Attitudes Toward Back-channeling in Iranian EFL Online Vs. Regular Classes

Document Type : Article

Authors

Department of English, Isfahan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Due to the vital role of back channels in mutual understanding and their use in many aspects of language learning, the present study investigated the attitudes toward back-channeling in Iranian EFL online versus regular classes. The study was quasi-experimental in design, with interviews and recording of course sessions by ZDF Soft Screen Recorder and the voice Memos application in both classes to measure the duration of silence, TTT (Teacher Talk Time), STT (Student Talk Time), BC (Back Channels), and other activities such as TCS (Teachers' Code-Switching), SCS (Students’ Code-Witching), S (the time passed in silence). In doing so, two online classes included 30, two regular ones included 27, and four English teachers of the participants were randomly selected from the Kanoon Language Institute in Isfahan, Iran, to take part in the study. Learners received four and a half hours of instruction per week within the course period. In the next step, all the data gathered was analyzed and statistically addressed by using, IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 26) software. The results revealed back channels had positive effects on learners in both classes. Besides, teachers and learners had positive attitudes toward using back channels, however, in online classes, learners were more willing to use back channels. The findings of this study could be fruitful for improvement with well-designed materials and explicitly teaching back channels, which can provide opportunities for learners to express their emotions, and ideas, and enhance their strengths.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Ally, M., & Samaka, M. (2013). Open education resources and mobile technology to narrow the learning divide. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(2), 14-27.
Bavelas, J. B., & Gerwing, J. (2011). The listener as addressee in face-to-face dialogue. International Journal of Listening, 25(3), 178-198.
Bavelas, J. B., & Chovil, N. (2000). Visible acts of meaning: An integrated message model of language in face-to-face dialogue. Journal of Language and social Psychology, 19(2), 163-194.
Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2000). Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of personality and social psychology, 79(6), 941.
Bertrand, R., Ferré, G., Blache, P., Espesser, R., & Rauzy, S. (2007, August). Backchannels revisited from a multimodal perspective. In Auditory-visual Speech Processing (pp. 1-5).
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Carpenter, J. P. (2015). Digital backchannels: Giving every student a voice. Educational leadership, 72(8), 54-58.
Chahooshi, M., & Rezvani, R. (2018). A Comparative Investigation of the Backchanneling Strategy in English Language Textbooks for Iranian School Students. Journal of Studies in Learning and Teaching English, 7(1), 23-45.
Chalak, A. (2021). Power dominance and interaction features in Iranian EFL teachers’ classroom discourse. Language Related Research, 12(5). https://doi.org/10.29252/LRR.12.5.14
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Observation. In Research methods in education (pp. 542-562). Routledge.
Chovil, N. (1991). Social determinants of facial displays. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 15, 141-154.
Clark, H. H., & Krych, M. A. (2004). Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding. Journal of memory and language, 50(1), 62-81.
Clark, H. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1982). Audience design in meaning and reference. In Advances in psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 287-299). North-Holland.
Clark, H. H., & Krych, M. A. (2004). Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding. Journal of memory and language, 50(1), 62-81.
Donahue, R. T. (1998). Japanese culture and communication: Critical cultural analysis. University Press of America.
Duncan Jr, S., & Niederehe, G. (1974). On signalling that it's your turn to speak. Journal of experimental social psychology, 10(3), 234-247.
Duncan, S., Brunner, L. J., & Fiske, D. W. (1979). Strategy signals in face-to-face interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(2), 301.
Farahian, M., & Rezaee, M. (2012). A case study of an EFL teacher's type of questions: An investigation into classroom interaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 161-167.
Fujimoto, D. T. (2009). Listener responses in interaction: A case for abandoning the term, backchannel.
Glessmer, M. S., Pick, M. A., & Göttsch, P. (2014). Enabling backchannel communication between a lecturer and a large group. In Proceedings of the 42nd SEFI Conference (pp. 1–8). Retrieved from https://www2.tuhh.de/zll/wp-content/uploads/0101-Glessmer.pdf
Goodwin, C. (1986). Gestures as a resource for the organization of mutual orientation.
