Cover not available
Commentary published In:
Describing and assessing interactional competence in a second language: Special issue of the journal of Applied Pragmatics 5:2 (2023)
Edited by Emma Betz, Taiane Malabarba and Dagmar Barth-Weingarten
[Applied Pragmatics 5:2] 2023
► pp. 273–279
Commentary

Nobody said it was going to be easy! (Practical) considerations in assessing interactional competence in the classroom

ORCID logo | Monash University,
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.CA-SLA, IC, and applied CA and their implications for assessment
  • 3.The testing principles
  • 4.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 28 February 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00017.fil
References (15)
References
Deppermann, A., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2021). Longitudinal conversation analysis – Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 54 (2), 127–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. K., Hellermann, J., & Pekarek-Doehler, S. (Eds.). (2011). L2 Interactional competence and development. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huth, T. (2021). Conceptualizing interactional learning targets for the second language curriculum. In S. Kunitz, O. Sert, & N. Markee (Eds.), Emerging issues in classroom discourse and interaction: Theoretical and applied CA perspectives on pedagogy (pp. 359–382). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huth, T., & Taleghani-Nikazm, C. (2006). How can insights from conversation analysis be directly applied to teaching L2 pragmatics? Language Teaching Research, 10 (1), 53–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huth, T., Betz, E., & Taleghani-Nikazm, C. (2019). Rethinking language teacher training: Steps for making talk-in-interaction research accessible to practitioners. Classroom Discourse, 10 (1), 99–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kley, K. (2019). What counts as evidence for interactional competence? Developing rating criteria for a German classroom-based paired speaking test. In M. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice (pp. 291–321). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kunitz, S. (2018). L1/L2 alternation practices in students’ task planning. In A. Filipi & N. Markee (Eds.), Conversation analysis and language alternation: Capturing transitions in the classroom (pp. 107–128). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markee, N., & Kasper, G. (2004). Classroom talks: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 88 (4), 491–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2021). Toward a coherent understanding of L2 interactional competence: Epistemologies of language learning and teaching. In S. Kunitz, O. Sert, & N. Markee (Eds.), Emerging issues in classroom discourse and interaction: Theoretical and applied CA perspectives on pedagogy (pp. 19–36). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, S., Wagner, J., & González-Martínez, E. (Eds.). (2018). Longitudinal studies on the organization of social interaction. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandlund, E., & Greer, T. (2020). How do raters understand rubrics for assessing L2 interactional engagement? A comparative study of CA- and non-CA-formulated performance descriptors. Papers in Language Testing and Assessment, 9 (1), 128–163.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tran, Q. H. (2018). Language alternation during L2 classroom discussion tasks. In A. Filipi & N. Markee (Eds.), Conversation analysis and language alternation: Capturing transitions in the classroom (pp. 165–182). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walters, F. S. (2021). Some considerations regarding validation in CA-informed oral testing for the L2 classroom. In S. Kunitz, O. Sert, & N. Markee (Eds.), Emerging issues in classroom discourse and interaction: Theoretical and applied CA perspectives on pedagogy (pp. 383–406). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wei, L. (2018). Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics, 39 (1), 9–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar