LSA 3: Background Essay

Helping Intermediate level learners manage interactive

conversations

Christopher Reese

DELTA Intensive 2017, International Language Centre, Kyiv, UA

Word Count:2435 (Pages) + 60 words (running text examples & tables, counted
by hand) = 2495 words

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 1 of 29
Table of Contents:

1. Introduction

2. Analysis

2.1 Speaking

2.2 Interactive Speaking

2.3Turn Taking

2.3.1 Turn Constructional Units (TCUs)

2.3.2 Multi-unit turns (Long turns)

2.3.3 Turn Allocation

3. Problems

3.1 Students constantly interrupt each other

Solution

3.2 Students cannot deal with interruptions politely

Solution

3.3 Students feel like they cannot enter conversations.

Solution

3.4 Students misinterpret response tokens as the beginning of a turn, and feel like they have
been interrupted
Solution

3.5 Students don’t cede turns to other speakers

Solution

4. Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendix

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 2 of 29
1. Introduction

While teaching in Ukraine, I’ve noticed that intermediate level students often struggle with
interactive conversations, and in conversations with colleagues we’ve determined that this has been
an issue in every context that we’ve taught in, including Saudi Arabia, China, Korea, Japan, Turkey,
and Romania. This may be because coursebooks focus primarily on transactional conversational
skills (buying things in a shop, ordering coffee, etc.), and skills for successfully navigating
interactive conversations are often neglected.

In the pre-intermediate group I am currently teaching, I have noticed that many of them lack the
skills to properly participate in interactive conversations, and many of them report feeling
uncomfortable in conversations with more proficient speakers. It is for the aforementioned reasons
that I am focusing on developing students’ ability to manage interactive conversations.

The scope of this essay is limited to turn-taking strategies used in interactive conversation. Wong
and Waring (2010) identify these skills as being key to interactive competence, and this skill will
benefit this group of students in both their further studies and any social situations where English is
required. I won’t examine sequencing or repair devices, as without turn taking “there is no
conversation” (ibid.).

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 3 of 29
2. Analysis

2.1 Speaking

Speaking is the “delivery of language through the mouth” (English Club 2017). It involves the
creation of sounds through the use of the lungs, vocal chords, vocal tract, tongue, teeth, and lips.
Essentially, it’s the act of putting “noise” to “notion.”

2.2 Interactive Speaking

Interactional talk is talk done primarily for social purposes, rather than transmitting information
(McCarthy 1991). Some features separating interactional talk from transactional talk are explained
below:

Interactional Transactional
• For social reasons • Primary purpose: exchange of information
• Listener-oriented • Message-oriented
• Topics change often • Topic generally stays the same
• Misunderstandings rarely repaired - can result • Speakers often make great efforts to be
in prejudice understood
• Speakers change more frequently, and
interruptions are more common

Adapted from: McCarthy 1991, Brown & Yule 1983, Hughes 2011

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 4 of 29
2.3 Turn Taking

Turn taking is the method by which speakers in a conversation determine who is speaking at what
time (Thornbury & Slade 2006; Waring & Wong 2010).

2.3.2 Turn-Constructional Units

Turn-constructional units (TCUs) are the “minimal semantic units that can constitute one complete
turn of talk” (Thornbury & Slade 2006:123). For example:

A: Hi! How are you?

B: Fine, thanks. And you?

Each of the previous statements constitutes a completed turn, as they finish communicating their
idea and invite the other person to speak.

TCUs are understood by listeners by their projectability, or the ability of the recipient to understand
when a turn will end, which lets participants know when they may enter the conversation or insert
response tokens (mmhm, uh-huh, sure) (Waring & Wong 2010).

Proficient speakers use several means to indicate a complete turn, including:

1) Gra
mmar (in relation to discourse context; “Orange juice” or “What would you like to drink?”
would both be equally valid (Waring & Wong 2010))
2) Into
nation (where a falling or rising tone is clearly heard as a final intonation)

It was great.

3) Prag
matics (where the meaning is clear)

A: Small, medium, or large?

B: Large.