Harunasari, S. Y., & Rahmat, A. (2015). CALL-Based Instruction Model Of Speaking English (A Developmental Research at the English Language Education Study Program of STKIP Kusuma Negara, Jakarta). IJLECR (International Journal of Language Education and Cultural Review), 1(1), 65-78.
Harunasari, S. Y., & Halim, N. (2019). Digital Backchannel: Promoting Students' Engagement in EFL Large Class. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn., 14(7), 163-178.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning: Introduction. Studies in second language acquisition, 27(2), 129-140.
Inamullah, H. M., & Hussain, I. (2008). Direct influence of English teachers in the teaching learning process. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(4), 29-36.
Iwasaki, S. (1997). The Northridge earthquake conversations: The floor structure and the ‘loop’sequence in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(6), 661-693.
Jailani, J., Sugiman, S., & Apino, E. (2017). Implementing the problem-based learning in order to improve the students’ HOTS and characters. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 4(2), 247-259.
Jokinen, K. (2009). Gaze and gesture activity in communication. In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Intelligent and Ubiquitous Interaction Environments: 5th International Conference, UAHCI 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19-24, 2009. Proceedings, Part II 5 (pp. 537-546). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Kassner, L. D., & Cassada, K. M. (2017). Chat it up: Backchanneling to promote reflective practice among in-service teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(4), 160-168.
Lambertz, K. (2011). Back-channelling: The use of yeah and mm to portray engaged listenership. Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication, 4(1/2), 11-18.
Maynard, S. (1997). Analysing Interactional Management in native/non-native English Conversation: A case of listener response in IRAL. XXXV/1.
McClave, E. Z. (2000). Linguistic functions of head movements in the context of speech. Journal of pragmatics, 32(7), 855-878.
Miyata, S., & Nisisawa, H. Y. (2007). The acquisition of Japanese backchanneling behavior: Observing the emergence of aizuchi in a Japanese boy. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(7), 1255-1274.
Norrick, N. R. (2012). Listening practices in English conversation: The responses responses elicit. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(5), 566-576.
Prastikawati, E. F., & Adi, A. P. K. (2020, March). Backchannel as an online HOTS-based formative assessment to improve students’ reading skills. In 2nd International Conference on Education and Social Science Research (ICESRE 2019) (pp. 95-100). Atlantis Press.Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1978). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. In Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 7-55). Academic Press.
Seliger, H. W., Shohamy, E. G., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research methods. Oxford University Press.
Senk, K. M. (1997). Analyzing interactional management in native/non-native English conversation: A case of listener response. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 35(1), 37.
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’and other things that come between sentences. Analyzing discourse: Text and talk, 71, 71-93.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382.
Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on language and social interaction, 41(1), 31-57.
Sutton, J. N., Palen, L., & Shklovski, I. (2008). Backchannels on the front lines: Emergency uses of social media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires.
Tao, H., & Thompson, S. A. (1991). English backchannels in Mandarin conversations: A case study of superstratum pragmatic ‘interference’. Journal of pragmatics, 16(3), 209-223.
Tolins, J., & Tree, J. E. F. (2014). Addressee backchannels steer narrative development. Journal of Pragmatics, 70, 152-164.
White, H. (1989). Learning in artificial neural networks: A statistical perspective. Neural computation, 1(4), 425-464.
Wolf, M., & Stoodley, C. J. (2008). Proust and the squid: The story and science of the reading brain (p. 336). New York: Harper Perennial.
Yardi, S. (2006). The role of the backchannel in collaborative learning environments.
Yngve, V. H. (1970). On getting a word in edgewise. In Papers from the sixth regional meeting Chicago Linguistic Society, April 16-18, 1970, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago (pp. 567-578).
Zohrabi, M., Torabi, M. A., & Baybourdiani, P. (2012). Teacher-centered and/or student-centered learning: English language in Iran. English language and literature studies, 2(3), 18.
JELT Journal | Farhangian University
Volume 2, Issue 2 - Serial Number 1024202
A Tribute to Ghaffar Tajalli, an Iranian Famous English professor and author.
September 2023
Pages 115-141

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics