Interactional Competence in Paired vs. Group Oral Tests

سال انتشار: 1398
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 446

فایل این مقاله در 26 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_TELJ-13-1_001

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 23 مهر 1398

چکیده مقاله:

Previously, competence was conceptualized as a static individual construct that could be measured with regard to grammatical, sociolinguistic, pragmatic, and discursive dimensions of second language (L2) knowledge. This perspective was criticized with the emergence of constructivist views in second language acquisition (SLA), and interaction was assumed to be coconstructed in specific contexts by all the members of the group, and was referred to as interactional competence. This study aimed at investigating the highlighted features of interactional competence from raters point of view. The raters were also required to compare and contrast the differences between the performance of paired vs. group interactions. For this purpose, 16 male and female proficient English language and literature students of Shiraz university participated in the study; also, 10 experienced raters were chosen to rate the performances. The participants were given a set of controversial questions, once to argue their viewpoints in four-member groups, and once more in paired interaction. Having videotaped the discussions, the raters were asked to watch the clips and were interviewed to comment their perspective. The detailed analysis of the transcription of interviews revealed at least three aspects of interactional competence, each with some subcategories: management, engagement and attention, and paralinguistic aspects. Moreover, peer-to-peer interactions were filled with turn-taking, other-initiated self-repair, use of pauses and wait times, backchanneling, and facial features such as eye contact. Group performances were prominent with self-initiated self-repair, open-ended clarification requests, and employment of vocal features.

نویسندگان

Alireza Ahmadi

Faculty of Foreign Languages, Shiraz University

Zahra Montasseri

Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, Shiraz University

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing ...
  • Brown, A., Iwashita, N., & McNamara, T. (2005). An examination ...
  • Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in ...
  • Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. Language ...
  • Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative ...
  • Celce-Murcia, M. (2007). Towards more context and discourse in grammar ...
  • Ducasse, A. M., & Brown, A. (2009). Assessing paired orals: ...
  • Fulcher, G. (1996). Does thick description lead to smarter tests ...
  • Fulcher, G. (2003). Testing second language speaking. London: Pearson Education. ...
  • Galaczi, E., & Taylor, L. (2018). Interactional competence: Conceptualisations, operationalization, ...
  • Goffman, E. (1967). Interactional ritual: Essays in face-to-face behavior. Chicago, ...
  • Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. ...
  • He, A. & R. Young. (1998). Language proficiency interviews: A ...
  • He, L., & Dai, Y. (2006). A corpus-based investigation into ...
  • Hymes, D. (1971). On linguistic theory, communicative competence, and the ...
  • Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. ...
  • Jacoby, S., & Ochs, E. (1995). Co-construction: An introduction. Research ...
  • Johnson, M. (2004). A philosophy of second language acquisition. New ...
  • Kecskes, I., Sanders, R. E., & Pomerantz, A. (2018). The ...
  • Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The ...
  • Markee, N. (2008). Toward a learning behavior tracking methodology for ...
  • May, L. (2006a). An examination of rater orientations on a ...
  • May, L. A. (2006). An examination of rater orientations on ...
  • May, L. A. (2011). Interactional competence in a paired speaking ...
  • McCarthy, M. J. (2005). Fluency and confluence: What fluent speakers ...
  • McNamara, T. (2001). Language assessment as social practice: Challenges for ...
  • Norris, J. (2001). Identifying rating criteria for task-based EAP assessment. ...
  • North, B., & Schneider, G. (1998). Scaling descriptors for language ...
  • Politt, A., & Murray, N. L. (1996). What do raters ...
  • Schegloff, E. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(6), ...
  • Sun, D. (2014). From communicative competence to interactional competence: A ...
  • Turner, C., & Upshur, J. (1996). Developing rating scales for ...
  • Walsh, S. (2011) Exploring Classroom Discourse: Language in Action, London: ...
  • Wang, L. (2004). 12 Years of Research in English Speaking ...
  • Waring, H. Z. (2018). Teaching L2 interactional competence: problems and ...
  • Young, R. (1999). Sociolinguistic approaches to SLA. Annual Review of ...
  • Young, R. F. (2000, March). Interactional competence: Challenges for validity. ...
  • Young, R. F. (2008). Language and interaction: An advanced resource ...
  • Yu, S., & Li, H. (2002). Students book, College English: ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع