985274

research-article2021
REL0010.1177/0033688220985274RELC JournalMoorhouse et al.

Research Article

RELC Journal

E-Classroom Interactional
 ­
2023, Vol. 54(1) 114–128
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
Competencies: Mediating and sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0033688220985274
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220985274
Assisting Language Learning journals.sagepub.com/home/rel

During Synchronous Online

Lessons

Benjamin Luke Moorhouse

Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR

Yanna Li
The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR

Steve Walsh
Newcastle University, UK

Abstract
Interaction is seen by many English language teachers and scholars as an essential part of face-
to-face English language classrooms. Teachers require specific competencies to effectively use
interaction as a tool for mediating and assisting learning. These can be referred to as classroom
interactional competence (CIC). However, the situation created by the ongoing global COVID-19
pandemic which began in early 2020, and the recent advancement in technologies have led to
teachers conducting synchronous online lessons through video-conferencing software. The online
environment is distinctly different from the face-to-face classroom and teachers require new and
additional skills to effectively utilise interaction online in real time. This exploratory study used an
online mixed-method survey of 75 university level English language teachers who had engaged in
synchronous online teaching due to COVID-19, to explore the competencies that teachers need
to use interaction as a tool to mediate and assist language learning in synchronous online lessons.
Teachers were found to require three competencies, in addition to their CIC – technological
competencies, online environment management competencies, and online teacher interactional
competencies – which together constitute e-CIC. The findings provide greater insights into the
needs of teachers required to teach synchronously online and will be of interest to teachers and
teacher educators.

Corresponding author:
Benjamin Luke Moorhouse, Department of Education Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, AAB836,
Academic and Administration Building, Baptist University Road Campus, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR.
Email: blmoorhouse@hkbu.edu.hk
Moorhouse et al. 115

Keywords
Classroom interactional competence, COVID-19, synchronous online teaching, digital
technologies, English language teacher competencies

Introduction
With the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic which began in early 2020 forcing the
suspension of face-to-face (F2F) classes at every level of education in most countries
around the world (Bozhert et al., 2020), English language teachers, like colleagues in
other disciplines, are having to find alternative modes of teaching and interacting with
their learners. Technological advancements in recent years have meant that teachers have
more options, and synchronous online lessons (SOLs) delivered through video-confer-
ence software (VCS) are now a real possibility (Peachey, 2017). However, teaching syn-
chronously requires specific skills, including the ability to: teach and communicate
content across a screen; engage learners using two-dimensional (2-D) images; facilitate
interaction in a digital classroom; attend to students’ emotional needs across distance;
maintain a sense of presence despite not being physically together; and troubleshoot
technical difficulties (Rehn et al., 2018).
For tertiary English language teachers, teaching synchronously online can bring
additional challenges; in particular, language is both the medium of instruction and
subject matter, while, at the same time, multimodal actions (gesture, facial expres-
sion, etc.) that aid teaching and interaction in F2F classrooms can operate in a very
different way in SOLs depending on the access and position of cameras and partici-
pants’ screen size ratio. It is important to note, that in this article we refer to lessons
conducted in a physical classroom as F2F as this is a commonly recognised term.
However, often it is not the lack of ‘faces’ that differentiates the synchronous online
classroom from the physical classroom, but the physical proximity and sense of pres-
ence of the teachers and learners.
Researchers have been studying the complex relationship between language, inter-
action and learning for many years now (see, for example, Walsh, 2006; Seedhouse,
2004; Tsui, 1985) This relationship can be found in any classroom, in any subject, at
all levels and in all parts of the world. It is an especially complex relationship in a
language classroom where language is both the ‘object and vehicle of study’
(Allwright, 1984). In more recent times, researchers have studied classroom interac-
tional competence (CIC) (Walsh, 2013) as a means of understanding the importance
of interaction to learning. A fuller discussion of CIC is presented in the next section.
In the absence of the kind of F2F interaction, which is typically found in any class-
room, the extent to which interaction can mediate and assist learning is only partially
understood in the synchronous online classroom. In particular, there has, to date, been
little light cast on the competencies that teachers need in order to maximise learning and
learning opportunity in this context. Put simply, what does CIC look like in an online
English language teaching and learning environment? What challenges are presented by
synchronous online teaching and how might these challenges be overcome?
116 RELC Journal 54(1)

Classroom Interactional Competence

Classroom interactional competence is defined as, ‘teachers’ and learners’ ability to use
interaction as a tool for mediating and assisting learning’ (Walsh, 2013: 65). It puts inter-
action at the centre of teaching and learning and argues that by improving their CIC, both
teachers and learners will immediately improve learning and opportunities for learning.
The central argument of a focus on CIC is that by helping teachers better understand
classroom interaction, there will be a corresponding impact on learning, especially where
learning is regarded as a social activity which is strongly influenced by involvement,
engagement and participation.
While it is true to say that CIC is highly context-specific, there are a number of fea-
tures which are common to all contexts. First, pedagogic goals and the language used to
achieve them are convergent: they work together. For example, if the aim of a teacher is
to elicit personal opinions from students, the use of ‘yes/no’ questions will not be conver-
gent with their pedagogic goal of the moment. Instead, ‘wh-questions’ (when, where,
who, etc.) would need to be asked which are more likely to produce longer, more elabo-
rated responses. This position assumes that pedagogic goals and the language used to
achieve them are inextricably intertwined and constantly being re-adjusted (Walsh, 2006;
Seedhouse, 2004). Any evidence of CIC must therefore demonstrate that interlocutors
are using discourse which is both appropriate to specific pedagogic goals and to the
agenda of the moment.
Secondly, CIC facilitates interactional space: students need space – time purposefully
deployed by the teacher – so that students can participate in the discourse, contribute and
receive feedback on their contributions. In short, CIC creates ‘space for learning’ (Walsh,
2012). There are a number of ways in which space for learning can be maximised. These
include increasing wait-time, promoting extended learner turns and allowing planning
time. By affording learners space, they are better able to contribute to the process of co-
constructing meanings.
Thirdly, CIC entails understanding feedback more fully. Of particular value is the
ability of a teacher to shape learner contributions (Walsh, 2013). Shaping involves taking
a learner response and doing something with it rather than simply accepting it. For exam-
ple, a response may be paraphrased, using more technical language or a particular code
or metalanguage; it may be summarised or extended in some way, or linked to a specific
reference; a response may require scaffolding so that learners are assisted in saying what
they really mean. By shaping learner contributions and by helping learners to articulate
what they mean, teachers are performing a more central role in the interaction, while, at
the same time, maintaining a student-centred, decentralised approach to teaching.
Shaping is most effective when students are aware of its purpose. Teachers can therefore
guide students to notice their shaping and other feedback strategies.
The relevance of CIC is clear. If our aim as language teachers is to promote dialogic,
engaged and ‘safe’ classroom environments where students are actively involved and
feel free to contribute and take risks, we need to study the interactions which take place
and learn from them. The proposal here is that we need to acquire a fine-grained under-
standing of what constitutes CIC and how it might be achieved in an online setting. This
can be accomplished by using data from our own context; the starting point has to be
Moorhouse et al. 117

evidence from our classroom in the form of a video-recording or audio-recording, self-

observation or peer-observation. Only by starting to describe interactional processes can
we begin to understand in some detail our local context. Not only will such an under-
standing result in more engaged and dynamic interactions in classrooms, it will also
enhance learning (see, for example, Walsh, 2019; Mercer et al., 2009 ).

Synchronous Online English Language Teaching

The online synchronous language classroom environment is distinctly different from
the F2F classroom. Teachers and learners are in different physical locations and can
even be in different countries and time zones. They cannot easily ‘see’ each other, as
computer or device screens are often too small. There can be environmental distractors
making it harder for students to engage, and there is a myriad of technical issues
(Peachey, 2017). These differences can limit a teacher’s ability to maintain a classroom
environment conducive to language learning and engage in meaningful interaction.
For example, teachers and learners may not be able to see who wants to take a speaking
turn. Lessons and interaction can therefore look very different in the synchronous
online classroom. Moorhouse described his experience, ‘The VCS sessions are still
more “bumpy” and more teacher-centred than face-to-face sessions. Group and whole-
class discussions are characterised by longer silences and shorter student responses’
(Moorhouse, 2020: 2). Payne argues that the limitations evident when teaching syn-
chronously online mean that ‘it is difficult to have an interactive L2 conversation with
more than about four to six individuals’ and ‘conversational turn-taking in a video
conference is challenging enough when everyone is speaking their first language (L1),
let alone a L2’ (Payne, 2020: 246).
To address the limitations evident in synchronous online teaching and enhance
opportunities for interaction, scholars have proposed the utilisation of ‘breakout
rooms’, a feature of certain VCS platforms (e.g., Zoom), to conduct tasks with small
groups of learners (González-Lloret, 2020), providing different modes for students to
interact, such as using written ‘chats,’ and ‘drawing’ (Kohnke and Moorhouse, 2020),
and combining synchronous and asynchronous technologies so students and teachers
can interact between classes (Moorhouse, 2020). However, there is limited empirical
research supporting these proposals. We still do not have a clear understanding of the
additional competencies English language teachers may need for teaching online and,
more specifically, for making effective use of interaction to mediate and assist lan-
guage learning in SOLs.

