Test taker-initiated repairs in an English oral proficiency exam for international teaching assistants

Stephanie Hyeri Kim; Innhwa Park

doi:10.1515/text-2014-0036

Article

Test taker-initiated repairs in an English oral proficiency exam for international teaching assistants

Stephanie Hyeri Kim
Stephanie Hyeri Kim received her PhD in Applied Linguistics from UCLA, and is currently Assistant Professor of Linguistics/TESL at California State University, Northridge. Her research interests include situated uses of language in everyday life and institutional settings, and their applications to language teaching and learning. She has recently published in the Journal of Pragmatics, Research on Language and Social Interaction, and Discourse Processes.
and Innhwa Park
Innhwa Park received her PhD in Applied Linguistics from UCLA, and is currently Assistant Professor in the Department of Languages and Cultures at West Chester University. Her teaching and research interests include writing pedagogy, educational discourse, and conversation analysis. She has recently published her research in Discourse Studies, Language and Education, and Journal of Pragmatics.

Published/Copyright: February 27, 2015

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Text & Talk Volume 35 Issue 2

Abstract

This paper is a conversation-analytic examination of video-recorded interactions between questioners and test takers during an English oral proficiency exam for international teaching assistants (ITAs). We focus on the test takers’ repair strategies identified in our data, and describe how distinct repair strategies influence the repair solution in the next turn. The test takers’ open-class repair initiator (e.g., “sorry?”) is likely to be treated as a hearing problem, and thus is responded to with the questioners’ repetition of the question. In contrast, the test takers’ targeted repair initiator (e.g., “what do you mean by x?”) is likely to be treated as an understanding problem, and thus is responded to with the questioners’ reformulation of the question. This reformulation generally helps the test takers successfully respond to the question despite the initial understanding problem. The findings have implications for teaching oral communication skills to ITAs, repair strategies in particular. They also contribute to improving performance-based oral proficiency exam by introducing different sequential trajectories that emerge from problems in hearing or understanding.

Keywords: repair; repetition; reformulation; international teaching assistant; oral proficiency exam; conversation analysis

About the authors

Stephanie Hyeri Kim

Stephanie Hyeri Kim received her PhD in Applied Linguistics from UCLA, and is currently Assistant Professor of Linguistics/TESL at California State University, Northridge. Her research interests include situated uses of language in everyday life and institutional settings, and their applications to language teaching and learning. She has recently published in the Journal of Pragmatics, Research on Language and Social Interaction, and Discourse Processes.

Innhwa Park

Innhwa Park received her PhD in Applied Linguistics from UCLA, and is currently Assistant Professor in the Department of Languages and Cultures at West Chester University. Her teaching and research interests include writing pedagogy, educational discourse, and conversation analysis. She has recently published her research in Discourse Studies, Language and Education, and Journal of Pragmatics.

Acknowledgments

The authors contributed equally to this work. Earlier versions of the paper were presented at the 2011 Second Language Research Forum, Ames, IA, and the 2012 American Association of Applied Linguistics Convention, Boston, MA. We would like to thank the UCLA Office of Instructional Development for allowing us to use the data. In particular, we are grateful for the help of Kumiko Hass, Ikkyu Choi, and Jonathan Schmidgall.

Appendix

Transcription conventions

[: The point where overlapping talk starts
]: The point where overlapping talk ends
=: Contiguous utterances (no break or gap)
(0.5): Length of silence in tenths of a second
(.): Micro-pause; hearably a silence but not readily measurable
.: Falling, or final intonation; not necessarily the end of a sentence
?: Rising intonation; not necessarily a question
,: Continuing intonation
¿: A rise stronger than a comma but weaker than a question mark
:: Sound stretch
-: Cut-off or self-interruption
word: Underlining indicates some form of stress or emphasis
_:: Inflected falling intonation contour
:: Inflected rising intonation contour
< >: A stretch of talk is markedly slowed or drawn out
hhh: Laughter, or hearable exhalation or aspiration (outbreaths); the more h’s, the more aspiration
.hhh: Hearable inhalation or inbreath
(()): Transcriber’s remarks
(word): Uncertainty on the transcriber’s part

References

Anderson-Hsieh, Janet & KoehlerKoehler. 1988. The effect of foreign accent and speaking rate on native speaker comprehension. Language Learn38. 561–570.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1988.tb00167.xSearch in Google Scholar

Axelson, Elizabeth, & CarolynMadden. 1994. Discourse strategies for ITAs across instructional contexts. In CarolynMadden & MyersCynthia (eds.), Discourse and performance of international teaching assistants, 153–187. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.Search in Google Scholar