(Ford & Thompson 1996)

Listeners may use one or more of these devices to know when a turn has been completed
(Thornbury & Slade 2006). Different languages and cultures within languages have different TCU
construction patterns.

Compound TCUs

Some TCUs are completed by multiple speakers (Carter 1997). For example:

A: Could you buy some chips, soda

B: and the plates. Got it.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 5 of 29
Here, the second speaker was able to complete the first speaker’s utterance begun by the list
structure. Many grammatical structures allow for this type of TCU completion:

(From Waring & Wong 2010:22)

Unfinished TCUs

Some TCUs are left intentionally incomplete by the speaker. For example:

A: Have you heard what happened to John?

B: No, what?
A: He was… you know…
B: Sacked?
A: Yeah

A doesn't complete his utterance grammatically, but its nonetheless pragmatically complete. This
“trailing off” is common in colloquial speech among proficient speakers. Carter (1997) suggests
it’s important in turn yielding, especially on uncomfortable topics.

2.3.3 Multi-unit Turns (Long turns)

In long turns, proficient speakers use several techniques to finish what they’d like to say. Schegloff
1996 separates these into TCU-initial, TCU-middle, and TCU-end practices.

TCU Initial

To mark that their turn will be long, speakers can start with:

1) List
initiating markers (First of all,)

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 6 of 29
4) Stor
y prefaces (I’ve got some bad news.)
5) Ope
ning questions (Can I ask you a question?)
6) Taki
ng a deep inbreath (Waring & Wong 2010)

TCU Middle
During their turn, speakers also:

1. Use
cataphoric reference (That’s why I came here, to talk to John).

2. Stres
s the first verb

3. Use Contrastive stress or structures

(See appendix 1for examples.)

TCU-end

Near the end of a TCU, proficient speakers may:

1. Not
use falling intonation at the end of a turn (so the turn is not intentionally complete)
3. “Rus
h-through” (Schegloff 1996:93), where the speaker accelerates through a possible completion
point, stopping at a point of “maximum grammatical control.”

(See appendix 2 for examples)

2.3.4 Turn Allocation

Proficient speakers use strategies to select who can take a turn at any point in the conversation.
Upon TCU completion, the following sequence occurs:

1) Curr
ent selects next
7) If
not 1, speaker self-selects
8) If
not 2, current speaker continues
(Sacks et. al 1974)

Current selects next uses three primary strategies:

1) Nom
ination (John?)
9) Bod
y language (looking at the intended speaker)

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 7 of 29
10) Indir
ect reduction of participants (asking a question only one person can answer)
(Waring & Wong 2010).

Speaker self-selection, by comparison, is more intricate. Speakers may attempt to enter a

conversation by:

1) Over
lap (starting before the previous TCU has finished)

This can take several forms:

Transitional Overlap Recognitional Overlap Progressive Overlap

Near a possible completion point. When one speaker understands the When one speaker interrupts the other
meaning of the statement and feels to push the conversation forward,
able to start earlier usually when there’s a fluency
problem

(Jefferson 1983; see appendix 3 for examples.)

Notably, overlap is also how interruptions happen, and during overlap there may be a power
struggle for who keeps the turn in a conversation. If speakers want keep their turn, they may use
specific phrases such as “As I was saying,” or “Anyways,”. Their interrupter, however, may
continue speaking, using body language or other paralinguistic features to maintain control.

2) Use of a turn-entry device

Proficient speakers often signal the start of their turn with markers like well, but, and, so, yeah, etc.
(Thornbury 1996).

(See appendix 4 for an example)

3) Recycled turn beginning

Speakers may repeat the part of a turn beginning which is overlapped.

(Carter 1997:66)

Finally, if the current speaker continues speaking, they may either

A) Begi
n a new TCU

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 8 of 29
B) Add
an increment, or a grammatical extension of an unfinished TCU.

A: I’m not sure it was exactly…

B: mmhm (0.5)
A: like they said.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 9 of 29
3. Problems:

3.1 Students constantly interrupt each other

A colleague who’s worked with multilingual classes of European exchange students (mainly
Spanish, Italian, and French) has often experienced that intermediate level from different ethnic
backgrounds constantly interrupt each other during conversation. This may be because turn-taking
conventions vary greatly between languages and cultures; Spanish and Italian speakers, for
example, are often cited as being more tolerant of overlap in conversation than English speakers
(Stivers et. al 2009; Berry 1994).

Solution:

One solution I have used in similar situations with adults at all levels is an adapted exercise from
Nolasco & Arthur 1987, aimed at raising students’ awareness of TCU structure. I prepare a video
of a conversation - it can be authentic (for example, a talk show) or semi-authentic (for lower
levels). I start the video (Appendix 5), stopping it at appropriate points in the recording, and ask
students to answer two questions with a partner:

1) Has
the speaker finished, or will he continue? How do you know?
11) Who
do you think will speak next? Why?

Any incorrect responses can be a point for teaching or discussion.

It works because predictive listening is a vital skill for contributing to conversations (Nolasco &
Arthur 1987), and it raises students’ awareness of they ways that turn structure is complete or
incomplete (Waring & Wong 2010). After this task, students discuss in pairs if this is similar to
how people speak in their L1 or different, and how.

3.2 Students cannot deal with interruptions politely

A colleague who worked in Japan told me their students often complained they did not know how
to politely keep their turn when interrupted. In my own experience teaching Korean students
business English, I often find students confuse “polite language” with politeness; for example, one
older man thought “Excuse me, may I finish please?” was a polite statement, due to the word
“please.”

Solution:

One task I have used with upper-intermediate students (but could be adapted for lower intermediate,
as well) is “As I was saying…” from Nolasco & Arthur 1987 (p.57-58). I set it up by distributing
task sheets A, B, and C (Appendix 6) to students. Students work in groups of 3. Two students have
a conversation, where one student constantly tries to interrupt. The third student is a monitor.
Afterward, the monitors report on phrases their group used to handle interruptions. If groups do not
use phrases for dealing with interruptions, I provide them. Groups then sort the phrases into
polite/impolite ways of handling interruptions (Appendix 7). Then, students repeat the task as a
drill in pairs, saying one sentence, being interrupted, and dealing with the interruption.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 10 of 29
It works because it provides both awareness-raising and very controlled practice of phrases and
language to deal with interruptions and hold the floor. For lower levels, the functional exponents
can be simplified (Appendix 8).

3.3 Students feel like they cannot enter conversations.

While teaching mixed-level groups of Polish, Ukrainian, and Russian students in speaking lessons,
many of my students have told me that they feel uncomfortable entering conversations, even though
they have the subject and linguistic knowledge to participate. This has also been reported by
Waring and Wong (2010) in Japanese students, and I have experienced it myself learning Russian.
In my experience, this was due to having poor turn-entering strategies in L2.

All of the sources above have indicated that this is related to the number of speakers - more
speakers means it is harder to enter the conversation.

Solution:

One solution I have used in my intermediate groups is a task from Waring and Wong 2010 to
practice turn-entering. I set it up by making two sets of cards - one with a set of statements, and one
with a set of replies (Appendix 9). There should be enough cards so that two students will have the
same card. One student takes a statement card and reads it aloud. The other students try to be the
first student to say the appropriate answer.

It works because the cognitive load on the students is decreased; they do not have to think of their
own contributions, so they can focus entering the conversation. As there is also a competitive
element to the task (the student should be first), it requires students to pay attention to possible TCU
completion points and act on these in real time. Moreover, this task can be scaffolded, and the
response cards can be written to include turn-entering devices.

