On the Predictability of Action
Student Gaze Shift in Anticipation of Teacher Selection
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v7i2.136142Keywords:
interaction, predictability of turn allocation, teacher-student interaction, willingness to participateAbstract
Gaze has been shown to be an important resource in both mundane and institutional interaction for next speaker selection and for displaying availability and willingness to be selected. In institutional interactions, participants' actions can be predictable due to factors such as how actions are projected, how participants are categorized, and the structure of the activity. This predictability enables participants to anticipate what will happen next, which can be seen through their actions before this anticipated next action actually occurs. Focusing on teacher-student interaction in two distinct EFL educational settings, this paper examines how students employ gaze shifts to anticipate and predict teacher's selection of the next speaker. The analysis displays how, in institutional interaction, the current state of the activity can make a next action, such as turn allocation, more or less predictable, allowing for participants to anticipate the next action and to act accordingly. The ability to anticipate the teacher’s next action in a local context in which this action is predictable is part of students’ classroom interactional competence. In addition, the data show that students' gaze shifts toward the teacher signal willingness to participate, while shifts away indicate resistance. The study highlights how participants navigate learning activities by anticipating and shaping actions, with gaze serving as a crucial interactional resource.
References
Auer, P. (2021). Turn-allocation and gaze: A multimodal revision of the “current-speaker-selects-next” rule of the turn-taking system of conversation analysis. Discourse Studies, 23(2), 117-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445620966922
Bezemer, J. (2008). Displaying orientation in the classroom: Students’ multimodal responses to teacher instructions. Linguistics and Education, 19(2), 166-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2008.05.005
Evnitskaya, N., & Berger, E. (2017). Learners’ multimodal displays of willingness to participate in classroom interaction in the L2 and CLIL contexts. Classroom Discourse, 8(1), 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2016.1272062
Fasel Lauzon, V., & Berger, E. (2015). The multimodal organization of speaker selection in classroom interaction. Linguistics and Education, 31, 14-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.05.001
Goodwin, C. (1980). Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn-beginning. Sociological inquiry, 50(3-4), 272-302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00023.x
Greer, T., & Potter, H. (2008). Turn-taking practices in multi-party EFL oral proficiency tests. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 297-320. https://journal.equinoxpub.com/JALPP/article/view/13255
Heath, C. (1986). Body movement and speech in medical interaction. Cambridge University Press.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-31). John Benjamins.
Kääntä, L. (2012). Teachers’ embodied allocations in instructional interaction. Classroom Discourse, 3(2), 166-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2012.716624
Kendon, A. (2010). Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction. In A. Esposito, N. Campbell, C. Vogel, A. Hussain & A. Nijholt (eds.), Development of multimodal interfaces: Active listening and synchrony (pp. 1-15). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12397-9_1
Lerner, G. H. (2003). Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society, 32(2), 177-201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450332202X
Mondada, L. (2013). Embodied and spatial resources for turn-taking in institutional multi-party interactions: Participatory democracy debates. Journal of Pragmatics, 46(1), 39-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.010
Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1), 85-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878
Mortensen, K. (2008). Selecting next speaker in the second language classroom: How to find a willing next speaker in planned activities. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 55-79. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v5i1.55
Mortensen, K. (2009). Establishing recipiency in pre-beginning position in the second language classroom. Discourse Processes, 46(5), 491-515. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530902959463
Mortensen, K., & Hazel, S. (2011). Initiating round robins in the L2 classroom: Preliminary observations. Novitas-ROYAL, 5(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Sahlström, J. F. (2002). The interactional organization of hand raising in classroom interaction. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37(2) 47-57. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23870411
Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748692651
Sert, O. (2019). Mutual gaze, embodied go-aheads and their interactional consequences in second language classrooms. In J. K. Hall & D. Looney (Eds.), The embodied work of teaching (pp. 142-159). Multilingual Matters.
Stivers, T. (2001). Negotiating who presents the problem: Next speaker selection in pediatric encounters. Journal of Communication, 51(2), 252-282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02880.x
Walsh, S. (2012). Conceptualising classroom interactional competence. Novitas-ROYAL, 6(1), 1-14. http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_6_1/Walsh.pdf
Waring, H. Z., & Carpenter, L. B. (2019). Gaze shifts as a resource for managing attention and recipiency. In J. K. Hall & D. Looney (Eds.), The embodied work of teaching (pp. 122-141). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788925501-010
Weis, C. (2018). When gaze-selected next speakers do not take the turn. Journal of Pragmatics 133, 28-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.05.016
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
We follow the Budapest Open Access Initiative's definition of Open Access.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.
The journal allows software/spiders to automatically crawl the journal content (also known as text mining)
The journal provides article level metadata to DOAJ
The journal allows readers to read, download, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
