Turn-Taking in Destination Negotiation among Mixed-Readiness EFL Learners in a Task-Based Group Discussion: A Conversation Analytic Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v8i3.1127-1148Keywords:
task-based language teaching, conversation analysis, turn-taking, mixed-readiness learners, EFL group discussionAbstract
This study investigates how mixed-readiness EFL learners organise turn-taking across a task-based group discussion by employing a conversation analytic approach. The participants were four 12th-grade female learners from Indonesia with lower, intermediate, and higher readiness levels. The data consisted of a 3.8-minute audio recording of a destination decision discussion in a task-based itinerary-planning lesson. The learners were given a budget, assigned roles, and asked to decide where they would go before writing and presenting an itinerary. The transcript was examined for the occurrence of sequence organisation, overlap, pause, agreement, disagreement, repair, and role-based participation. The findings showed that the discussion was highly task-oriented, starting from budget confirmation to destination proposal and proceeding to evaluation, then final agreement. The learners used short turns, overlaps, repetition, and clarification to navigate the interaction to achieve closure efficiently. While more assertive learners assisted in sustaining the discussion, the less assertive ones participated through brief responses and evaluative turns. The facilitator also maintained the task structure and channelled the learners when needed. The study suggests that mixed-readiness learners are able to collaboratively organise interaction in completing a classroom task, and that conversation analysis is effective for uncovering how turn-by-turn practices form decision-making in task-based EFL group work.
References
Anito, B. F., Ali, W. T., & Ayele, Z. A. (2025). Effects of Task-Based Language teaching on improving Grade 11 students’ essay writing skills. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 16(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1601.03
Basireddi, R., Dasam, S., Anumula, V. S. S., Suma, J., V., Pettela, R., P, V. K., Bolleddu, S. N., & K, S. L. (2025). Improving students’ speaking skills in engineering colleges through Task-Based language teaching. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 15(3), 698–705. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1503.04
Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
Cox, T. L. (2017). Understanding Intermediate-Level Speakers’ strengths and weaknesses: An examination of OPIC tests from Korean learners of English. Foreign Language Annals, 50(1), 84–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12258
D’Angelo, C. M., & Rajarathinam, R. J. (2024). Speech analysis of teaching assistant interventions in small group collaborative problem solving with undergraduate engineering students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(4), 1583–1601. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13449
Dowell, N. M. M., Nixon, T. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2018). Group communication analysis: A computational linguistics approach for detecting sociocognitive roles in multiparty interactions. Behavior Research Methods, 51(3), 1007–1041. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1102-z
Floyd, S. (2021). Conversation and culture. Annual Review of Anthropology, 50(1), 219–240. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-101819-110158
Franceschi, V. (2024). Competing for the floor towards a common goal: a focus on the functions of adversative markers in simultaneous sequences in BELF encounters. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 13(2), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2024-2015
Guardiola, M., & Bertrand, R. (2013). Interactional convergence in conversational storytelling: when reported speech is a cue of alignment and/or affiliation. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 705. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00705
Horrill, T. C., Varcoe, C., Brown, H., Stajduhar, K. I., & Browne, A. J. (2024). Bringing an equity lens to participant observation in critical ethnographic health research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241270397
Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., Vrikki, M., & Wheatley, L. (2019). Teacher–Student dialogue during classroom teaching: Does it really impact on student outcomes? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(4–5), 462–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730
Kasper, G., & Wagner, J. (2014). Conversation Analysis in Applied Linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 171–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190514000014
Kim, Y. (2012). TASK COMPLEXITY, LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES, AND KOREAN EFL LEARNERS’ QUESTION DEVELOPMENT. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 627–658. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263112000368
Konzett‐Firth, C., & Balaman, U. (2025). From a learner’s perspective: Tracing L2 interactional competence development in Video‐Mediated Task‐Based interactions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36(2), 1628–1640. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.70008
Kunitz, S., Berggren, J., Haglind, M., & Löfquist, A. (2022). Getting Students to Talk: A Practice-Based Study on the design and Implementation of Problem-Solving Tasks in the EFL classroom. Languages, 7(2), 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7020075
Lam, H. T. L., Van Nguyen, S., & Nguyen, H. a. T. (2021). University Lecturers’ Task-Based Language Teaching Beliefs and Practices. Education Sciences, 11(11), 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110748
Le, H. T. V. (2021). Exploring L2 learners’ Task-related Identities in a Reading Circle Task Through Conversation Analysis. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 128–155. https://doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2021.31343
Leung, T. T., & Lam, B. C. (2018). Building consensus on user participation in social work: A conversation analysis. Journal of Social Work, 19(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017318757357
