How Teachers in Georgia Use Language to Encourage Students in Online Language Classes: A Close Examination of Feedback, Discourse, and Participation
Keywords:
Teacher discourse, Online language teaching, Student engagement, Feedback strategies, Constructive feedback, Motivational language, Student participation, Language simplification, Semantic gravity, Semantic density, Student-centered approachesAbstract
This paper examines how foreign language teachers encourage students to participate in online language learning in Georgia, paying particular attention to the language they use to promote active participation. It focuses on strategies such as feedback, praise, questioning, and comprehension checks that help maintain students' attention and engagement. Grounded in Legitimation Code Theory, particularly the concepts of semantic gravity and semantic density, the study explores how teachers balance the delivery of complex content with the need to make it accessible to learners. It examines how teachers move between abstract explanations and real-life examples to help students connect theory with practice. In addition, the research explores how different forms of feedback, both corrective and encouraging, as well as carefully designed questions, influence students' motivation and willingness to participate. Importantly, it also incorporates students' perspectives, examining how these teaching practices are experienced by learners and whether they are perceived as supportive, confusing, or motivating.
References
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1
Hampel, R., & Stickler, U. (2005). New skills for new classrooms: Training tutors to teach languages online. Routledge.
Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 99–136. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066002099
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hymes, D. (1971). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269–293). Penguin.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the Outer Circle. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp. 11–30). Cambridge University Press.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge.
Mikulincer, M. (1995). Defense mechanisms and the development of the sense of self: A psychodynamic approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(3), 450–464. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.450
Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. Simon & Schuster.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)900035