The Study
The current study uses a mixed-method online survey (Braun et al., 2020) to explore the
experiences and perceptions of tertiary English language teachers who have conducted
SOLs. Specifically, the study focuses on interaction during online language instruction
with the aim to identify: (a) the affordance of CIC in SOLs; and (b) the skills and knowl-
edge that teachers require to use interaction to mediate and assist learning in SOLs. To
address these aims, the study is guided by the following research question:
118 RELC Journal 54(1)

What competencies do teachers need in order to use interaction as a tool to mediate and assist
language learning in synchronous online lessons?

The survey was purposefully developed for the study and piloted with 10 teachers to
ensure content and face validity. After piloting, the number of items was reduced and
language in the items was clarified to ensure greater reliability. The final survey includes
three sections: biographical information; experiences of SOLs; and interaction during
SOLs. It included 17 items: eight closed items (quantitative); four short answer items
(quantitative); and five open long answer items (qualitative). The number of items was
kept to a minimum to give respondents an opportunity to provide fuller responses to the
qualitative items (Braun et al., 2020). The quantitative items were primarily designed to
collect biographical information, while the qualitative items were designed to collect
participants’ experiences and perceptions of online synchronous teaching and interac-
tion (e.g., ‘What knowledge and/or skills do teachers need to successfully use interac-
tion ‘as a tool for mediating and assisting learning’ when teaching in synchronous online
lessons?’). The use of qualitative items allows for ‘rich and complex accounts of the
type of sense-making’ of participants (Braun et al., 2020: 1). This makes open-ended
items particularly useful for this study due to its exploratory nature. The survey was
administered online through the use of Google Forms to 75 territory level language
teachers in July 2020.

Participant Recruitment and Biographical Information

To address the aims of the study, it was important to recruit participants with experience
of teaching synchronously online. To ensure this, convenience and snowball sampling
were adopted. The researchers invited tertiary level teachers with relevant experience to
complete the survey by disseminating a link to the survey through email, instant messag-
ing platforms and social media. The final dataset consisted of 25 English for academic
purposes (EAP) teachers (33%), 30 English language educators (40%), 14 English foun-
dation course teachers (19%) and 6 other types of English teacher (e.g., English for
specific purposes teachers and English as a second language teachers) (8%). The major-
ity teach in Asia (55%) and Europe (41%), with two participants from the Middle East,
two from America and one from Africa. This distribution is understandable, as Asia and
Europe were the first contexts affected by COVID-19. Both regions suspended in-person
teaching earlier than other contexts requiring teachers to find alternative methods to F2F
instruction (Bozhert et al., 2020). The dataset includes teachers with a range of teaching
experiences – 0–5 years (16%), 6–10 years (24%), 11–15 years (19%), 16–20 years
(23%), and >20 years (20%) – who teach learners with different English proficiencies:
beginner/intermediate (30%); intermediate (25%); and intermediate/advanced (45%).
Overall, the dataset represents a diversity of countries, English language content areas,
teaching experiences and teachers of students with a range of English proficiencies.
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has had a diversity of impact on different contexts,
with higher education institutions suspending F2F classes at various times during the
spring of 2020 (Bozhert et al., 2020). In addition, the teaching contexts in each country and
institution can be different. To better understand these differences, items related to the
Moorhouse et al. 119

Table 1. Month participants started teaching synchronously online.

December January February March April May June July

2019 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
n 1 1 4 39 18 6 4 3
% 1.3 1.3 5 52 24 8 5 4

Table 2. Hours spent teaching synchronously online per week.

Hours 0.5–3.5 3.6–6.5 6.6–9.5 9.6–12.5 >12.6

n 16 26 5 19 10
% 21 35 7 25 13

Table 3. Hours spent teaching synchronously online per class.

Hours 1< 1–2 2–3 >4

n 37 26 6 6
% 49 35 8 8

Table 4. Software used to conduct synchronous online lessons.

Software Zoom Google Blackboard Microsoft Cisco Others (e.g.,

Meets Collaborate Teams Webex Tencent QQ)
n 39 8 11 8 2 9
% 52 11 15 11 3 12

participants’ teaching context were included (see Tables, 1, 2, 3 and 4). It can be seen that
the majority of participants started teaching synchronously online in March or April 2020,
with most lessons lasting from less than one hour to two hours in length, while teachers
have a range of contact time with their learners. Zoom is the most used VSC platform, with
Blackboard Collaborate, Google Meets and Microsoft Teams also utilised.

Data Analysis
Quantitative data were analysed following standard statistical procedures to generate
descriptive statistics appropriate to the data type, including percentages and frequencies
(Cohen et al., 2011). Qualitative data from the survey were analysed through an iterative
thematic analysis through a six-stage reflexive and discursive process (Braun et al., 2020)
– the dataset was read and re-read to familiarise the researchers with its content. Initial
codes were subsequently generated and compared systematically with categories identi-
fied. Categories were organised into themes and sub-themes identified. The themes were
120 RELC Journal 54(1)

reviewed and organised, with the final three themes established. The dataset was treated
as one cohesive dataset, meaning that themes were identified across multiple items. The
researchers kept in communication – checking understandings, asking for clarification,
and discussing differences in interpretations – throughout the data analysis.

Findings
It is well-known in the literature that teachers perceive interaction to be an important
aspect of F2F language classrooms (Walsh, 2013). The data analysis shows teachers feel
that interaction is also important in the synchronous online classroom, with 97%
(n = 73) of respondents agreeing that interaction is important or very important when
teaching SOLs compared to 100% (n = 75) for teaching F2F. However, the data analysis
reveals that for teachers to use interaction effectively in SOLs, teachers need three key
competencies: technological competencies; online environment management competen-
cies; and online teacher interactional competencies.

Technological Competencies
Teachers faced a number of technical challenges when teaching synchronously online.
They complained about internet stability issues, such as, video lag, delays in muting, and
speakers talking over each other. These were particularly evident when students were in
different countries from the teacher. An EAP teacher from Ireland wrote:

[The main challenge is] connectivity! Our students online in China don’t all have VPNs [virtual
private networks] so they will lose connectivity during the lessons which is especially
challenging when they are presenting PowerPoint presentations.

To overcome these challenges required a number of technical ‘work arounds’ and flexi-
bility on the part of both students and teachers. Teachers tried different synchronous
platforms, used instant messaging platforms, such as WeChat as ‘back-up’ communica-
tion channels, developed ‘emergency’ resources in case there were computer glitches and
provided tutorials to students on new technologies. They were also flexible in allowing
students to turn on or off their camera so as to reduce bandwidth demands. An English
language educator from Spain, explained the support she provided:

Regarding technical problems, I tried to give students some advice on the use of the new
technologies employed in my classes, I shared tutorials written by me, I gave them the link to
some tutorials provided by my university and I shared the tips that I learned myself through the
actual use of those tools.

While the knowledge required to overcome these challenges and implement technical
solutions could be considered prerequisites for synchronous online teaching, there were
also specific skills identified that pertain to the use of interaction. These include familiar-
ity with the tools and features of the platform adopted and how they can be used to facili-
tate interaction, and also knowledge about the variety of web-based tools that teachers
Moorhouse et al. 121

can use to boost interaction. For example, teachers talked about the need to use features
of the VCS that allowed for multiple communication channels, such as ‘icons,’ ‘chat
box,’ ‘interactive whiteboard’ and ‘breakout rooms.’ These make it possible for students
and teachers to interact in different modes, written versus oral, and group sizes, and
whole class versus small groups. In addition, teachers wrote about other platforms they
used in parallel with their VCS, such as game-based platforms (e.g., Kahoot!), learning
management systems (e.g., Edmodo), collaborative tools (e.g., Google Docs) and instant
messaging platforms (e.g., WhatsApp and WeChat), providing different modes of inter-
action both during and between lessons. A teacher from Austria described how a variety
of tools can be used to maximise interaction:

I have been using an [instant messaging platform] in which students could communicate with
me and with each other. Group work was organised in breakout rooms. Panel discussions were
done in a written form on an interactive blackboard. Presentations were held online with the
student presenting speaking and other students posting questions in a chat. Feedback was given
via e-mail and also in BigBlueButton (a VCS) sessions.

Teachers acknowledged that it is important to ‘keep updated with new sources’ and tech-
nologies that could be potentially beneficial in the language classroom. It is important to
note that not all respondents expressed confidence in their technological abilities and that
relevant professional development was needed.