Bailey, Kathleen M. 1984. The “foreign TA problem. In Kathleen M.Bailey, FrankPialorsi & JaenZukowski/Faust (eds.), Foreign teaching assistants in US universities, 3–16. Washington, DC: National Association for Foreign Student Affairs.Search in Google Scholar

Bell, Nathan E. 2011. Graduate enrollment and degrees: 2000 to 2010. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools.Search in Google Scholar

Bernhardt, Elizabeth. 1987. Training foreign teaching assistants: Cultural differences. College Teaching35. 67–69.10.1080/87567555.1987.10532369Search in Google Scholar

Canale, Michael. 1983. From communicative competence to language pedagogy. In Jack C. Richards & Richards W. Schmidt (eds.), Language and communication, 2–28. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Canale, Michael, & MerrillSwain. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language testing and teaching. Applied Linguistics1(1). 1–47.10.1093/applin/1.1.1Search in Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne. 2007. Rethinking the role of communicative competence in language teaching. In EvaAlcon Soler & Maria Pilar SafontJorda (eds.), The intercultural language use and language learning, 41–58. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-5639-0_3Search in Google Scholar

Chiang, Shiao-Yun, & Han-FuMi. 2008. Reformulation as a strategy for managing “understanding uncertainty” in the office-hour interactions between international teaching assistants and American college students. Intercultural Education19(3). 269–281.10.1080/14675980802078640Search in Google Scholar

Drew, Paul. 1997. Open” class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics28. 69–101.10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7Search in Google Scholar

Egbert, Maria. 1998. Miscommunication in language proficiency interviews of first-year German students: A comparison with natural conversation. In RichardYoung & Agnes W.He (eds.), Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency, 147–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.14.10egbSearch in Google Scholar

Egbert, Maria, AndreaGolato & JefferyRobinson. 2009. Repairing reference. In JackSidnell (ed.), Conversation analysis: Comparative perspectives, 104–132. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511635670.005Search in Google Scholar

Farnsworth, Timothy. 2004. The effect of teaching skills on holistic ratings of language ability in performance tests for international teaching assistant selection. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Los Angeles MA thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Gaskill, William. 1980. Correction in native speaker–nonnative speaker conversation. In DianeLarsen-Freeman (ed.), Discourse analysis in second language research, 125–137. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar

Gorsuch, Greta, Colleen M.Meyers, LucyPickering & Dale T.Griffee. 2010. English communication for international teaching assistants. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gravois, John. 2005. Teach impediment. The Chronicle of Higher Education51(31). A10.Search in Google Scholar

He, Agnes W. 1998. Answering questions in LPIs: A case study. In RichardYoung & Agens W. He (eds.), Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral language proficiency, 101–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.14.08heSearch in Google Scholar

Heritage, John. 1984a. Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John. 1984b. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J.Maxwell Atkinson & JohnHeritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.020Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John, & Marja-LeenaSorjonen. 1994. Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society23. 1–29.10.1017/S0047404500017656Search in Google Scholar

Hinofotis, Frances B. & Kathleen M.Bailey. 1980. American undergraduates’ reactions to the communication skills of foreign teaching assistants. In Janet C.Fisher, Mark A.Clarke & JacquelynSchachter (eds.), On TESOL ’80 – Building bridges: Research and practice in teaching English as a second language, 120–133. Washington, DC: TESOL.Search in Google Scholar

Hosoda, Yuri. 2000. Other-repair in Japanese conversations between nonnative and native speakers. Issues in Applied Linguistics11. 39–65.10.5070/L4111005023Search in Google Scholar

Jia, Cailun, & Amy A.Bergerson. 2008. Understanding the international teaching assistant training program: A case study at a northwestern research university. International Education37(2). 77–98.Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, Marysia. 2001. The art of non-conversation: A reexamination of the oral proficiency interview. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriel. 1985. Repair in foreign language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition7. 200–215.10.1017/S0272263100005374Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriel. 2006. Beyond repair: Conversation analysis as an approach to SLA. AILA Review19. 83–99.10.1075/aila.19.07kasSearch in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriel & StevenRoss. 2003. Repetition as source of miscommunication in oral proficiency interviews. In JulianeHouse, GabrielKasper & StevenRoss (eds.), Misunderstanding in social life: Discourse approaches to problematic talk, 82–106. Harlow: Longman/Pearson Education.Search in Google Scholar

Kurhila, Salla. 2006. Second language interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.145Search in Google Scholar

