Student-Initiated Questions in English as a Medium of Instruction Classrooms in a Turkish Higher Education Setting
Özet
This study investigates student-initiated questions in English as a medium of
instruction (EMI) interaction in a higher education setting. Although there is a
growing body of research on EMI, classroom interactions occurring in this
institutional setting are still underinvestigated. Considering the importance of
learner-generated questions, which can promote autonomous inquiry-based
learning as well as be diagnostic of students’ learning in content-based classrooms,
no study has been found conducted on the phenomenon at hand in full EMI settings.
Motivated by this research gap, the current study seeks to understand how
participants initiate and handle knowledge gaps. It particularly focuses on the
instances where student-initiated questions are constructed and managed by the
students and the teacher, respectively. More specific research questions concern
what the distinctive features of these learner-generated questions are and what kind
of interactional resources participants use in the instances of knowledge gaps. The
data for this study comprise video data recorded in twelve weeks with three
cameras. The data come from a corpus of 30 hours of video-recorded interaction in
two content classrooms at an EMI university in Turkey. The participants (n=78) are
fourth year undergraduate students in the Faculty of Education. This study adopts
the conversation analysis methodology. The data were transcribed and analyzed
with a special focus on student-initiated question episodes, and interactions were
examined with particular attention to various interactional resources such as
language use, body orientation, gesture, gaze and instructional materials. The
findings of the study include three categories of student-initiated questions, namely
(1) procedural and task-related questions, (2) content-related questions, and (3)
terminology-related questions. First category of questions reveals that although
English is the institutionally-assigned classroom language, students navigate
classroom language norms by switching between L1 (Turkish) and L2 (English). The
findings also shed light on the teacher’s divergent treatment of L1 initiations in taskoriented and whole-classroom interaction modes in terms of both language choice
viii
and the interactional resources utilized to resolve the problems. Second category of
questions demonstrates that the normative language in pursuits of resolving
content-related knowledge gap is L2 and students can handle quite complex
professional issues using L2, which relates to the specific EMI context. More
specifically, content-related questions address issues including practical concerns,
guidelines for conduct, and ways of handling specific situations. Most notably, these
questions are mainly designed in multi-unit questioning turns which do not come
straightforwardly as the other two categories of questions do. Third category of
questions shows that students resolve their knowledge gaps (1) by proposing an
understanding in L1 and (2) by engaging in meaning negotiation between two
terminology-related items. The first case demonstrates that the use of living
language norms is a complex process, thereby unveiling the institutional fingerprints
of EMI interaction, in which there is a shared language (L1) available to all
participants. In the second case, students indicate their epistemic access to the
domain following the teacher’s turn by displaying understanding through providing
some analysis of the information, which points that there is a clear orientation by
students towards engaging in internalizing the meanings of lexical items through
demonstration-of-(mis)understanding turns. The study has several implications for
research on interactional repertoires and student agency in EMI and bilingual
classrooms, and feeds into the growing body of research on L1 use in L2
classrooms, as well. Overall, this study contributes to the field of conversation
analysis in general and to research on learner initiatives in EMI interaction in
particular.