3.1.1 Conversational analysis concepts .......................... 20
3.1.2 Interactional competence ............................... 21
4 Results and Discussion ............................... 26
4.1 Engagement Level .......................... 26
4.2 Idea Sharing ..................................... 29
4.3 Reciprocal Feedback .................. 35
5 Conclusion ........................... 40
5.1 Major Findings ..................................... 40
5.2 Pedagogical Implications .......................... 40
5.3 Limitations and Future Research .................... 41
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Engagement Level
The significance level of the control group in the pretest (M=0.826, SD=0.383) and posttest (M=0.739, SD=0.444) is .290>.05(table 2), and that of the experimental group in the pretest (M=0.711, SD=0.458) and posttest (M=0.911, SD=0.288) is .003<.05(table 3). Besides, non-parametric test shows that the significance level of control (M=0.824, SD=0.383) and experimental (M=1.495, SD=0.503) groups in the posttest is .032<.05(table 3). It illustrates that the training has an apparent effect on increasing average turn length of short response tokens, enhancing engagement level of learners in the experimental group.
5 Conclusion
5.1 Major Findings
This study is conducted in college English class. It is to explore the feasibility and effectiveness of CA concepts adopted as the training content of college English classroom to improve learner’s IC. It is found that CA concepts can be trained. Major findings are summarized as follows:
First, CA concepts training has an effect on students’ engagement level. To be specific, the experimental group have the significant difference on average turn length. Compared with the control group, the average turn length of short response tokens and adjacency pairs in the experimental group increases significantly. However, there is no significant difference on average turn length of assessments. That because Chinese students lack rich input, thus lacking diverse output of language.
Second, the training has a positive effect on idea sharing. To put this more concretely, there is the significant difference regarding adjacency pairs between the experimental and control group. Adjacency pairs of questions and answers are more employed by students in the experimental group to share their ideas in group interaction.
Third, the training has a positive effect on reciprocal feedback. In other words, compared with the control group, the experimental group have the significant difference on using short response tokens and assessments per minute. They are two important subcategories of reciprocal feedback and they are used more by students in the experimental group to give more reciprocal feedback in group inter
