Exploring teachers’ and learners’ overlapped turns in the language classroom: Implications for Classroom Interactional Competence.

• Authors: Marco Cancino
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The language choices that teachers make in the language classroom have been found to influence the opportunities for learning given to learners (Seedhouse, 2004, Walsh, 2012; Waring, 2009; 2011). The present study expands on research addressing learner-initiated contributions (Waring et al., 2016; Jacknick, 2011; Garton, 2012; Yataganbaba & Yıldırım, 2016) by demonstrating that opportunities for participation and learning can be promoted when teachers allow learners to expand and finish their overlapped turns. Audio recordings of lessons portraying language classroom interaction from three teachers in an adult foreign language classroom (EFL) setting were analyzed and discussed through a Conversation Analysis (CA) methodology. Findings suggested that when teachers are able to navigate overlapping talk in such a way that provides interactional space for learners to complete their contributions, they demonstrate classroom interactional competence (Walsh, 2006, Sert, 2015). The present study contributes to the literature by addressing interactional features that increase interactional space, and an approach to teacher and learner talk that highlights CA’s methodological advantages in capturing the interactional nuances of classroom discourse.

Keywords

EN

Conversation Analysis; Classroom Discourse; Classroom Interactional Competence; Teacher-learner Overlap

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 9
• Issue: 4

Dates

published

2020-02-16

Contributors

author

Marco Cancino

References

• Atkinson, J., & Heritage, J. (1984). Transcript notation. In J. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. IX-XVI). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Breen, M. (1998). Navigating the discourse: On what is learned in the language classroom. In W. Renandys & G. Jacobs (Eds.), Learners and language learning (pp. 72-88). Singapore: SAMEO, Regional Language Centre.
• Brouwer, C., & Wagner, J. (2004). Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal Of Applied Linguistics And Professional Practice, 1(1), 29-47.
• Cross, R. (2010). Language teaching as sociocultural activity: Rethinking language teacher practice. The Modern Language Journal, 94(3), 434-452.
• Donato, R. (2000). Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second language classroom. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 27-50). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Garton, S. (2012). Speaking out of turn? Taking the initiative in teacher-fronted classroom interaction. Classroom Discourse, 3(1), 29-45.
• Hall, J., & Verplaetse, L. (2000). Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. In J. K. H. a. L. S. Verplaetse (Ed.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. Mahwah, N.J: Erlbaum.
• He, A. (2004). CA for SLA: Arguments from the Chinese language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 568-582.
• Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis. Cambridge: Polity.
• Jacknick, C. (2011). Breaking in is hard to do: how students negotiate classroom activity shifts. Classroom Discourse, 2(1), 20-38.
• Jefferson, G. (1984). Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset. Discourse Analysis and Natural Rhetoric, 11–38.
• Kasper, G. (2009). Locating cognition in second language interaction and learning: Inside the skull or in public view? IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47, 11.
• Kasper, G., & Wagner, J. (2011). A conversation-analytic approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 117-142). New York: Taylor & Francis.
• Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal, 70(4), 366-372.
• Kumaravadivelu, B. (1993). Maximizing learning potential in the communicative classroom. ELT Journal, 47(1), 12-21.
• Kumaravadivelu, B. (1999). Critical classroom discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 453-484.
• Lazaraton, A. (2004). Conversation analysis and the nonnative English speaking ESL teacher: A case study. In D. Boxer & A. Cohen (Eds.), Studying speaking to inform second language learning (pp. 49-57). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• Lee, W., & Ng, S. (2010). Reducing student reticence through teacher interaction strategy. ELT Journal, 64(3), 302-313.
• Liddicoat, A. (2011). An introduction to conversation analysis. London: Continuum.
• Markee, N. (2008). Toward a learning behavior tracking methodology for CA-for-SLA. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 404-427.
• Markee, N. (2015). The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (Vol. 115). John Wiley & Sons.
• Mondada, L., & Pekarek, S. (2004). Second language acquisition as situated practice: Task accomplishment in the French second language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 501-518.
• Nakamura, I. (2008). Understanding how teacher and student talk with each other: An exploration of how `repair' displays the co-management of talk-in-interaction. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 265-283.
• Park, Y. (2014). The roles of third-turn repeats in two L2 classroom interactional contexts. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 145-167.
• Pekarek Doehler, S. (2010). Conceptual Changes and Methodological Challenges: On Language and Learning from a conversation analytic perspective on SLA. In P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, & C. Jenks (Eds.), Conceptualising “Learning” in Applied Linguistics (pp. 105–126). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Rodriguez, J. & Wilstermann, I. (2018). Learner initiative in the Spanish as a foreign language classroom: Implications for the interactional development. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 113-133.
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696-735.
• Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Schegloff, E., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382.
• Schegloff, E., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica VIII (4), 289-327.
• Schegloff, E. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29, 1–63.
• Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: a conversation analysis perspective. U.K: Blackwell Publishing.
• Sert, O. (2013). ‘Epistemic status check’ as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 45(1), 13-28.
• Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Sert, O. (2017). Creating opportunities for L2 learning in a prediction activity. System, 70, 14-25.
• Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2).
• Solem, M. S. (2016). Displaying knowledge through interrogatives in student-initiated sequences. Classroom Discourse, 7(1), 18-35.
• Tai, K. W., & Brandt, A. (2018). Creating an imaginary context: teacher’s use of embodied enactments in addressing learner initiatives in a beginner-level adult ESOL classroom. Classroom Discourse, 9(3), 244-266.
• van Lier, L. (1988). The classroom and the language learner : Ethnography and second-language classroom research. New York: Longman.
• van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning: Recent advances (pp. 245-259). Oxford: Oxford University.
• ---
• Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3-23.
• Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London: Routledge.
• Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: language in action. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Walsh, S. (2012). Conceptualising classroom interactional competence. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 6(1), 1-14.
• Walsh, S. (2013). Classroom discourse and teacher development. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Waring, H. (2008). Using explicit positive assessment in the language classroom: IRF, feedback, and learning opportunities. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 577-594.
• Waring, H. (2009). Moving out of IRF (initiation-response-feedback): A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796-824.
• Waring, H. (2011). Learner initiatives and learning opportunities in the language classroom. Classroom Discourse, 2(2), 201-218.
• Waring H., Reddington, E., & Tadic, N. (2016). Responding artfully to student-initiated departures in the adult ESL classroom. Linguistics and education, 33, 28-39.
• Yataganbaba, E., & Yıldırım, R. (2016). Teacher interruptions and limited wait time in EFL young learner classrooms. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 689-695.