The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 11 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Classroom discourse: analyzing teacher/learner interactions in iranian EFL task-based classrooms
Open accessAbstract
Teaching English in an EFL context involves certain difficulties.The most important is how to prepare learners to use the English language so as to be able to participate in conversations inside and outside the class.Six classes at intermediate level (nine hours) were video and audio-taped in their entirety.The study explored recurring patterns of questioning behavior and their interactive effects were observed through nonparticipant observation.The findings of this study indicated that Display questions were used by the teachers more frequently than Referential questions.Also, it was concluded that NOT all Referential questions could create enough interaction.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This observational study of six intermediate EFL classes in Iran found teachers used Display questions slightly more often than Referential questions (96/186, 51.61% vs. 90/186, 48.38%), but Referential questions generated longer interaction on average. The authors conclude that most, not all, Referential questions create more classroom interaction than Display questions.
Key findings
- Across 186 teacher questions, 96 were Display (51.61%) and 90 were Referential (48.38%); per-class use varied widely, e.g. Class C had 80.95% Referential questions while Class A had 76.08% Display questions.
- For selected questions, Referential questions had a mean interaction time of 1.8 minutes versus 0.87 minutes for Display questions; the observed t-value was 2.735 against a critical t of 2.120 at 0.05 with d.f. = 16, so the null hypothesis was rejected.
- Qualitatively, not all Referential questions created interaction: some produced short answers, silence, or topic change, leading the authors to modify the hypothesis to “Most, not all, Referential questions create more interaction in the classroom than Display questions do.”
- Other patterns included Display questions mostly concerning textual information, comprehension checks, and word meaning; Referential questions mostly concerning personal information or experiences; some Display questions elicited long answers; and “no real interaction” was observed in the classes.
Methods
- Nonparticipant observation of six intermediate EFL classes at the Goldis Language Institute in Tabriz, Iran; learners were female, Iranian, aged 16–28, with 12–18 learners per class and six teachers of both sexes. Classes were video- and audio-taped in their entirety (the abstract reports nine hours).
- Data were handled through a four-part Record–View–Transcribe–Analyze process, focusing on teachers’ Display and Referential questions; a t-test compared interaction means for two randomly selected groups of questions (Table 2: RQ n = 10, DQ n = 8).
- The textbook was New Interchange, Book 3, with supplementary materials; classrooms had U-shaped seating; teachers were not initially informed about recording, then permission was requested, and no instructions were given on using question types.
Limitations
- The paper states that classroom processes are extremely complex, that an observer cannot fully understand what is going on by observing and analyzing a number of lessons, and that the data were limited; it also notes that including other question types would have given a clearer image.
- The paper states there were no experimental subjects and no control or treatment groups, and warns it would be dangerous to generalize that Referential questions are most useful or Display questions useless, since each context requires an appropriate strategy.
- Evident from the text: the sample was a convenience sample of six classes at one institute, all learners were female, and the t-test used a small selected subset of questions (10 Referential and 8 Display), limiting generalizability.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
16 Own result · 12 Own interpretation · 8 Sources not found · 4 No basis given · 3 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fortunately, our «t-value» is enough above the «t-critical» that we are quite safe in rejecting the null hypothesis.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 2.735
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Almost all the questions asked by teachers while working on the exercises were Display.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there can be found a number of Referential questions which required a shorter answer and after them there was a period of silence or topic-change.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > Sample Display
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Through observation, it was found that Display questions outnumbered Referential ones.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“sometimes a Display question may cause learners to give, for instance, a two/three-minute answer, though we may not consider it as interaction.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fortunately, our «t-value» is enough above the «t-critical» that we are quite safe in rejecting the null hypothesis.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 2.735
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was observed that Referential questions made more classroom interaction.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not all of the teachers made equal use of Display or Referential questions.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was found that out of a total of 186 questions, 96 were Display (51.61%) and 90 Referential questions (48.38% ).”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.1. Quantitative results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Teachers ask a number of questions --mostly Referential --before they start to work directly on Snapshot, Conversation, Listening, and Reading parts.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 10
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 15
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The question asking was not just from the teachers, the questions asked by the learners made an interaction between learner-teacher or between learner-learner.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The amount of time each question resulted in classroom interaction was measured (in minutes); then, they were added up; and a mean was calculated for each type: RQ-mean= 1.8, DQ-mean= 0.87 minutes).”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > DQ= Display Questions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was observed that personality type of the learners played a main role in classroom interactions.Talkative learners took most of the class time in answering the two types of the questions.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such questions were found to cause more learner speech than Display questions -such as «What does «perpetual» mean?»did.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > Sample Display
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Learners who were less willing to participate were usually encouraged, or forced, to speak when asked to speak.Some learners are less confident or are shy but they also participate when the teacher gives them a turn.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most of the Display questions asked by teachers concerned textual information, e.g.comprehension checks, meaning of words, idioms, re-telling of the story book; while most of the Referential questions concerned personal information or experiences -like feeling, family, ideas, e.g. on society, crime, occupation, future, education, etc.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The observation analysis revealed that there was no real interaction in the observed classes.Interaction of two or more sides with a topic, tone, and turn (see Allwright and Bailey, 1991) rarely happened in the classrooms.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Allwright and Bailey, 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In observed classes, in some cases, interaction was seen without the teachers asking any question.In other words, wherever the topic was interesting, learners tended to speak more.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not all answers given by the learners for Referential questions were long and complex; on the contrary, it was observed that lots of grammatical mistakes were made by the learners and simple answers were given.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“She suggests that output creates the necessity for the learner to perform a syntactic analysis of the language.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Swain (1985)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such interaction needs a considerable information gap to enhance it.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was no instruction to the teachers on using different types of questions (Display and Referential) by the researchers in order to obtain authentic data record.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 3.4. Procedure
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“While Display questions are usually asked for comprehension checks, confirmation checks or clarification requests (Long and Sato, 1983;Brock, 1986, cited in Johnson andJohnson, 1998), Referential questions are usually used for information gaps.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > Sample Display
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Long and Sato, 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Brock, 1986, cited in Johnson andJohnson, 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In order to obtain authentic data, the teachers were not informed about recording of their classes.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 3.4. Procedure
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, motivation and interest cause the interaction to be more lifelike.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > Sample Display
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it seems that the use of Display questions can encourage language learners, especially beginners, to get interested.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Different types of questions play a central role in learning English.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These questions usually help the learners warm up for the task, and get familiar with the topic of different parts in the textbook.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 4.2. Qualitative results
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A learner will be more eager when s/he finds the teacher paying attention and interested in the answer.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Allwright and Bailey (1991) maintain that it is a dangerous simplification to suggest that verbal interaction in the classroom is just a case of «the more, the merrier».”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Allwright and Bailey (1991)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“They add that: «there may be times when teacher's desire to get students to interact verbally can be counterproductive.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Allwright and Bailey (1991)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It may also help teachers provide comprehensible input for learners.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, teachers can increase the amount of interaction in their classes by applying two factors: humor and interest.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also, when the teacher incorporates a piece of humor into the classroom, learners are encouraged to participate more than when the teacher is the sole speaker.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Johnson andJohnson (1998) cite Swain (1985), who argues that output may be an important factor in successful second language learning /acquisition.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Johnson andJohnson (1998)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Swain (1985)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two groups of questions were randomly selected from among the obtained data for statistical analysis.”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > DQ= Display Questions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The types of questions asked by teachers are an influential factor in creating classroom interactions.
“One of the influential factors in creating classroom interactions is the types of the questions which are asked by the teachers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Different types of questions play a central role in learning English.
“As we know, different types of questions play a central role in learning English.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Classroom discourse is dynamic and cooperative where the teacher and the learners cooperate and negotiate with each other in achieving certain instructional goals.
“Researchers and language teachers should bear in mind that classroom discourse is dynamic and cooperative where the teacher and the learners cooperate and negotiate with each other in achieving certain instructional goals in the classroom.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Language classroom discourse is a very spontaneously evolving, dynamic, and complicated phenomenon.
“Language classroom discourse is a very spontaneously evolving, dynamic, and complicated phenomenon.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Pedagogic discourse is characterized by transmission, reception and practice of teaching/learning points where the focus is on knowledge as a product and on accuracy.