Liebscher, Grit & JenniferDailey-O’Cain. 2003. Conversational repair as a role-defining mechanism in classroom. The Modern Language Journal87. 375–390.10.1111/1540-4781.00196Search in Google Scholar

Macbeth, Douglas. 2004. The relevance of repair for classroom correction. Language in Society33. 703–736.10.1017/S0047404504045038Search in Google Scholar

Marvasti, Akbar. 2005. US academic institutions and perceived effectiveness of foreign-born faculty. Journal of Economic Issues39(1). 151–176.10.1080/00213624.2005.11506784Search in Google Scholar

McHoul, A. W. 1990. The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society19. 349–377.10.1017/S004740450001455XSearch in Google Scholar

Mehan, Hugh. 1979. Language lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Nakamura, Ian. 2008. Understanding how teacher and student talk with each other: An exploration of how “repair” displays the co-management of talk-in-interaction. Language Teaching Research12(2). 265–283.10.1177/1362168807086295Search in Google Scholar

Pickering, Lucy. 2004. The structure and function of intonational paragraphs in native and nonnative speaker instructional discourse. English for Specific Purposes23. 19–43.10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00020-6Search in Google Scholar

Plakans, Barbara S. & Roberta G.Abraham. 1990. The testing and evaluation of international teaching assistants. In DanDouglas (ed.), English language testing in US colleges and universities, 68–81. Washington, DC: NAFSA.Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, Jeffrey. 2013. Epistemics, action formation, and other-initiation of repair: The case of partial questioning repeats. In MakotoHayashi, GeoffreyRaymond & JackSidnell (eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding, 261–292. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511757464.009Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, Jeffrey & HeidiKevoe-Feldman. 2010. Using full repeats to initiate repair on others’ questions. Research on Language and Social Interaction43(3). 232–259.10.1080/08351813.2010.497990Search in Google Scholar

Rubin, Donald L. 1993. The other half of international teaching assistant teaching: Classroom communication workshops for international students. Innovative Higher Education17. 183–193.10.1007/BF00915600Search in Google Scholar

Sacks Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff & Gail.Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language50(4). 696–735.10.1353/lan.1974.0010Search in Google Scholar

Savignon, Sandra J. 2007. Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead?Journal of Pragmatics39. 207–220.10.1016/j.pragma.2006.09.004Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2000. When “others” initiate repair. Applied Linguistics21(2). 205–243.10.1093/applin/21.2.205Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel A.2007. Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791208Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel, GailJefferson & HarveySacks. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53(2). 361–382.10.1353/lan.1977.0041Search in Google Scholar

Seedhouse, Paul & MariaEgbert. 2006. The interactional organization of the IELTS speaking test. IELTS Research Reports6. 1–45.Search in Google Scholar

Seo, Mi-Sook & IreneKoshik. 2010. A conversation analytic study of gestures that engender repair in ESL conversational tutoring. Journal of Pragmatics42. 2219–2239.10.1016/j.pragma.2010.01.021Search in Google Scholar

Sinclair, John M. & R.Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Svennevig, Jan. 2008. Trying the easiest solution first in other-initiation of repair. Journal of Pragmatics40. 333–348.10.1016/j.pragma.2007.11.007Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, Andrea. 1995. The co-construction of cross-cultural miscommunication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition17. 129–152.10.1017/S0272263100014133Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, Andrea A., AnnJefferies & Catharine E.Davies. 1988. The effect of discourse structuring devices on listener perceptions of coherence in non-native university teacher’s spoken discourse. World Englishes7. 101–110.10.1111/j.1467-971X.1988.tb00223.xSearch in Google Scholar

Van Lier, Leo. 1988. The classroom and the language learner: Ethnography and second language classroom research. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, Jessica. 1992. Planning, discourse marking, and the comprehensibility of international teaching assistants. TESOL Quarterly26. 693–711.10.2307/3586869Search in Google Scholar

Wong, Jessica. 2000. Delayed next turn repair initiation in native/nonnative speaker English conversation. Applied Linguistics21. 244–267.10.1093/applin/21.2.244Search in Google Scholar

Wong, Jean & Hansun Z.Waring. 2010. Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9780203852347Search in Google Scholar

Young, Richard and Agnes W.He. 1998. Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.14Search in Google Scholar

Young, Richard & Elizabeth R.Miller. 2004. Learning as changing participation: Discourse roles in ESL writing conferences. The Modern Language Journal88(4). 519–535.10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.t01-16-.xSearch in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-2-27

Published in Print: 2015-3-1

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0036

Keywords for this article

repair; repetition; reformulation; international teaching assistant; oral proficiency exam; conversation analysis