3.4 Students misinterpret response tokens as the beginning of a turn, and feel like they have
been interrupted

Very often during my teaching, and during my time living abroad, I have noticed that when giving
response tokens to Russian or Ukrainian speakers (signals that I’m listening, agreeing, disagreeing,
showing sympathy, etc.) that they often stop talking, believing that I’m about to begin a speaking
turn and that I have interrupted them. I also encountered this while living in Hong Kong. For
example:

A: And then I told him…

B: mmhm.
(Silence)
B: Yeah… so I told him…

Solution:

I find that awareness raising and practice discriminating between turn-entering devices and
response tokens are very useful here. One task I’ve used with my upper-intermediate students is
asking them to listen to a piece of authentic conversation. With the conversation, I give students a

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 11 of 29
list of tokens/devices (Appendix 10). Students listen to part of the conversation and circle what
they hear when someone starts a turn. I then ask students to listen again, and put a tick next to any
phrases which are showing interest. After clarification, students listen to more of the conversation,
and after each response token / turn-entry device I stop the recording and students decide in pairs if
the speaker will start a turn or not.

It works because it explicitly highlights the differences between the two sets of devices, and
provides students with practice differentiating the two sets.

3.5 Students don’t cede turns to other speakers

During collaborative tasks or group work, there is a tendency in my Ukrainian pre-intermediate and
intermediate classes that it may become a monologue rather than a conversation. This can be for
many reasons, like students’ sociocultural norms (such as not interrupting someone older (very
common among Russian speakers), or that men “talk over” women and dominate gendered
conversations). Alternatively, the student may not be clearly selecting the following speaker, and in
lieu of other speakers self-selecting starts a new turn.

Solution:
One solution I’ve used with my students is after giving students a task role-playing catching up with
old friends, I show them a video of a model (Appendix 11). As they watch the first time, I ask them
to track the number of times the speakers change. The second time, they jot down how people knew
they could speak. After clarification, I follow with a simple drilling task. Students work in fours,
and I give each group a ball. Students complete sentences based on a simple prompt (ex. I like…),
then hand the ball to someone else, who takes the next turn. After a minute, I take the ball away
and make students do the same (use their body language to select the speaker).

These tasks work because they both raise awareness of and provide practice of strategies for
involving other speakers. Depending on the group, I may also include a questionnaire on their task
performance (Appendix 12).

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 12 of 29
4. Conclusion

In this essay, I have elaborated on my interest in how to assist language learners participate in
conversations by focusing on turn-taking. I have identified several problems, and solutions for
these problems, which I am looking forward to implementing further in the classroom.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 13 of 29
References

Berry, A. (1994) Spanish and American Turn-Taking Styles: A Comparative Study.

Pragmatic and Language Learning Monograph Series (5), p. 181-190.

Brown, G. and G. Yule (1983) Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press

Ford, C. E., & S. A. Thompson (1996) Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic,

intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In E. Ochs, E . A.
Schegloff, and S. A. Thompson (Eds.) Interaction and grammar (134-184).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Eggins, S. & D. Slade (1997) Analysing Casual Conversation. London: Equinox.

English Club (Accessed Aug. 5, 2017) What is Speaking? Available at:

https://www.englishclub.com/speaking/what-is-speaking.htm

Hughes, R. (2011) Teaching and Researching Speaking, 2nd Ed. UK: Pearson Education Ltd.

Jefferson, G. (1983) Notes on some orderliness of overlap onset. Tillburg Papers in

Language and Literature, 30, 1-18. In: H. Waring and J. Wong (2010) Conversation
Analysis and Second Language Pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. USA:
Routledge.

McCarthy, M. (1991) Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Nolasco, R. And L. Arthur (1987) Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sachs, H., E. A. Schegloff & G. Jefferson (1974) A simplest systematics for the
organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696-735

Schegloff, E. A. (1987) Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in

conversation’s turn-taking organization. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and
social organization (pp. 70–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Schegloff, E. A. (1996) Turn Organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In:
E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar, p. 52-133.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schegloff, E. A. (2007) Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation

analysis, Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. As cited in Waring, H.
and J. Wong (2010) Conversation Analysis and Second Language Pedagogy: A guide for
ESL/EFL teachers. USA: Routledge.

Schulze-Wenck, S. (2005) Form and function of “first verbs” in talk-in-interaction. In A.

Hakulinin (Ed.), Syntax and lexis in conversation (pp. 319-348). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.