“Pedagogic discourse is characterized by transmission, reception and practice of teaching/ learning points where the focus is on knowledge as a product and on accuracy.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Class E | 31 | 20= 67.74 | 10= 32.25 |”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
Reported 31 · recomputed 30
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Class E | 31 | 20= 67.74 | 10= 32.25 |”
§ Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/ Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms > 5. CONCLUSION
Reported 67.74 · recomputed 64.516129
Citations
Cites
The Study of Second Language Acquisition
Brown, C., & Ellis, R. (1996) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/329065 · Cited by 4,217
Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315833835 · Cited by 3,569
Ellis, R. (1991) · Language in society · doi:10.1017/s0047404500016663 · Cited by 3,455
The Study of Second Language Acquisition
Kearney, J., & Ellis, R. (1995) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3588082 · Cited by 3,147
The Study of Second Language Acquisition
Ellis, R. (2006) · Cited by 2,561
Second Language Teaching and Learning
Shi, L., & Nunan, D. (2000) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587962 · Cited by 1,761
Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers
McCarthy, M. (1992) · Child Language Teaching and Therapy · doi:10.1177/026565909200800108 · Cited by 1,172
Ur, P. (1996) · Cited by 1,077
O'Rourke, V., & Widdowson, H. G. (1993) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587161 · Cited by 905 · cited 1×
“In addition such questions are not in harmony with conversational maxims (unwritten rules about conversation which people know and which influence the form of conversational exchanges) which is agreed by many researchers ( Widdowson, 1990 ).”
BackgroundExplorations in Applied Linguistics
Belasco, S., & Widdowson, H. G. (1981) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/325632 · Cited by 707
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Brown, H.D (2001). Teaching by principles (2 nd Ed.). London: Longman.
- Candlin, C., and Mercer, N. (2001). English in its Social Context. A Reader. London: Routledge.
- Nunan, D. (1989). Understanding language classroom. Cambridge: Prentice Hall.
- Richards, J.C. (1998). New Interchange, Book3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Talebinezhahd, M.R. (1999). «Effective questions». Retrieved on March 2, 2005 from www.exchange.state.gov/forum/vols/vol37/no2/p20.html.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Use of Open Ended versus Closed Ended Questions in Turkish Classrooms
Çakır, H., & Cengiz, Ö. (2016) · Open Journal of Modern Linguistics · doi:10.4236/ojml.2016.62006 · Cited by 43
“Asking good questions smooths the interaction between the teacher and his or her students (Behnam & Pouriran, 2009: p. 123).”
BackgroundDerin, T., Putri, N. S., Nursafira, M. S., et al. (2020) · ELSYA Journal of English Language Studies · doi:10.31849/elsya.v2i1.3611 · Cited by 24
Rahman, A., & Haslynda, N. (2014) · White Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · Cited by 24
A Theoretical Review of Classroom Discourse
Al‐Smadi, O. A. (2017) · International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development · doi:10.6007/ijarped/v6-i3/3169 · Cited by 14
Barekat, B., & Mohammadi, S. (2014) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.426 · Cited by 17
“Shomoosi (2004) and Behnam & PourIran (2009) indicated that the teachers asked display questions more frequently than referential questions.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Behnam, B.
- Affiliations
- Islamic Azad University of Tabriz (IR)
- Corresponding author
- Behnam, Biook
- Venue
- Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras
- Published
- 2009-06
- ISSN
- 1697-7467 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2124998920
- Semantic Scholar
- 336b1876e8874d110f21eacded73a507d3adf99c
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Dialnet (Universidad de la Rioja) (submittedVersion)
- Institutional Repository of the University of Granada (University of Granada) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Johnson and Johnson
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Keywords
- classroom discourse, teacher-student relationship, task-based language teaching, English as a foreign language, questioning behavior, display questions, referential questions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-23, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-23 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Classroom discourse: analyzing teacher/learner interactions in iranian EFL task-based classrooms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.30827/digibug.31875
- The paper
- Behnam, B. (2009). Classroom discourse: analyzing teacher/learner interactions in iranian EFL task-based classrooms. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras. https://doi.org/10.30827/digibug.31875