Online Environment Management Competencies

Teachers found the online environment distinctly different from the F2F classroom. They
reported that it was harder to maintain students’ interest and the mode restricted the kinds
of activities that could be conducted. In addition, respondents commented on difficulties
associated with students turning cameras off and restrictions on the number of students
visible on the screen at any one time; in particular, these actions made it difficult for
teachers to create a positive classroom atmosphere, monitor students’ behaviour and
engagement, and build rapport with students. In addition, respondents mentioned that
activities took longer online than in F2F classrooms. For example, setting up group
work, moving students in and out of breakout rooms, and classroom discussions all took
more time.
Therefore, teachers require specific online environment management competencies,
including designing language lessons and materials that account for the environment,
and its limitations, and building rapport with and between learners who are in different
physical spaces. To design lessons for the environment, teachers suggested keeping the
lesson content simple, and ensuring instructions, questions and explanations are explicit.
This can be done by ‘minimis[ing] the number of [presentation] slides,’ planning ‘shorter
activities’ and adopting the ‘virtual flipped classroom’ approach. An EAP teacher from
India talked about the ways in which he managed the online environment:

[I] minimised the numbers of presentation slides and the content on each slide,]. I adopted a
dialogic mode of talking, asked students to interact via the chat box and occasionally invited
122 RELC Journal 54(1)

quick comments on some point in the session. I kept first and last few minutes for some
interaction about general matters.

In a similar vein, an English language educator from Indonesia explained how they made
videos to support students’ understanding of session content:

For me, teaching and learning from face-to-face to synchronous online lessons need creativity
in how to explain and deliver the materials to the students such as I made a voice recording so
the students can easily understand the materials provided in the PowerPoint presentations.

The virtual flipped classroom approach, where teachers provide materials and videos
asynchronously regarding the lesson content for students to watch before SOLs (Ismail
and Abdulla, 2019), was seen as a particularly good way to account for the limitations of
online teaching. It allowed teachers to ‘free synchronous class time for more interac-
tions.’ The effective use of online and off-line time seems important to maximise interac-
tion in SOLs and avoid ‘lecturing’.
To build rapport with and between language learners, teachers deployed various strat-
egies. One of the most frequently mentioned strategies is to manage expectations. The
novel environment necessitates clear explanations of how teachers expect students to
participate. For example, a teacher from Austria explained explicitly to her students that
‘interrupting teacher talk to ask questions will not be considered as being rude at all as
teachers cannot see them’. To make students feel comfortable to learn as a group, teach-
ers believed that students should be ‘given time and space during the session to get to
know more about each other,’ this could be done through ‘1 to 5 minutes of free chatting
with classmates in breakout rooms,’ or time given at the beginning and end of class for
‘general chat.’ Some teachers developed icebreakers activities at the beginning of
courses. Outside of the SOLs, teachers mentioned they had regular virtual office hours,
met students in smaller groups and responded to emails more frequently as some stu-
dents were unwilling to ask questions in class.
To manage online environments, the data suggest that teachers need the skills and
knowledge to consider ways to utilise learners’ class time and out of class time, so class
time can be more effectively used for engaging students in interaction. Teachers need
explicit strategies to help build and maintain rapport, as the normal social setting an F2F
classroom provides, can only be replicated through concrete actions, such as providing
assigned times for free chats and unstructured interactions. Acknowledging the differ-
ences between the physical and online classroom and setting context-specific expecta-
tions and routines are also important.

Online Teacher Interactional Competencies

As mentioned above, teachers viewed interaction as almost equally important to lan-
guage learning in the online synchronous classroom as they do in the F2F classroom.
However, the lack of physical proximity and the limitations afforded in teaching on a
2-D screen, means there are inevitable challenges to facilitating and utilising interaction.
A common issue raised was an increase in the amount of ‘teacher talking time’. As a
Moorhouse et al. 123

teacher stated ‘It is easy for the teacher to fall into the trap of too much teacher talking
time. Lessons can become very teacher-centred.’ This was partly explained by the diffi-
culty in eliciting responses from students. Teachers described finding themselves talking
to an ‘empty room’, or in a ‘dark cave’, which felt like ‘a one-sided experience’ or
‘monologue’. One teacher wrote that ‘it’s harder to make jokes or make students laugh’,
while another stated that a lack of F2F contact made interaction rather ‘awkward, diffi-
cult to follow, slow and cumbersome’. These issues were conflated by some of the tech-
nical limitations, with teachers only allocating specific learners to speak at one time
using the ‘mute’ feature, and also social norms, such as fear of interrupting teacher talk
leading students to respond through the chat box rather than orally. This is exacerbated
by the various modes of interactions the teacher is required to monitor and engage in, as
this EAP teacher from India detailed:

[The main challenges of synchronous online teaching include] the need to toggle between
muting and unmuting, being direct and brief, being aware of other speakers, noticing/giving cues
for taking turns, knowledge of the options/facilities for written interaction (like chat boxes) and
their features, ability to deal with the isolation and ‘singularity’ of online classes, ability to
frequently shift between or mix oral and written interaction, ability to multitask between listening
to the speaker, watching the presentation, keeping an eye on the chat box, using the keyboard,
interacting at multiple levels (private chat, public chat, oral responses, . . .).

