Investigating Turn-Taking Patterns on Students’ Conversation on Synchronous Discussion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v14i1.8518Keywords:
Conversation Analysis; Turn Taking Pattern; Synchronous Online DiscussionAbstract
This study investigates turn-taking patterns and students' management of the conversational floor during synchronous online discussions in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) setting. As synchronous platforms grow more prevalent in language learning, understanding how students organize interaction in digitally mediated situations becomes increasingly crucial. The data were collected through a single recorded Zoom discussion involving three EFL students, using a descriptive qualitative approach guided by Conversation Analysis (CA). This study investigates how platform affordances and pedagogical expectations influence turn-taking behavior in teacher directed synchronous classroom context. In contrast, previous CA studies in online EFL contexts that generically address interactional competence. The findings demonstrate that turn-taking in synchronous settings is highly regulated and heavily influenced by teacher oversight. Turn initiation was primarily through teacher nomination, while student self-selection emerged only at clear transition points. Significantly, no were no instances of overlap or interruption were observed, demonstrating that participants complied with platform norms and institutional requirements. Students also utilized self-initiated repair strategies, including hesitations, repetitions, and reformulations to maintain the language challenges and maintain speakership. Overall, turn-taking in synchronous EFL discussions was systematic and non-competitive, influenced by technological affordances and pedagogical framework. Furthermore, the findings of the study enhance the theoretical comprehension of how technologically mediated environments shape interactional patterns and turn-taking frameworks in instructed language-learning settings. Despite the small sample of three participants, these findings provide preliminary insights into interactional approaches within online language classes and highlight the necessity for instructional strategies that encourage equitable participation in synchronous learning settings.
References
Balaman, Ufuk. (2021). The Interactional Organization Of Video‐Mediated Collaborative Writing: Focus On Repair Practices. TESOL Quarterly. 55. 10.1002/Tesq.3034.
Balaman, U., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2022). Navigating the complex social ecology of screen-based activity in video-mediated interaction. Pragmatics, 32(1), 54–79. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20023.bal
Chalak, A., & Karimi, M. (2022). Analysis of Turn-Taking System and Gender Differences in Online Iranian EFL Classrooms. Langua: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Education, 5(1), 1–14.
Chalak, A., & Karimi, M. (2022). Analysis Of Turn-Taking System And Gender Differences In Online Iranian Efl Classrooms. 5(1), 1–14.
Due, B. L., & Licoppe, C. (2021). Video-Mediated Interaction (VMI). Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies Of Human Sociality, 3(3), 1–20. Https://Doi.Org/10.7146/Si.V3i3.123836
Ho, D. G. E., Sa’adi, M., He, D., & Hoon, C. Y. (2023). Silence Over The Wire: Student Verbal Participation And The Virtual Classroom In The Digital Era. Asia Pacific Education Review, 24(4), 599–615. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S12564-023-09834-4
Iwasaki, S. (2024a). Transition-relevance place (TRP). In A. Gubina, E. M. Hoey, & C. W. Raymond (Eds.), Encyclopedia of terminology for conversation analysis and interactional linguistics (pp. 1–5). International Society for Conversation Analysis (ISCA). https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GHCVP
Jack Sidnell. Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Malden, Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell. 2010. 269 pp. Pb (9781405159012) $36.95.
Jefferson, G. (1984). Transcript notation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. ix–xvi). Cambridge University Press.
Jenks, C. J. (2014). Social Interaction in Second Language Chat Rooms. Edinburgh University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g0b2g8
John Heritage & Steven Clayman, Talk in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions: Language in Society, 1984. 40(4), 513–517. doi:10.1017/S0047404511000510
Lerner, G. H. (2011). On The Place Of Hesitating In Delicate Formulations: A Turn-Constructional Infrastructure For Collaborative Indiscretion. In Conversational Repair And Human Understanding (Issue January 2013). Https://Doi.Org/10.1017/CBO9780511757464.004
Markee, N. (Ed.) (2015). The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118531242
Masruddin, M., Amir, F., Langaji, A., & Rusdiansyah, R. (2023). Conceptualizing linguistic politeness in light of age. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 11(3), 41-55.
Mulyati, Y. F., Hidayat, D. N., & Husna, N. (2023). Conversational Analysis On Politeness In Online Class Discussions : Exploring Turn-Taking And Relational Work Strategies Between Lecturer And Students. 17(May), 102–117.
Nasriandi, N., & Masruddin, M. (2021). The Use of British Parliamentary Debate Style in Teaching Speaking Skill. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 9(1).
Prastiningrum, H., Azwandi, A., & Hati, G. M. (2022). Interactional Patterns in Synchronous Online Teaching Mode at the Third Semester of English Education Study Program of University of Bengkulu. Journal of English Education and Teaching, 6(1), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.33369/jeet.6.1.103-114
Rosyida Ekawati. (2011). Turn Taking in Math Tutorial Session : Turn Taking in Math Tutorial Session: A Conversation Analysis, 5(2), 1–12. https://journal.trunojoyo.ac.id/prosodi/article/view/71/93
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The_preference_for_self-correction_in_th. In Language (Vol. 53, Issue 2, pp. 361–382).
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis Perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Sert, O. (2015). Social Interaction and L2 Classroom Discourse. Edinburgh University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g09vt3
Stone, P., & Brinham, A. (2021) (n.d.). Turn taking in student Zoom discussions. 1–30.
Teaching, E. L., Sari, C. C., & Nusantara, U. B. (2020). Conversation Analysis : Turn-Taking Mechanism And Power Relation In Classroom Setting. 7, 118–136.
Watanabe, A. (2024). Managing Turn-Taking and Student Response Through a Microphone Gesture in an EFL Classroom. JALT Journal, 46(2), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.37546/jaltjj46.2-1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sylvia Putri Ainurrifah, Dian Ratnawati, Irma Khoirot Daulay
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under an Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access)
