Speaker
Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions
Corpus-based ELF studies demonstrate frequent and purposeful use of repair, nonetheless, repair remains largely underrepresented in ELT textbooks and classroom instruction (Stone, Kershaw, Brinham, 2023). This points to a pedagogical gap between authentic ELF practices and current teaching materials. Therefore, the study addresses two research questions: (1) How does instruction on repair strategies affect students’ management of interactional troubles in academic discussion? and (2) How can repair strategies be effectively integrated into EFL classroom practice?
Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results
This presentation reports preliminary findings from a larger-scale study investigating effective pedagogical approaches to developing interactional competence in Japanese university English classrooms. Initial results indicate that awareness-raising tasks and explicit instruction in repair strategies encourage students to draw on these interactional resources to address misunderstandings proactively, rather than “let them pass,” thereby promoting negotiation of meaning and collaborative knowledge building. However, students appear to experience difficulty sustaining exchanges across multiple turns, suggesting challenges in maintaining topic development, which may be related to limited topical knowledge. Pedagogical implications for task design and classroom practice will be discussed.
Abstract section 1: Relevance
In the context of accelerated globalization, English increasingly functions as a lingua franca (ELF), requiring speakers from diverse linguacultural backgrounds to collaboratively construct meaning. Therefore, developing learners’ interactional competence deem highly important. A key premise of interactional competence is that participants jointly reduce uncertainty during interaction by negotiating and clarifying meaning (Kramsch, 1986). This view of interaction underscores the importance of skills for managing interactional trouble. One essential interactional resource is repair (Young, 2019), defined as ‘efforts to deal with trouble-sources or repairables - marked off as distinct within the ongoing talk’ (Schegloff, 2007, pp.100-101).
Abstract section 3: Content/method
Drawing on Conversation Analytic approach and corpus-based ELF research, the study was conducted at a Japanese university. Students engaged in small-group discussions that were video-recorded and transcribed before and after instruction. The pedagogical sequence consisted of awareness-raising activities, explicit instruction on repair strategies, guided discussion practice, and informal peer feedback to encourage reflection on interactional processes. A final discussion task was recorded and transcribed to compare changes in the frequency and functions of repair strategies.
Abstract section 5: References
Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal, 70(4), 366-372.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction: Volume 1: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stone, P., Kershaw, M., Brinham, A. (2023). Looking for interactional competence in textbooks. 言語・文化・社会 / 学習院大学外国語教育研究センター 編. (21)3, 113-138. https://ndlsearch.ndl.go.jp/books/R000000004-I032787797Looking for Interactional Competence in Textbooks.
Young, R. (2019). Interactional competence and L2 pragmatics. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics. New York: Routledge (pp.93-110).
| Title | Learning to Manage Interactional Troubles: Repair Strategies |
|---|---|
| Teaching Context | College and university education |