(A)synchronous tasks for young EFL beginners

Synchronous and asynchronous activities for L2 English learning with young beginners

1. Are we up to the task? Synchronous and
asynchronous learning activities for young
beginners
Shona Whyte Ciara R. Wigham EulineCutrim-Schmid
EuroCALL2025 Milan, Italy 29/08/2025

2. Virtual exchange (VE) for young learners
•Application of VE with young learners
relatively unexplored (Dooly & Vinagre, 2022)
•Provision of engaging, interactive
experiences
•Motivation
•Risk-taking
•Challenge of ensuring Yls feel confident and
prepared (Dooly & Sadler, 2016)
•Engage meaningfully
•Limited linguistic and cultural resources

3. VE Task design
•Task design to facilitate YL exchanges (Cutrim
Schmid & Whyte, 2015; Dooly& Sadler, 2015; Mont & Masats, 2018;
Pennock-Speck & Clavel-Arroitia, 2023; Reader, 2024)
•TBLT principles (Ellis, 2006; 2020) :
•Involve encoding/decoding messages ≠
language forms
•Incorporate a communicative gap
(unknown information, opinions)
•Draw on learners’ own resources
•Foster autonomy and creative problem-
solving
•Include a non-language outcome

4. VE facilitation by teachers (or peers)
•Scaffold interactions to provide sufficient support
without dominating exchanges or conversely
leaving learners unsupported (CutrimSchmid & Whyte,
2015; Dooly& Sadler, 2016; Wigham & Whyte, 2024)
•‘Backstage’ teacher scaffolding to facilitate
‘frontstage’ learner to learner videoconferencing
interactions (Austin et al., 2017)
•Task-as-workplan / Task-as-process (Breen, 1989)

5. Research context
Whyte, Wigham
& Younès (2022)
Calvez et al.
(2022)

6. Research focus (ongoing programme)
1)Research is needed on how to design and implement VE tasks that
support young learners’ language development(Austin et. al, 2017;
Wigham & Whyte, 2024; Whyte & Wigham, in press)
2) To what extent do three project tasks
1)Adhere to TBLT principles
2)Foster meaningful learner-learner interaction
3)Create opportunities for language learning?
(Whyte, Wigham & Cutrim Schmid, in press)

7. Filmed task implementations
Tasks1–3TaskmodalityAims TasktypeAgelevel ConfigurationPartnership
1 Who’s
who?
SynchronousAsk and answer
questions about
identity
Information
gap
10-11 Small groups (4
learners) with 1:1
interaction; no
teacher
involvement
France-France
2 Alphabet
book
SynchronousWrite sentences
for an ABC book
Opinion gap9-10 Small groups (2
learners plus
teacher on each
side)
France-Spain
3 Guess
the
Monsters
AsynchronousDescribe a
character’s body
parts
Information
gap
10-11 Whole class with
1 learner writing
on the board
France-France

8. Who’s who: TBLT principles
•Identifying remote pupils by name
•Asking and answering prepared questions
•Recording responses on a wipeable grid
•Guessing identity using learners ID cards
•Real-life interaction gap
•Clear non-linguistic outcome
•Opportunity to use rote learning and
manage turns spontaneously
•Cognitive load
•Truncated interactions
•Too much information to track
•Interaction
•Comprehension breakdowns
•Turn management

9. Who’s who: Sample interaction

10. Who’s who: Interaction & language learning
•High degree of learner autonomy
•Range of questions -> extended interaction
•Turn management
•Scaffolding
•Inclusion of wipeable listening grids
•Absence of teacher
(Wigham & Whyte, 2024 ; Whyte & Wigham, in press)
“putting the child back at the
centre of learning, at the centre of
projects…[and] showing that they
are capable of this, that they can
manage to do things, that they can
communicate and express
themselves”
INTERACTIONAL
SPACE (ARENA)
COGNITIVE LOAD

11. Alphabet book: TBLT principles
•Collaborative writing of an alphabet e-
book
•Reading pre-prepared sentences
•Deciding which sentence to retain
•Exercise books and vocabulary checklist
•Opinion gap
•Production of a book
•Expressing opinions (I like…I prefer…)
•Cognitive load
•Composing, reading and
understanding complicated
sentences
•Interaction
•Comprehension breakdowns
•Turn management

12. Alphabet book: Sample interaction

13. Alphabet book: Interaction & language learning
•Intensive scaffolding by both
teachers
•Turn management
•Checking comprehension
•Designating speakers
•Summarising contributions
•Prompting decisions
•Confirming task outcomes
•Task adaptations
•More practice language of comparison
and liking/disliking
•Sentences produced more complex
than learners’ current productive
competence
•(Focus on form conducted in L1)
•Asynchronous modality?
TASK MODALITY
TASK TYPE

14. Guess the Monsters: TBLT principles
•Asynchronous guessing game
•Drawing monsters
•Recording oral descriptions
•Guessing which monster was described
•Information gap (which monster?)
•Understand sentences using numbers,
colours, body parts to match meaning to
images
•Language: pre-task phase of description
•Cognitive load
•Differences too obvious
•Task-as-process
•Proficient learners spoil the game

15. Guess the monsters: Sample interaction

16. Guess the monsters: Interaction & language learning
•Teacher maintained task frame to
give meaning to listening activity
•Controlling task outcome –
whiteboards
•Supporting comprehension –
replaying audio, focusing on salient
elements (‘small mouth’) in language
of schooling and L2, encouraging peer
scaffolding
•Extending task – write description of
correct monster
•Task modality
•Asynchronous : focus attention of
whole class
•Maximising learning opportunities for
all learners
TASK FRAME

17. Take-aways
•Task design and implementation in
accordance with key VE and TBLT principles
•VE
•Adhered to YLs’ level
•Incorporated playful elements
•Fostered confidence
•Balanced task demands and scaffolding
•TBLT
•Meaning-focused communication
•Fostered autonomy, creative problem-solving
•Tangible outcomes beyond language use

18. Task
dimensions

19. 1. Task modality
(synchronous versus asynchronous)
a. Are you sure this task needs live interaction?
b. Are you sure your learners have the toolsto navigate this interaction?
c. Will there be focus on form, and if so, how will it be handled?

20. 2. Task type
(information versus opinion gap)
a. Does the task involve a gapwhich learners need to negotiate?
b. Is this gap easyfor learners to conceptualise?
c. Is the outcome simple and immediate?

21. 3. Interactional space or ‘arena’
(frontstage versus backstage activity)
a. Will the teacherbe present? If so, will they be frontstage or backstage?
Why?
b. How are learners frontstagesupportedin interaction?
c. What backstageinteraction if any is anticipated? What supportcan be
offered backstage? Is backstage interaction likely to foster L2 development?

22. 4. Cognitive load
(task demand versus support)
a. How is the task calibratedto make sure it is not too easy or too difficult?
Consider cognitive load and linguistic competence required.
b. What pedagogical resourcescan support learners during task interaction?
c. How can pedagogical resources be made easy to adapt and shareamong
learners to support collaboration and help face unanticipated problems?

23. 5. Task frame
(meaningful interaction versus focus-on-form)
a. How clear is the task purposeto learners? How engaged are they likely to
be with the non-language outcomeof the task (as opposed to its linguistic
focus)?
b. During which task phase is focus on formplanned, or likely to arise?
c. How can focus-on-form be supported without breaking task frame?

24. 6. Post-task reflection
(immediate versus delayed feedback)
a. What kind of feedbackare learners going to be offered upon task
completion?
b. What kind of information will teachers have availablein order to make
decisions about feedback?
c. Will learnersbe able to review their own task performanceand that of
peersin order to judge task success and target language understanding and
use?

25. Checklist

26. References
Austin,N.,Hampel,R.,&Kukulska-Hulme,A.(2017)'Videoconferencingandmultimodalexpressionofvoice:Children'sconversationsusingSkypefor
secondlanguagedevelopmentinatelecollaborativesetting',System,64,pp.87-103.
Breen,M.(1989)‘Theevaluationcycleforlanguagelearningtasks’,inJohnson,R.K.(ed.)Thesecondlanguagecurriculum.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press,pp.187–206.
Calvez et al. (2022). GTnum RAVEL (Ressources pour l'Apprentissage en classe Virtuelle et l'Enseignement des Langues) Scénarios pédagogiques.
[https://zenodo.org/record/7441186]
Cutrim Schmid, E. & Whyte, S. (2015) ‘Teaching young learners with technology’, in Bland, J. (ed.) Teaching English to Young Learners: Critical Issues in
Language Teaching with 3-12 year olds. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 239-260.
Dooly,M.&Sadler,R.(2016)‘Becominglittlescientists:Technologically-enhancedproject-basedlanguagelearning’,LanguageLearning&Technology,20(1),
pp.54-78.https://dx.doi.org/10125/44446
Dooly,M.&Vinagre,M.(2022).Researchintopractice:Virtualexchangeinlanguageteachingandlearning.LanguageTeaching,55,392–406.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444821000069
Ellis, R. (2006) ‘The methodology of task-based teaching’, Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), pp. 19-45.
Ellis,R.(2020)‘Task-basedlanguageteachingforbeginner-levelyounglearners’,LanguageTeachingforYoungLearners,2(1),pp.4–27.
Mont,M.&Masats,D.(2018)‘Tipsandsuggestionstoimplementtelecollaborativeprojectswithyounglearners’,inDooly,M.andO'Dowd,R.(eds.)Inthis
together:teachers’experienceswithtransnational,telecollaborativelanguagelearningprojects.Bern:PeterLang,pp.93-122.
Pennock-Speck,B.&Clavel-Arroitia,B.(2023)‘Virtualexchangesamongprimary-educationpupils:Insightsintoanewarena’,inPotolia,A.andDerivry-Plard,
M.(eds.)Virtualexchangeforinterculturallanguagelearningandteaching.London:Routledge,pp.115-132.
Reader,S.(2024)‘AsynchronousvirtualexchangeandyoungEnglishlearners’interculturalcommunicativecompetence:Anexploratorystudy’,Language
TeachingforYoungLearners,2,pp.220–242.https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.00054
Whyte,S.,Wigham,C.R.,&Younès,N.(2022).Insightsintoteacherbeliefsandpracticeinprimary-schoolEFLinFrance.Languages,7(3),185.[hal-
03788664]
Whyte, S. & Wigham, C.R. (in press) Young learner autonomy in synchronous oral telecollaborative tasks: participants, arena, and turns, Language
Teaching for Young Learners.
Whyte, S., Wigham, C.R. & Cutrim Schmid, E. (in press) Task-based interaction in virtual exchange with young learners. In Bland, J. & Mourãu, S.(ed.)
Teaching English to Young Learners: Critical Issues in Language Teaching with 3-12 year olds. Second edition. London: Bloomsbury
Wigham,C.R.&Whyte,S.(2024)‘Teacherroleinsynchronousoralinteraction:Younglearnertelecollaboration’,LanguageLearning&Technology,
28(1),pp.1–27.https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73599

27. Are we up to the task?
Synchronous and
asynchronous learning
activities for young
beginners
Shona Whyte Ciara R. Wigham Euline Cutrim-Schmid