To overcome these challenges, teachers require specific online interactional competen-

cies. These include setting specific interaction expectations, using the multiple modes of
communication afforded by the VCS and other platforms effectively, providing longer
wait time, and developing specific questioning techniques to elicit responses.
Teachers talked about setting interaction expectations in the first course session, as
this EAP teacher from the United Kingdom explained:

The first challenge, I think, is establishing clear modes for interacting or a set of agreed ‘rules’
for interacting in the online classroom. So, things like which buttons or signals are used for
showing you want to speak or showing agreement/disagreement with what someone else is
saying, or asking for repetition, clarification etc. Otherwise, it’s just babble. Basically, it’s about
establishing a set of ‘cues’ to replace the non-verbal ones we use in a physical classroom.

These ‘rules’, can help the teacher and students to navigate the unfamiliar online envi-
ronment and establish new ways of interacting. Teachers then need to consider the kinds
of interaction they want, and how the features and platforms can support these kinds of
interaction. For example, using, ‘breakout rooms’ was seen as essential for students to
interact in small groups. One teacher noted that it was not just the use of breakout rooms,
but also the need for the teacher to set ‘challenging tasks/questions for students to dis-
cuss.’ If not, the students may struggle to communicate. Wait time, an important tool in
any classroom (Walsh, 2013), needs to be consciously considered in the online synchro-
nous classroom. Teachers reported needing to give more wait time. In addition, teachers
suggested that they needed to use a greater variety of nomination strategies. Teachers
needed to directly invite students to respond more frequently than they would in the F2F
classroom.
124 RELC Journal 54(1)

Finally, developing specific questioning techniques was seen as important, to reduce

the risk that the teacher’s questions go unanswered. This can mean the teacher asking a
closed question to the whole class through a survey tool or using the chat box, followed
by an open question to elicit a few students’ longer oral responses. It can also mean
accepting both written and oral responses. For example, a teacher from Malaysia, when
asking the students if they have questions, would invite students to share orally, and then
‘after each question’, she ‘would ask the rest of the students to think about [the question]
and share their answers.’ She wrote that ‘most of the time’ she ‘received responses on the
chat column.’
Due to the radically different online classroom environment, teachers need to con-
sciously consider how they use and manage interaction. Even though teachers reported a
variety of strategies they feel teachers can use, overall, the data analysis suggests that
facilitating interaction online is more challenging than in the F2F classroom and requires
competencies that many of the surveyed teachers felt they did not yet possess.

Discussion
The present study has found that teachers believe interaction is nearly as important in
SOLs as it is in F2F lessons. However, for teachers to be able to successfully use interac-
tion as a tool to mediate and assist language learning when teaching synchronously
online, the findings of this study suggest they need three additional competencies to
those required in the F2F classroom, namely: technological competencies; online envi-
ronment management competencies; and online teacher interactional competencies.

Technological Competencies
Although advancements in technology have made synchronous online teaching possible,
this study has shown that teachers need specific technological competencies so that they
can utilise them successfully. Platforms and tools, such as Zoom, provide multiple modes
of interaction (e.g., written chat, annotation, drawing, and oral) (Konhke and Moorhouse,
2020), and opportunities for smaller group activities and tasks (González-Lloret, 2020).
Teachers need to feel competent in using them in their classrooms. In addition, teachers
need to feel comfortable combining these with other tools, such as game-based plat-
forms, learning management platforms, collaborative tools and instant management plat-
forms, to ensure that classroom activities provide opportunities for various forms of
interaction that contribute to their pedagogical goals. Perhaps one of the biggest chal-
lenges going forward is to understand how ‘best practice’ from F2F teaching contexts
should be modified when teaching online. In particular, we need to understand how new
technologies can be integrated with existing practices – or, indeed, with new practices –
to ensure that learning is mediated in a successful and appropriate way.

