One of the primary goals of second-language study is to build language proficiency. The use of small-group and pair instruction has been promoted as an alternative to large-group instruction and as an avenue for the accomplishment of the goal of becoming proficient in a second language.

In this study, three elementary-school French classes were observed and videotaped on five occasions each for a total of 15 observations. Analysis involved determining if students were engaged, and whether they were engaged in writing, speaking, listening, thinking, and reading. It was also noted whether or not students were participants in one of three group contexts: pairs, small groups, or large groups. Video-recordings were transcribed and coded using the Foreign Language Observational System (FLOS) developed by Nerenz and Knop (1982).

Of the 6,800 occurrences coded for data analysis, 98% (n = 6,674) were instances when students were engaged in the large-group context where more writing (32%, n = 2,116) occurred than any of the activities identified for investigation. The greatest amount of nonengagement occurred in the large group and consisted of managerial activities, for instance, waiting for the teacher to distribute materials 32% (n = 40), interim transitional activities 20% (n = 25), and offtask when students were not engaged with a classroom curricular task (30%, n = 23).

An ANOVA detected that statistically significant differences (p < .01) exist within the small [F(4,68 = 5.53] and large [F(4,68) = 13.26] groups for time spent engaged among the activities under investigation: writing, speaking, listening, thinking, and reading. No differences were found within the pair group among the activities in the study (F = 0.84). Further data analysis indicated statistically significant (p < .01) differences among the groups on time spent writing [F(2,34) = 22.90], speaking [F(2,34) = 5.59], thinking [F(2,34) = 10.88], and reading [F(2,34) = 9.58]. No differences were found between the groups for the listening activity (F = 0.96).

Duncan Post Hoc Comparison Tests were used to determine where there were significant differences between the means for each main effect. An examination of the results of the Duncan Tests revealed that in this study students were most often instructed in the large-group context. The tests also showed that there was more writing than speaking, listening, thinking, or reading done in the large group. More reading than speaking, listening, or thinking was done in the small group.

In sum, students in this study were more involved in the large group and did more writing than any of the other four activities. In the small group, there was more reading than speaking, listening, or thinking, and more writing than thinking.