Slade, D. (1996) The Texture of Casual Conversation: A Multidimensional Interpretation.

Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Sydney. Appears in S. Thornbury and D.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 14 of 29
Slate (2006) Conversation - from Description to Pedagogy. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Stivers, T, N. J. Enfield, P. Brown, C. Englert, M. Hayashi, T. Heinemann, G. Hoymann, F.

Rossano, J.P. de Ruiter, K.E. Yun, and S. Levinson (2009) Universals and Cross-
Cultural Variation in Turn-Taking in Conversation. PNAS (106), 26. p. 10587-10592.

Thornbury, S. (1996) Beyond the Sentence - Introducing Discourse Analysis. Oxford:

MacMillan Books for Teachers

Thornbury, S, & D. Slade (2006) Conversation - from Description to Pedagogy.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Waring, H. and J. Wong (2010) Conversation Analysis and Second Language Pedagogy: A guide
for ESL/EFL teachers. USA: Routledge.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 15 of 29
Appendix 1: Examples of TCU Middle Practices

Use of cataphoric reference

A: Is John here?
B: No, annoyingly.
A: That’s a shame, I wanted to ask him a question.
B: Yeah, I know. I mean, that’s why I came to the office today, to run my plans by him.

B’s “That’s why” in the final turn anticipates his explanation, that he wanted John to check his
plans. As such, he has made his TCP pragmatically incomplete and therefore secured his turn.

Stressing the first verb

A: Did you do anything interesting over the weekend?

B: Well, we WANTED TO go to the movies, but then the pipes burst in the flat and we had to stay
home doing repairs all day.

In the previous example, the second speaker stresses the first verb to show that it shows a desired
outcome that didn’t happen, and communicate to the other speaker that their turn will be longer.

Schulze-Wenke (2005:322) identifies the following marked first verbs:

1. Wan
ted to
2. was/
were going to
3. was/
were supposed to
4. thou
ght/ was thinking
5. Trie
d / was trying
6. Coul
d have
7. Shou
ld have

They also usually express past intentions or possibilities, and imply their failure. They are followed
with an account of what happened (Waring & Wong 2010).

Using contrastive stress or structures

A: You only love him for his money!

B: No, I don’t love him for his MONEY. I love him because he’s an AMAZING PERSON.

In the previous example, the second speaker stresses “money” because it shows disagreement with
the first speakers comment; this also shows that they have not finished, because they will complete
their rebuttal in the following statement.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 16 of 29
Appendix 2: TCU-End Examples

1: An example of pitch-drop withholding, or not producing the falling intonation at the end of a
TCU. Here, the speaker did not produce falling intonation on “themselves” so the second speaker
knew they were not finished. However, they did produce it on “tall,” which is how the listener
knew to respond.
(Original from Schegloff 2007, appears with modification in Waring & Wong 2010:32)

2: An

example of rush-through. At the end of his first potentially completed TCU, the speaker accelerates
his speech and continues to the point where he can reasonably think ahead. He pauses after if,
because he has not had time to process what will come next.

(From Waring & Wong 2010:32)

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 17 of 29
Appendix 3: Examples of Overlap

Example 1: Transitional Overlap, occurring near the end of a completed TCU. The second speaker
has anticipated the end of the current speaker’s TCU, and starts a little early in order to secure their
turn.

Example 2:
Recognitional
Overlap,
where the
second
speaker has
already
worked out
the first
speaker’s
message. As
such, they feel they may begin mid-utterance (interrupting the first speaker) without a loss in
information.

Example 3: Progressive Overlap, where the first speaker is struggling in some way to communicate
their message (can’t think of a word, etc.) and the second speaker interrupts to provide support and
continue the conversation.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 18 of 29
(Modified examples from Waring & Wong 2010, p. 38,42; original source cited in examples).

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 19 of 29
 Appendix

4:
Example of Turn-
Entry Devices

In the following extract:

(Thornbury 1996:66)

In line 15, Claire uses several devices here to enter her turn: Well, Yeah, I mean, and but.