Li, D., & Zhang, L. (2020). Exploring teacher scaffolding in a CLIL-framed EFL intensive reading class: A classroom discourse analysis approach. Language Teaching Research, 26(3), 333–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820903340
Little, D. (2020). Language learner autonomy: Rethinking language teaching. Language Teaching, 55(1), 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444820000488
Long, M.H. (1985) A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann. (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second lan- guage development (pp. 77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
McCabe, R. (2021). When patients and clinician (dis)agree about the nature of the problem: The role of displays of shared understanding in acceptance of treatment. Social Science & Medicine, 290, 114208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114208
Melefa, O. M., Uwen, G. O., & Ozor, A. V. (2024). CONVERSATIONAL STRUCTURE AND TURN-TAKING MANAGEMENT IN INTERACTIONS BETWEEN CLIENTS AND OFFICERS AT a DRIVERS LICENSING OFFICE IN NIGERIA. Филолог – Часопис За Језик Књижевност И Културу, 15(29), 475–498. https://doi.org/10.21618/fil2429475m
Meredith, J. (2019). Conversation analysis and online interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631040
Mondada, L., & Meguerditchian, A. (2022). Sequence organization and embodied mutual orientations: openings of social interactions between baboons. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 377(1859), 20210101. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0101
Mondémé, C. (2021). Why study turn‐taking sequences in interspecies interactions? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12295
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2013). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Park, Y. (2021c). Task type completion in lower level EFL classes: A conversation analytic study. Language Teaching Research, 27(6), 1352–1377. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820987957
Peräkylä, A. (2019). Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapy: Identifying Transformative Sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 257–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2019.1631044
Raymond, G. (2018). Which epistemics? Whose conversation analysis? Discourse Studies, 20(1), 57–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734343
Robinson, J. D., & Kevoe-Feldman, H. (2010). Using full repeats to initiate repair on others’ questions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(3), 232–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2010.497990
Robinson, J. D., Clift, R., Kendrick, K. H., & Raymond, C. W. (2024). Jeffersonian Transcription Conventions. In The Cambridge Handbook of Methods in Conversation Analysis (pp. 974–989). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108936583.035
Schegloff, E. A. (1999). Discourse, pragmatics, conversation, analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(4), 405–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445699001004002
Seuren, L. M., Wherton, J., Greenhalgh, T., & Shaw, S. E. (2020). Whose turn is it anyway? Latency and the organization of turn-taking in video-mediated interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 172, 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.11.005
Shimamoto, D. (2025). Repairing problems of acceptability in pre-task interaction. Classroom Discourse, 16(4), 480–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2025.2497767
Takeda, L. U. (2022). Overlaps in collaboration adjustments. Pragmatics Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA), 33(2), 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21009.tak
Tian, L., & Jiang, Y. (2021). L2 Proficiency Pairing, Task type and L1 use: A Mixed-Methods study on optimal pairing in dyadic Task-Based peer interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 699774. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.699774
Tietbohl, C. K., & White, A. E. C. (2022). Making conversation Analysis Accessible: A conceptual guide for health services researchers. Qualitative Health Research, 32(8–9), 1246–1258. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323221090831
Van Den Branden, K. (2016). The role of teachers in Task-Based Language Education. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 164–181. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190515000070
Vinten, G. (1994). Participant observation: a model for organizational investigation? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 9(2), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683949410059299
Wang, P., Luo, H., Liu, B., Chen, T., & Jiang, H. (2023). Investigating the combined effects of role assignment and discussion timing in a blended learning environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 60, 100932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2023.100932
Wang, R., Li, X., Li, X., Hu, W., Li, Y., & Tian, J. (2025). Exploring the differences in response characteristics to teacher scaffolding between the high- and low-performing groups during collaborative problem solving. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 56, 101753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101753
Wu, Y. (2021). Empathy in nurse-patient interaction: a conversation analysis. BMC Nursing, 20(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00535-0
Wu, Y., & Ma, W. (2015). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 35(4), 418–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2015.1046154
Xu, Y., Chen, C., Spence, C., Washington-Nortey, M., Zhang, F., & Brown, A. (2021). Supporting young Spanish speaking English learners through teacher scaffolding and reciprocal peer tutoring. Early Child Development and Care, 192(8), 1324–1336. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2021.1874944
Young, R. (1995). Conversational styles in language proficiency interviews. Language Learning, 45(1), 3–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00961.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nabila Sofhia, Misdi, Nunung Nurjannah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Copyright Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with JOURNAL OF PRAGMATICS RESEARCH agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment 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 acknowledgment 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.
Indonesian Pragmatics Association
