Teachers’ Stimulated Recall Reflections on their Negotiation of Meaning Strategies

Abstract

Classroom interaction is a challenging yet crucial part of language teaching, where teachers play a critical role in successful learning. Teachers' awareness of interaction strategies, such as negotiation of meaning strategies, including when and how to implement them, significantly affects learning outcomes, and reflective practices like stimulated recall interviews (SRIs) can effectively develop their awareness. Thus, the research aims to find out the EFL teachers' negotiation of meaning strategy (NfM) use reflected in stimulated recall interviews (SRIs) and the effect of awareness-raising activity on the negotiation of meaning strategies on teacher's reflections. The research participants are two in-service EFL teachers working at a private university in Türkiye. This research uses a mixed-method explanatory sequential design in a quasi-experimental framework. Teachers completed two SRIs, and between the interviews, they participated in an awareness-raising activity where they were informed about NfM strategies. In the light of qualitative and quantitative analysis, it is revealed that after the awareness-raising activity, the number and the type of NfM strategies increased. Furthermore, it was found that teachers demonstrated initiation in starting reflections and took more deliberate actions in the strategy choices. It could be stressed that teachers' reflections, as in SRIs, serve as a valuable tool for professional development opportunities to think, reflect, and improve their teaching, helping learners' language learning. These findings suggest that such awareness-raising activities positively impact teachers' professional development, classroom interaction, and, ultimately, student learning experiences.

Keywords

• negotiation of meaning
• stimulated recall interview
• classroom interaction
• awareness-raising activity
• teacher reflection

Öğretmenlerin Anlam Söyleşmesi Stratejileri Üzerine Uyarılmış Hatırlama Yansımaları

Abstract

Sınıf içi etkileşim, dil öğretiminin zorlu fakat hayati bir parçasıdır ve öğretmenler başarılı öğrenme sürecinde kritik bir rol oynar. Öğretmenlerin, ne zaman ve nasıl uygulanacağını bilmeleri gereken anlam söyleşmesi stratejileri gibi etkileşim stratejilerinin farkında olmalarının, öğrenme çıktıları üzerinde önemli bir etkisi vardır. Uyarılmış hatırlama görüşmeleri gibi yansıtıcı uygulamalar, bu farkındalığı geliştirmede etkili olabilir. Bu nedenle bu araştırma, uyarılmış hatırlama görüşmeleri aracılığıyla İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğreten öğretmenlerin anlam söyleşmesi stratejilerini nasıl kullandıklarını ve bu stratejilerle ilgili farkındalık kazandırıcı bir etkinliğin öğretmen yansımalarına etkisini ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Katılımcılar, Türkiye’deki özel bir üniversitede çalışan iki hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenidir. Araştırmada, yarı deneysel bir çerçevede açıklayıcı sıralı karma yöntem deseni kullanılmıştır. Öğretmenler iki uyarılmış hatırlama görüşmesi oturumuna katılmış, bu görüşmeler arasında ise anlam söyleşmesi stratejileri hakkında bilgilendirildikleri bir farkındalık kazandırıcı etkinliğe katılmışlardır. Nitel ve nicel analizler ışığında, farkındalık kazandırıcı etkinlik sonrası anlam söyleşmesi stratejilerinin sayısında ve türünde artış gözlemlenmiştir. Ayrıca öğretmenlerin yansıtmalara başlama konusunda inisiyatif gösterdiği ve strateji seçimlerinde daha bilinçli hareket ettikleri tespit edilmiştir. Uyarılmış hatırlama görüşmesi gibi öğretmen yansımalarının, öğretmenlerin düşünmelerine, yansıtmalarına ve öğretimlerini geliştirmelerine olanak tanıyarak öğrencilerin dil öğrenimine yardımcı olan mesleki gelişim fırsatları sunduğu çıkarımı yapılabilir. Bu bulgular, bu tür farkındalık kazandırıcı etkinliklerin öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimleri, sınıf içi etkileşimleri ve nihayetinde öğrenci öğrenme deneyimleri üzerinde olumlu etkiler yarattığını göstermektedir.