Online Management Competencies

Teachers and learners are physically distant in the synchronous online classroom.
Therefore, teachers need new competencies to manage learning without the physical
Moorhouse et al. 125

proximity the F2F classroom provides. These competencies include the awareness and
effective utilisation of learners ‘in class’ and ‘out-of-class’ time, through approaches
such as the ‘virtual flipped classroom’ (Ismail and Abdulla, 2019) – with videos provided
before live sessions providing input for dialogue and discussion during SOLs. Teachers
need to be aware of the differences in the environment and help learners adjust and
become familiar with it. Teachers need to be able to provide clear expectations and
instructions and communicate these effectively to students across a screen. Classroom
management has been found to be of enormous importance in teacher efficacy in F2F
settings (see, for example, Buchanan and Timmis, 2019). In an online teaching context,
the management of learning is perhaps even more crucial given the lack of physical and
human props and the need to manage a virtual environment. So, for example, using the
‘chat’ function as a virtual whiteboard and sharing a screen which outlines each teaching
session as a ‘running order’ are the kinds of practice which will guide and support learn-
ing in an online classroom.

Online Teacher Interactional Competencies

Interaction can look very different in the synchronous online classroom from the F2F
classroom (Payne, 2020). Often teachers cannot ‘see’ students, as they have not turned
on their camera or the VCS limits how many participants can be viewed at once. There
can also be other distractors on the screen, such as PowerPoint presentations. Combined,
these can limit the use of paralinguistic features used to communicate the desire to talk,
nominate speaking turns non-verbally and gather information about students’ under-
standing. Teachers need to be aware of these differences and develop strategies to
account for the different interactional environment. For example, utilising the different
modes afforded by the VCS, providing longer wait time, and developing specific ques-
tioning techniques. Data suggest that the use of a closed question to the whole class,
with students responding in the written chat, followed by an open question to a few
specific students can increase interaction and the chance of learners responding. And
increasing use of practices such as ‘rehearsal’ – where students are given time to prepare
a response in small groups before going public – are certainly needed when working
online.
While this study focused on the teacher within SOLs, it is also important to consider
the role of the learners. As has been stated previously, CIC is essentially a two-ways inter-
action and the teacher can only express this with the collaboration of their students (Walsh,
2006). Teachers should therefore consider how and when students may already be engag-
ing in technological mediated interaction, such as participating in online gaming and
social media (Hafner, 2019), and leverage these existing uses to create a collaborative
space in which both parties take responsibility for working towards CIC. Teachers can
invite students to share their online interactional experiences and make suggestions for
how they can mutually create an online space for learning. To do this, teachers can spend
time fostering learner understanding of and providing explicit scaffolding for being inter-
active in the learning space. For example, teachers and learners could collaboratively
negotiate expectations and online etiquette, such as, encouraging interruptions, or turning
on cameras when taking a speaking turn. It is likely that students, as with teachers, see the
126 RELC Journal 54(1)

importance of cultivating opportunities for interaction in SOLs and will be motivated to

create a more effective language learning environment.
What is emerging from this study is an initial conceptualisation of what we are calling
e-CIC: classroom interactional competence in online contexts. It is too early at this stage
to offer a clear definition of this phenomenon, but it is obvious from this exploratory
study that e-CIC brings together the additional three sets of competencies discussed in
this section and in our findings with the existing features of F2F CIC. Although scholars
have identified some potential strategies that teachers can use during SOLs to assist lan-
guage learning and interaction (e.g., Kohnke and Moorhouse, 2020; González-Lloret,
2020; Payne, 2020), this study, by drawing on the experiences of front-line teachers who
have used synchronous online teaching due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, has
provided empirical support for the competencies which teachers need to manage interac-
tion during SOLs. It is important to note that the data suggest that many teachers are still
struggling with this mode of teaching and, as yet, lack some of the required
competencies.

