visual eTandem language learning. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 10(1). 49–72. in Google Scholar

Ernest, Pauline, Montse Guitert Catasús, Regine Hampel, Sarah Heiser, Joseph Hopkins, Linda Murphy & Ursula Stickler. 2013. Online teacher development: Collaborating in a virtual learning environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning 26(4). 311–333. in Google Scholar

Farrell, Thomas S. 2015. Promoting teacher reflection in second language education: A framework for TESOL professionals. New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9781315775401Search in Google Scholar

Fuchs, Carolin. 2016. “Are you able to access this website at all?” – Team negotiations and macro-level challenges in telecollaboration. Computer Assisted Language Learning 29(7). 1152–1168. in Google Scholar

Godwin-Jones, Robert. 2019. Telecollaboration as an approach to developing intercultural communication competence. Language Learning & Technology 23(3). 8–28.Search in Google Scholar

González-Lloret, Marta. 2015. Conversation analysis in computer-assisted language learning. CALICO Journal 32(3). 569–594.10.1558/cj.v32i3.27568Search in Google Scholar

González-Lloret, Marta & Lourdes Ortega. 2014. Towards technology-mediated TBLT: An introduction. In Marta González-Lloret & Lourdes Ortega (eds.), Technology-mediated TBLT: Researching technology and tasks, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.6.01gonSearch in Google Scholar

Gruba, Paul. 2004. Designing tasks for online collaborative language learning. Prospect 19(2). 72–81.Search in Google Scholar

Guichon, Nicolas & Miriam Hauck. 2011. Teacher education research in CALL and CMC: More in demand than ever. ReCALL 23(3). 187–199. in Google Scholar

Hampel, Regine. 2006. Rethinking task design for the digital age: A framework for language teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment. ReCALL 18(1). 105–121. in Google Scholar

Hampel, Regine. 2009. Training teachers for the multimedia age: Developing teacher expertise to enhance online learner interaction and collaboration. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 3(1). 35–50. in Google Scholar

Hampel, Regine. 2010. Task design for a virtual learning environment in a distant language course. In Michael Thomas & Hayo Reinders (eds.), Task-based language learning and teaching with technology, 131–153. London: Continuum Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Hauck, Mirjam & Bonnie L. Youngs. 2008. Telecollaboration in multimodal environments: The impact on task design and learner interaction. Computer Assisted Language Learning 21(2). 87–124. in Google Scholar

Helm, Francesca. 2017. Critical approaches to online intercultural language education. In Steven Thorne & Stephen May (eds.), Language, education and technology. Encyclopedia of language and education, 3rd edn. New York, NY: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-02237-6_18Search in Google Scholar

Ishino, Mika. 2018. Micro-longitudinal conversation analysis in examining co-teachers’ reflection-in-action. System 78. 130–147. in Google Scholar

Keogh, Jayne. 2010. (In)forming formal evaluation: Analysis of a practicum mentoring conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics & Professional Practice 7(1). 51–73. in Google Scholar

Kessler, Greg & Philip Hubbard. 2017. Language teacher education and technology. In Carol A. Chapelle & Sauro Shannon (eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning, 278–292. Hoboken: Wiley‐Blackwell.10.1002/9781118914069.ch19Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Younhee & Rita Elaine Silver. 2016. Provoking reflective thinking in post observation conversations. Journal of Teacher Education 67(3). 203–219. in Google Scholar

Koehler, Matthew & Punya Mishra. 2009. What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 9(1). 60–70.10.1177/002205741319300303Search in Google Scholar

Kolb, David. 1984. Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Upper Sadle River: Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar

Korthagen, FAJ. 2010. How teacher education can make a difference. Journal of Education for Teaching 36(4). 407–423. in Google Scholar

Koshik, Irene. 2005. Alternative questions used in conversational repair. Discourse Studies 7(2). 193–211. in Google Scholar

Kurek, Malgorzata & Andreas Müller-Hartmann. 2017. Task design for telecollaborative exchanges: In search of new criteria. System 64. 7–20. in Google Scholar

Lee, Lina. 2007. Fostering second language oral communication through constructivist interaction in desktop videoconferencing. Foreign Language Annals 40(4). 635–649. in Google Scholar

Lerner, Gene H. 2004. On the place of linguistic resources in the organization of talk-in-interaction: Grammar as action in prompting a speaker to elaborate. Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(2). 151–184. in Google Scholar

Levy, Mike. 2015. The role of qualitative approaches to research in CALL contexts: Closing in on the learner’s experience. CALICO Journal 32(3). 554–568. in Google Scholar

Lewis, Tim & Robert O’Down. 2016. Introduction to online intercultural exchange and this volume. In Robert O’Dowd & Tim Lewis (eds.), Online intercultural exchange, 17–34. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315678931Search in Google Scholar

Luttenberg, Johan & Theo Bergen. 2008. Teacher reflection: The development of a typology. Teachers and Teaching 14(5–6). 543–566. in Google Scholar

Müller-Hartmann, Andreas. 2012. The classroom-based action research paradigm in telecollaboration. In Melinda Dooly & Robert O’Dowd (eds.), Researching online foreign language interaction and exchange, 163–204. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Malgorzata Kurek. 2016. Virtual group formation and the process of task design in online intercultural exchanges. In Robert O’Dowd & Tim Lewis (eds.), Online intercultural exchange, 145–163. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