Keywords

• anlam söyleşmesi
• uyarılmış hatırlama görüşmesi
• sınıf içi etkileşim
• farkındalık kazandırıcı etkinlik
• öğretmen yansımaları

References

1. Andon, N., & Eckerth, J. (2009). Chacun à son goût? Task-based L2 pedagogy from the teacher’s point of view. Language Teaching Research, 13(2), 169–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809103465
2. August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Bitchener, J. (2012). A reflection on “the language learning potential” of written CF. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 348–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.006
4. Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. Continuum.
5. Borko, H., Jacobs, J., & Koellner, K. (2020). Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development. In International encyclopedia of education (7th ed., pp. 548–556). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00638-0
6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
7. Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. National Staff Development Council.
8. Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology, with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3602_5

9. Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge.
10. Farrell, T. S. C. (2013). Reflective practice in ESL teacher development groups: From practices to principles. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137317193
11. Fernández-García, M., & Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2014). Native speaker–nonnative speaker study abroad conversations: Do they provide feedback and opportunities for pushed output? System, 42, 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.11.006
12. Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 402–430. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami014
13. Freeman, D. (2016). Educating second language teachers. Oxford University Press.
14. Garcia, M. (2007). Negotiation of meaning in teacher–student interactions. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074604
15. Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2017). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research (2nd ed.). Routledge.
17. Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1985). Task variation and nonnative/nonnative negotiation of meaning. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 149–161). Newbury House.
18. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
19. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512
20. Hartono, H., & Ihsan, D. (2016). Negotiation of meaning strategies in EFL classrooms. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 108–117. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v6i1.2741
21. Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.
22. Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.126
23. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.
24. Lyle, J. (2003). Stimulated recall: A report on its use in naturalistic research. British Educational Research Journal, 29(6), 861–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192032000137349
25. Lyle, J. (2018). Understanding stimulated recall methodology. In N. Dempsey & A. Costley (Eds.), Researching reflective practice (pp. 71–85). Routledge.
26. Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 269–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060128
27. Meade, A., Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2021). Researching language learning motivation: A concise guide. Routledge.
28. Meydan, A., & Akkaş, H. (2024). The role of triangulation in qualitative research: Converging perspectives. [Unpublished manuscript].
29. Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher–learner negotiation in content-based instruction: Communication at cross-purposes? Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 286–325. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.3.286
30. Nakahama, Y., Tyler, A., & van Lier, L. (2001). Negotiation of meaning in conversational and information gap activities: A comparative discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 377–405. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588028
31. Nakatsukasa, K., & Loewen, S. (2017). A teacher’s first language use in form-focused episodes in Spanish as a foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12399
32. Naughton, D. (2020). Interactional feedback and the negotiation of meaning in the foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 445–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818787546
33. Nichols, P. C., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51(4), 719–758. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00168
34. Pica, T. (2005). Classroom learning, teaching, and research: A task-based perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 89(3), 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00308.x
35. Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985). Input and interaction in the communicative language classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. Language Learning, 35(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1985.tb01013.x
36. Sato, M., & Loewen, S. (2018). Metacognitive instruction enhances the effectiveness of corrective feedback: Variable effects of feedback types and linguistic targets. Language Learning, 68(2), 507–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12283
37. 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. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041
38. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
39. Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh University Press.
40. Sezgin, S. (2024). Negotiated meaning in online classes for podcasts in student–student interaction. Journal of Language and Learning, 10(3), 78–101.
41. Shi, L. (1998). Negotiation of meaning in teacher-led and student-led discussions. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 85–112. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587905
42. Shim, S. (2007). A study of the use of negotiation of meaning strategies in synchronous computer-mediated communication. English Teaching, 62(4), 3–31.
43. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press.
44. Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Routledge.
45. Vásquez, C., & Harvey, J. (2010). Raising teachers’ awareness about corrective feedback through research replication. Language Awareness, 19(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410903431721
46. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
47. Wagner, J. (1996). Foreign language acquisition through interaction: A critical review of research on conversational adjustments. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00038-0
48. Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring classroom discourse: Language in action. Routledge.
49. Walsh, S. (2013). Classroom discourse and teacher development. Edinburgh Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 22, 1–12.
50. Yazan, B. (2018). Conducting qualitative research of language teacher cognition: A sociocultural perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 52(3), 706–732. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.449
51. Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. U.S. Department of Education.