The final “but” shows us that her nature will be contradictory to the previous statement, and gives
the listener a clue as to the meaning of the utterance overall. It should be noted that not all turn-
entering devices serve as signposting meaning, but very many do (McCarthy 1991).

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 20 of 29
 Appendix 5:
Video for
solution to
“Students
constantly
interrupt each
other”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbmW_Z1oPJw

Procedure: Play the conversation, and stop the recording either after a turn, during a turn, or at a
possible completion point. Students quickly check with a partner if the speaker is finished, or if
they are going to say more. Elicit from students why they think the speaker will continue or not.

There’s no need to finish the clip - the first two minutes are enough. I’ve selected a TV show as it’s
a bit “cleaner” - the turns are more easily marked for students to recognize, as such, this is more
appropriate for pre-intermediate and intermediate than upper-intermediate, who would benefit more
from authentic materials.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 21 of 29
After viewing and elicitation has finished, students discuss in pairs about if turn structure in English
is similar to or different from their L1. If it’s similar, brainstorm strategies which might apply
cross-culturally. If not, these need to be focused on for students’ awareness.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 22 of 29
Appendix 6: Task Cards, “As I was saying…” Nolasco & Arthur 1987:57

Appendix 7: Language Focus task for “As I was saying…”

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 23 of 29
Look at the phrases below. Sort the phrases for dealing with interruptions into polite phrases
and forceful phrases.

Where was I….? May I continue? Is that all? To return to what I was
saying…
I’m sure that’s true, but… Yes, well anyway… If you don’t mind, I’d like As I was saying…
to continue.

Polite Forceful

Choose five of the phrases the class used earlier, and add them to the appropriate columns.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 24 of 29
Appendix 8: Language focus for “As I was saying…” adapted for lower-intermediate groups

Look at the phrases below. Sort the phrases for dealing with interruptions into polite phrases
and forceful phrases.

Where was I….? May I continue? Is that all? So, yeah…

So… Yes, well anyway… May I finish? As I was saying…

Polite Forceful

Choose five of the phrases the class used earlier, and add them to the appropriate columns.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 25 of 29
Appendix 9: Example Cards for Solution to “Students feel like they can’t enter
conversations” (Waring & Wong 2010:48).

Alternatively, the cards can be modified to include turn-entering devices.

It was such a good movie! Yeah, but it was a bit boring.

Has it really always been this way?
Why can’t you lift this box again?
Do you have any idea what it means?
What did you do?
Where was the party?
Well, not until recently.
Well, I'm pregnant.
Not really, but John might now.
Well, not much to be honest.
Um, it was in the middle of a forest.

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 26 of 29
Appendix 10: Example worksheet for identifying turn-entry devices

Listen to the conversation. Circle what you hear when a new speaker starts talking.

Well

Yeah

Mmhm

So

You know

That's too bad

I’m sorry

Really?

Uh-huh

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 27 of 29
Appendix 11: Role-play and video task

You and a friend are having lunch in a cafe, and you just saw a
friend who you haven’t met in a long time.
What things do you want to know? What will you talk about?
Role play the conversation.

You and a friend are having lunch in a cafe, and you just saw a
friend who you haven’t met in a long time.
What things do you want to know? What will you talk about?
Role play the conversation.

You walked into a cafe and saw two friends who you haven’t
met in a long time.
What things do you want to know? What will you talk about?
Role play the conversation.

Video for model: Cutting Edge 3rd Intermediate Students’ Book, Unit 1 Language Live (2013)

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 28 of 29
Appendix 12: Metacognitive questionnaire about performance during speaking tasks.

In your group, how much of the speaking did you do?

<—————————————————————————————————————>
Almost none (0%) Almost all (100%)

Did you say everything you wanted to say? (Yes / Most things / not really / not at all)

Circle any of the problems you had:

A classmate interrupted me, and I didn’t know what to do.

I felt like I couldn’t enter the conversation.
I felt like no-one else wanted to talk.
Other (What?)

Did anyone ask you for your opinions or ideas? How did this make you feel?

UA800_007_Reese_internal_LSA3_BE 29 of 29