O’Dowd, Robert. 2007. Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language teachers. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847690104Search in Google Scholar

O’Dowd, Robert. 2015. The competences of the telecollaborative teacher. Language Learning Journal 43(2). 194–207. in Google Scholar

O’Dowd, Robert. 2018. From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: State-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange 1. 1–23.10.14705/rpnet.2018.jve.1Search in Google Scholar

O’Dowd, Robert & Melinda Dooly. 2020. Intercultural communicative competence development through telecollaboration and virtual exchange. The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.10.4324/9781003036210-28Search in Google Scholar

O’Dowd, Robert & Paige Waire. 2009. Critical issues in telecollaborative task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning 22(2). 173–188. in Google Scholar

O’Dowd, Robert, Sauro Shannon & Elena Spector‐Cohen. 2020. The role of pedagogical mentoring in Virtual Exchange. TESOL Quarterly 54(1). 146–172. in Google Scholar

Park, Innhwa. 2014. Stepwise advice negotiation in writing center peer tutoring. Language and Education 28(4). 362–382. in Google Scholar

Park, Innhwa. 2017. Questioning as advice resistance: Writing tutorial interactions with L2 writers. Classroom Discourse 8(3). 253–270. in Google Scholar

Pekarek-Doehler, Simona, Johannes Wagner & Esther González-Martínez (eds.). 2018. Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/978-1-137-57007-9Search in Google Scholar

Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68. 939–967. in Google Scholar

Samuda, Virginia. 2015. Tasks, design, and the architecture of pedagogical spaces. In Bygate Martin (ed.), Domains and directions in the development of TBLT, 271–301. John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.8.10samSearch in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel & Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8(4). 289–327. in Google Scholar

Schön, Donald A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Schön, Donald A. 1987. Educating the reflection practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the profession. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Seedhouse, Paul. 2005. “Task” as research construct. Language Learning 55(3). 533–570. in Google Scholar

Sert, Olcay. 2015. Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University.10.1515/9780748692651Search in Google Scholar

Sert, Olcay. 2019. Classroom interaction and language teacher education. In Steve Walsh & Steve Mann (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English language teacher education, 216–238. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315659824-19Search in Google Scholar

Sert, Olcay. 2021. Transforming CA findings into future L2 teaching practices: Challenges and prospects for teacher education. In Silvia Kunitz, Numa Markee & Olcay Sert (eds.), Classroom-based conversation analytic research: Theoretical and applied perspectives on pedagogy. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-52193-6_13Search in Google Scholar

Shamsipour, Anahita & Hamid Allami. 2012. Teacher talk and learner involvement in EFL classroom: The case of Iranian setting. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 2(11). 2262–2268. in Google Scholar

Sidnell, Jack & Tanya Stivers (eds.). 2012. The handbook of conversation analysis. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118325001Search in Google Scholar

Skovholt, Karianne. 2018. Anatomy of a teacher–student feedback encounter. Teaching and Teacher Education 69. 142–153. in Google Scholar

Stivers, Tanya. 2004. “No no no” and other types of multiple sayings in social interaction. Human Communication Research 30(2). 260–293. in Google Scholar

Üzüm, Babürhan, Sedat Akayoglu & Bedrettin Yazan. 2020. Using telecollaboration to promote intercultural competence in teacher training classrooms in Turkey and the USA. ReCALL 32(2). 162–177.10.1017/S0958344019000235Search in Google Scholar

Van den Branden, Kris. 2009. Mediating between predetermined order and chaos: The role of the teacher in task‐based language education. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 19(3). 264–285. in Google Scholar

Van Manen, Max. 1977. Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry 6(3). 205–228. in Google Scholar

Vehviläinen, Sanna. 2009. Problems in the research problem: Critical feedback and resistance in academic supervision. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 53(2). 185–201.10.1080/00313830902757592Search in Google Scholar

Vehviläinen, Sanna. 2012. Question-prefaced advice in feedback sequences of Finnish academic supervisions. In Holger Limberg & Miriam A. Locher (eds.), Advice in discourse, 31–51. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.221.04vehSearch in Google Scholar

Walsh, Steve. 2006. Investigating classroom discourse. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203015711Search in Google Scholar

Walsh, Steve & Steve Mann. 2015. Doing reflective practice: A data-led way forward. ELT Journal 69(4). 351–362. in Google Scholar

Wang, Yuping. 2006. Negotiation of meaning in desktop videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. ReCALL 18(1). 122–145. in Google Scholar

Wang, Yuping. 2007. Task design in videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. Calico Journal 24(3). 591–630.10.1558/cj.v24i3.591-630Search in Google Scholar

Waring, Hansun Zhang. 2007. The multi‐functionality of accounts in advice giving. Journal of Sociolinguistics 11(3). 367–391. in Google Scholar

Waring, Hansun Zhang. 2017. Going general as a resource for doing advising in post-observation conferences in teacher training. Journal of Pragmatics 110. 20–33. in Google Scholar

Young, Richard F. & Elizabeth R. Miller. 2004. Learning as changing participation: Discourse roles in ESL writing conferences. The Modern Language Journal 88(4). 519–535. in Google Scholar

Zeichner, Kenneth M. & Daniel P. Liston. 2013. Reflective teaching: An introduction. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203771136Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-12-07
Accepted: 2021-11-23
Published Online: 2021-12-14

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 3.6.2023 from
Scroll to top button