Conclusion
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has likely accelerated the development of online
modes of English language teaching, and specifically the use of synchronous technolo-
gies to provide real time English language lessons. Such technologies have the potential
to connect learners and teachers in different contexts around the world and provide flex-
ibility that traditional F2F teaching cannot (Peachey, 2017). However, due to the rapid
shift, the teaching competencies required for the radically different teaching environ-
ment have not been fully conceptualised. This study has found that teachers need techno-
logical competencies, online environment management competencies, and online teacher
interactional competencies, combined with the CIC required for the F2F classroom, or
e-CIC, in order for them to effectively use interaction to mediate and assist language
learning in online synchronous lessons. The study has important implications for both
teachers and teacher educators. For teachers, it is important they recognise the additional
competencies they need to mediate and facilitate interaction during SOLs, identified in
this study, and actively explore them in relation to their own context and practices.
Teachers can do this by collecting and analysing evidence from their own SOLs in the
form of a video-recording or audio-recording, self-observation or peer-observation
(Walsh, 2019). For teacher educators, it is imperative that they utilise the findings of this
study and others (e.g., Cheung, 2021; Moorhouse and Beaumont, 2020), to support
teachers who either by choice or by circumstance, find themselves teaching synchro-
nously online to adapt and adjust to this different environment.
While this study has provided some important findings, providing an initial under-
standing of the competencies that teachers’ need to utilise interaction in SOLs, it has
methodological limitations. The study used a self-reporting online mixed-method sur-
vey. This is appropriate for the exploratory nature of the study; however, it cannot accu-
rately report on teachers’ actual practices. As interaction is conducted within unique
classroom contexts and involves a complex combination of factors (Walsh, 2013), it is
important that future studies collect data of teachers’ actual SOLs through observations
Moorhouse et al. 127

of lessons and conducting conversation analysis (Seedhouse, 2004). This will allow for
a more detailed understanding of e-CIC.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/
or publication of this article.

Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.

ORCID iD
Benjamin Luke Moorhouse https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3913-5194

References
Allwright RL (1984) The importance of interaction in classroom language learning. Applied
Linguistics 5(2): 156–171.
Bozkurt A, Jung I, Xiao J, et al. (2020) A global outlook to the interruption of education due
to COVID-19 Pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of
Distance Education 15(1): 1–126.
Braun V, Clarke V, Boulton E, et al. (2020) The online survey as a qualitative research tool.
International Journal of Social Research Methodology. Epub ahead of print 16 August 2020.
DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2020.1805550
Buchanan H and Timmis I (2019) Classroom management: Art, craft or science? In: Walsh S and
Mann S (eds) The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teacher Education. London:
Routledge, 319–334.
Cheung A (2021) Language teaching during a pandemic: A case study of zoom use by a second-
ary ESL teacher in Hong Kong. RELC Journal. Epub ahead of print 23 January 2021. DOI:
10.1177/0033688220981784
Cohen L, Manion L and Morrison K (2011) Research Methods in Education. 7th edition. London:
Routledge
González-Lloret M (2020) Collaborative tasks for online language teaching. Foreign Language
Annals 53(2): 260–269.
Hafner C (2019) Digital literacies for English language learners. In: Gao XS (ed.) Second
Handbook of English Language Teaching. Singapore: Springer International Handbooks of
Education, 1–19.
Ismail SS and Abdulla SA (2019) Virtual flipped classroom: New teaching model to grant the
learners knowledge and motivation. Journal of Technology and Science Education 9(2):
168–183.
Kohnke L and Moorhouse BL (2020) Facilitating synchronous online language learning through
zoom. RELC Journal. Epub ahead of print 30 August 2021. DOI: 10.1177/0033688220937235
Mercer N, Dawes L and Staarman JK (2009) Dialogic teaching in the primary science classroom.
Language and Education 23(4): 353–369.
Moorhouse BL (2020) Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course ‘forced’
online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching 46(4): 609–611.
128 RELC Journal 54(1)

Moorhouse BL and Beaumont AM (2020) Utilizing video conferencing software to teach young
language learners in Hong Kong during the COVID-19 class suspensions. TESOL Journal,
11(3): 1–6.
Payne JS (2020) Developing L2 productive language skills online and the strategic use of instruc-
tional tools. Foreign Language Annals 53(2): 243–249.
Peachey N (2017) Synchronous online teaching. In: Carrier M, Damerow RM and Bailey KM
(eds) Digital Language Learning and Teaching: Research, Theory, and Practice. New York:
Routledge, 153–155.
Rehn N, Maor D and McConney A (2018) The specific skills required of teachers who deliver
K–12 distance education courses by synchronous videoconference: Implications for training
and professional development. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 27(4): 417–429.
Seedhouse P (2004) The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation
Analysis Perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Inc.
Tsui AB (1985) Analyzing input and interaction in second language classrooms. RELC Journal
16(1): 8–30.
Walsh S (2006) Investigating Classroom Discourse. London: Routledge.
Walsh S (2013) Classroom Discourse and Teacher Development. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Walsh S (2019) SETTVEO: Evidence-based Reflection and Teacher Development. London: British
Council.
Walsh S and Li L (2012) Conversations as space for learning. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics 23(2): 247–266.