Giving and receiving advice in computer-mediated peer response activities
Issue: Vol 32 No. 1 (2015)
Journal: CALICO Journal
In synchronous computer-mediated contexts, peer-to-peer interaction at the micro-level has received little scrutiny.1 In applying a conversation analysis approach, this study scrutinizes the precise nature of peer-to-peer advice giving and receiving. In this process, an advice giver can be viewed at certain moments as more competent to evaluate a recipient’s essay and to provide advice, while the recipient can be positioned as being less knowledgeable. Therefore, the present study focuses on the following research question: How did advice givers and recipients mange the asymmetrical participant roles inherent in L2 peer response? More specifically, this study explores the relationship between institutional roles and social relationships during advising episodes by investigating three single cases of dyadic pairs in an ESL university writing classroom. We show the ambiguity arising in interactions as novice advice givers attempt to balance criticism with the maintenance of harmonious interpersonal relationships, offering compliments rather than straightforward advice.
Author: Mei-Hsing Tsai, Celeste Kinginger
Beauvois, M. H. (1992). Computer-assisted classroom discussion in the foreign language classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5): 455–464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1992.tb01128.x
Beauvois, M. H. (1998). Conversation in slow motion: Computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54 (2): 198–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.54.2.198
Benson, D. and Hughes, J. (1991). Method, evidence and inference: Evidence and inference for ethnomethodology. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences, 109–136. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611827.007
Braine, G. (1997). Beyond word processing: Networked computers in ESL writing classes. Computers and Composition, 14 (1): 45–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90037-2
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for Teaching, Testing, and Research. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524681
Chun, D. (1994). Using computer network to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence. System, 22 (1): 17–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(94)90037-X
DiGiovanni, E. and Nagaswami, G. (2001). Online peer review: An alternative to face-to-face? ELT Journal, 55 (3): 263–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/55.3.263
Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (Eds). (1992). Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Frankel, R. (1990). Talking in interviews: A dispreference for patient-initiated questions in physician-patient encounters. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Interaction Competence, 231–262. Washington DC: University Press of America.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Garcia, A. C. and Jacobs, J. B. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn-taking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32 (4): 337–367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327973rls3204_2
Gardner, R. and Wagner, J. (2004). Introduction. In R. Gardner and J. Wagner (Eds), Second Language Conversations, 1–17. London: Continuum.
Golato, A. (2005). Compliments and Compliments Responses: Grammatical Structures and Sequential Organization. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sidag.15
Golato, A. and Taleghani-Nikazm, C. (2006). Negotiation of face in web chats. Multilingua, 25 (3): 293–322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2006.017
González-Lloret, M. (2007). What do language learners attend to when their environment changes? In C. Periñan (Ed.), Revisiting Language Learning Resources, 223–242. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
González-Lloret, M. (2009). CA for computer-mediated interaction in the Spanish L2 classroom. In G. Kasper and H. Nguyen (Eds), Conversation Analytic Studies of L1 and L2 Interaction, Learning, and Education, 281–316. Honolulu, HI: NFLRC and University of Hawaii Press.
González-Lloret, M. (2011). Conversation analysis of computer-mediated communication. CALICO Journal, 28 (2): 308–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.11139/cj.28.2.308-325
Goodwin, C. and Heritage, J. (1990). Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19: 283–307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435
Hall, J. K. (2004). Language learning as an interactional achievement. The Modern Language Journal, 88 (4): 607–611.
Hall, J. K. (2007). Redressing the roles of correction and repair in research on second and foreign language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 91 (4): 511–526. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00619.x
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edn). London: Edward Arnold.
Heath, C. (1992). The delivery and reception of diagnosis in the general practice consultation. In P. Drew and J. Heritage (Eds), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, 235–267. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Heritage, J. and Sefi, S. (1992). Dilemmas of advice: Aspects of the delivery and reception of advice in interactions between health visitors and first-time mothers. In P. Drew and J. Heritage (Eds), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, 359–417. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchby, I. (1995). Aspects of recipient design in expert advice-giving on call-in radio. Discourse Processes, 19 (2): 219–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638539509544915
Hutchby, I. (2001). Conversation and Technology: From the Telephone to the Internet. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hutchby, I. and Wooffit, R. (2008). Conversation Analysis (2nd edn). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Johnson, D. M. (1992). Compliments and politeness in peer-review texts. Applied Linguistics, 13 (1): 51–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/13.1.51
Jones, R. H., Garralda, A., Li, D. C. S. and Lock, G. (2006). Interactional dynamics in on-line and face-to-face peer-tutoring sessions for second language writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15 (1): 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.12.001
Kasper, G. (2004). Participant orientations in German conversation-for-learning. The Modern Language Journal, 88 (4): 551–567. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-18-.x
Kasper, G. (2006). Beyond repair: Conversation analysis as an approach to SLA. AILA Review, 19: 83–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.07kas
Kelm, O. R. (1992). The use of synchronous computer networks in second language Instruction: A preliminary report. Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5): 441–454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1992.tb01127.x
Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79 (4): 457–476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05445.x
Kinginger, C. (2000). Learning the pragmatics of solidarity in the networked foreign language classroom. In J. K. Hall and L. S. Verplaetse (Eds), Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction, 23–46. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kitade, K. (2000). L2 learners’ discourse and SLA theories in CMC: Collaborative interaction in internet chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13 (2): 143–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/0958-8221(200004)13:2;1-D;FT143
Koshik, I. (1999). Practices of pedagogy in ESL writing conferences: A conversation analytic study of turns and sequences that assist student revision. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Koshik, I. (2002). Designedly incomplete utterances: A pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35 (3): 277–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3503_2
Lazaraton, A. (2003). Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in applied linguistics: Whose criteria and whose research? The Modern Language Journal, 87 (1): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00175
Liu, J. and Hansen, J. (2002). Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Liu, J. and Sadler, R. W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2 (3): 193–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00025-0
Markee, N. (2008). Toward a learning behavior tracking methodology for CA-for-SLA. Applied Linguistics, 29 (3): 404–427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm052
Mori, J. (2002). Task design, plan, and development of talk-in-interaction: An analysis of a small group activity in a Japanese language classroom. Applied Linguistics, 23 (3): 323–347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.3.323
Mori, J. (2004). Negotiating sequential boundaries and learning opportunities: A case from a Japanese language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 88 (4): 536–550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-17-.x
Morrow, P. R. (2006). Telling about problems and giving advice in an Internet discussion forum: Some discourse features. Discourse Studies, 8 (4): 531–548. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461445606061876
Negretti, R. (1999). Web-based activities and SLA: A conversation analysis research approach. Language Learning & Technology, 3 (1): 75–87. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol3num1/negretti/index.html
Pomerantz, A. (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, 79–112. New York, San Francisco, London: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50010-0
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (Eds), Structures of Social Action, 57–101. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Psathas, G. (1995). Conversation Analysis: The Study of Talk-in-interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pudlinski, C. (2002). Accepting and rejecting advice as competent peers: Caller dilemmas on a warm line. Discourse Studies, 4 (4): 481–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461445602004004026
Sacks, H. E., Schegloff, E., and Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematic for the organization of turn taking for conversation. Language, 50: 696–735. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/412243
Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50 (2): 101–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2786745
Schönfeldt, J. and Golato, A. (2003). Repair in chats: A conversation analytic approach. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36 (3): 241–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3603_02
Simpson, J. (2005). Conversational floors in synchronous text-based CMC discourse. Discourse Studies, 7 (3): 337–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461445605052190
Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (1): 38–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00177
Stewart, M. (2004). Written pedagogic feedback and linguistic politeness. In R. M. Reiter and M. E. Placencia (Eds), Current Trends in the Pragmatics of Spanish, 99–120. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pbns.123.11ste
ten Have, P. (1999). Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Vásquez, C. (2004). Very carefully managed: Advice and suggestions in post-observation meetings. Linguistics and Education, 15 (1–2): 33–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2004.10.004
Waring, H. Z. (2005). Peer tutoring in a graduate writing center: Identity, expertise and advice resisting. Applied Linguistics, 26 (2): 141–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amh041
Waring, H. Z. (2007a). Complex advice acceptance as a resource for managing asymmetries. Text and Talk, 27 (1): 107–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2007.005
Waring, H. Z. (2007b). The multi-functionality of accounts in advice giving. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11 (3): 367–391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00328.x
Waring, H. Z. (2008). Using explicit positive assessment in the language classroom: IRF, feedback, and learning opportunities. The Modern Language Journal, 92 (4): 577–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00788.x
Waring, H. Z. (2009). Moving out of IRF (initiation-response-feedback): A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59 (4): 796–824. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00526.x
Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13 (2–3): 7–26.
Wong, J. and Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation Analysis and Second Language Pedagogy: A Guide for ESL/EFL Teachers. New York: Routledge.