Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on CALL Number 9. July 2023                     Pp.87-104

Full Paper PDF

    Classroom Discourse Analysis of Computer-Mediated Communication during

Mona Bani Alkahtani
English Language Department, College of Langauge Sciences
King Saud University, Saudi Arabia
Email: mona@KSU.EDU.SA


Received: 07/24/2023                         Accepted:06/24/2023              Published: 07/24/2023


In March 2020, the Saudi government announced that school and university courses were to be held online to control the COVID-19 outbreak. A sudden yet smooth movement occurred from traditional face-to-face classrooms to online courses. This shift influenced the nature of classes, the nature of the interaction, and the participants’ roles. Interaction in online classes is viewed as a form of computer-mediated communication. This paper explores the nature of computer-mediated communication in online courses at one of the major research universities in Riyadh during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using an in-depth qualitative analysis of Walsh’s (2006) framework of Self-Evaluation of Teacher talk, this study examines the nature of classroom discourse and interactions among level six students who took a content course in English and lectures were transcribed for this study. Results answer questions regarding the common interaction modes and features and how efficient they are to encourage participation during Computerized Mediated Communication. Analysis reveals that using traditional interactional features is not suitable in virtual classes.Teacher dominated classes with excessive IRFs patterns do not cultivate interaction in Computerized Mediated Communication. New modes of communication and discursive features using more interactive tools and engaging features such as referential questions promote interaction. Results provide an insight into the nature of interaction in online university classrooms. It also adds to the current literature on Computerized Mediated Communication interaction to enhance the existing practices done in classrooms.
Keywords: classroom discourse analysis, Computer-Mediated Communication, Covid-19, interaction

Cite as: Alkahtani, M.B. (2023).  Classroom Discourse Analysis of Computer Mediated Communication During COVID-19.  Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on CALL (9) 87-104.


Alhawiti, M.M. (2017). The effect of virtual classes on student English achievement at Tabuk Community College. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research,16(5),90-101.

Alahmadi, N. S. &Alraddadi, B.M. (2020). The Impact of Virtual Classes on Second Language Interaction in the Saudi EFL Context: A Case Study of Saudi Undergraduate Students. Arab World English Journal, 11(3), 56-72.

Al-Kathiri, F. (2015). Beyond the classroom walls: Edmodo in Saudi secondary school EFL instruction, attitudes and challenges. English Language Teaching, 8(1), 189–204.

Allwright, R. L. (1980). Turns, topics and tasks: Patterns of participation in language learning and teaching. In D. Larsen-Freeman (Ed.), Discourse analysis in second language research (pp. 165–186). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Almeniei, O. (2005). What counts as language learning: Analysis of teacher–learner interactions in an English as a foreign language classroom in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.

Almossa, S. Y. (2021). University students’ perspectives toward learning and assessment during COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies26(6), 7163-7181.

Al-Otaibi, S. S. H. (2004). The Effect of” Positive Teacher Talk” on Students’ Performance, Interaction & Attitudes: A Case Study of Female Students at the College of Languages & Translation at King Saud University. Unpublished master thesis, King Saud University. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Al-Qahtani, M. H. (2019). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of virtual classes and the effectiveness of virtual classes in enhancing communication skills. Arab World English Journal, The Dynamics of EFL in Saudi Arabia [Special issue], 223–240.

Alshehri, Y., Mordhah, N.,Alsibiani, S.,Alsobhi, S.,&Alnazzawi, N. (2020). How the regular teaching converted to fully online teaching in Saudi Arabia during the coronavirus COVID-19. Creative Education11, 985–996. doi:10.4236/ce.2020.117071

Arifin, T. (2012). Analyzing English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom interaction. Apple3L Journal1(1), 1-20.

Arishi, A. (1984). A study of EFL teachers’ behavior in EFL classes in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington.

Beatty, K. (2013). Teaching & researching: Computer-assisted language learning. London: Routledge.

Bellack, A., Kliebard, H., Hyman, R., & Smith, F. (1966). The language of the classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Bianchi, R., Yyelland, B., Yang, J., & McHarg, M. (2019). Avatar Kinect: Drama in the virtual classroom among L2 learners of English. The Qualitative Report, 24(13), 58–74.

Cazden, C. B. (1988). Environmental assistance revisited: Variation and functional equivalence. In F.S. Kessel (Ed.), The development of language and language researchers: Essays in honor of Roger Brown (pp. 281–297). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum

Congmin, Z. (2013). Classroom interaction and second language acquisition: The more interactions the better? Studies in Literature and Language, 7(1), 22–26.

Cullen, R. (1998). Teacher talk and the classroom context. English Language Teaching Journal, 52, 179–187.

Deroey, K. L. (2012). What they highlight is. . . : The discourse functions of basic wh-clefts in lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes11(2), 112–124.

Edwards, A. D., & Westgate, D. P. (1994). Investigating classroom talk (Vol.13). Routledge.

Flanders, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teacher behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Flowerdew, J., & Tauroza, S. (1995). The effect of discourse markers on second language lecture comprehension. Studies in second language acquisition17(4), 435-458.

Gaies, S. J. (1977). The nature of linguistic input in formal second language learning: Linguistic and communicative strategies in ESL teachers’ classroom language. TESOL77, 204–212.

Hall, J. K. (1995). “Aw, man, where you goin?” Classroom interaction and the development of L2 interactional competence. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 37–62.

Hall, J. K. (2004). Language learning as an interactional achievement. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 606–612.

Hamdan , A. H. E. ., &Elandeef , E. A. E. . (2021). Teacher Talk and Learner Involvement in EFL Classroom: The Case of Saudi Setting. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(3), 201–208.

Hamouda, A. (2020). The effect of virtual classes on Saudi EFL students’ speaking skills. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 3(4), 175-204

Hardman, F., Smith, F., & Wall, K. (2003). Interactive whole class teaching in the national literacy strategy. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(2), 197–215.

Heritage, J., & Greatbatch, D. (1991). On the institutional character of institutional talk: The case of news interviews. In D. Boden & D.H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (pp. 93–137). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press.

Herring, S. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. Barab, R. Kling, & J. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (Learning in doing: Social, cognitive and computational perspectives; pp. 338–376). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016

Hall, J. K., & Walsh, M. (2002). Teacher–student interaction and learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 186–203.

Hussein, E.T. (2016). The effectiveness of using blackboard in improving the English listening and speaking skills of the female students at the University of Hail. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 3(12), 81-93.

Izzati, N. (2021). The use of teacher talk through online teaching and learning process in EFL classroom during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Ninth International  Conference on Language and Arts (ICLA 2020) (pp. 8-13). Atlantis Press.

Johnson, K. (1995). Understanding communication in second language classrooms. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79(4), 457–476.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Pergamon.

Levinson, S., C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126–141.

Long, M. (1985). Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. Gass& C. Madden (Eds.), Input and second language acquisition (pp. 377–393). Rowley, MA

Long, M. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 13-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Long, M., II. (1990). Task, groups, and task-group interactions. In S. Anivan (Ed.), Language teaching methodology for the nineties (pp. 31–50). Singapore: RELC.

Lörscher, W. (1986). Conversational structures in the foreign language classroom. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Learning, teaching and communication in the language classroom (pp.11-22). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.

Mathew, N. G., Sreehari, P., & Al-Rubaat, A. M. (2019). Challenges and implications of virtual e-learning platform in EFL context: Perceptions of teachers. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(2), 100–116

Mauer, J. (1997). Presentation, practice, production in the EFL classroom. The Language Teacher, 21(9).

McBrien, J. L., Cheng, R., & Jones, P. (2009). Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(3), 1-17.

McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–213.

Miller, L. (2002). Towards a model for lecturing in a second language. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(2), 145–162.

Morell, T. (2004). Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students. English for specific Purposes, 23(3), 325–338.

Morell, T. (2007). What enhances EFL students’ participation in lecture discourse? Student, lecturer and discourse perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(3), 222–237.

Moskowitz, G. (1976). The classroom interaction of outstanding language teachers. Foreign Language Annals, 9, 135–143.

Olbertz-Siitonen, M. (2015). Transmission delay in technology-mediated interaction at work. PsychNology Journal, 13(2–3), 203–234.

Oraif, I.; Elyas, T. (2021). The Impact of COVID-19 on Learning: Investigating EFL Learners’ Engagement in Online Courses in Saudi Arabia. Education. Sciences, 11, 99. educsci11030099

O’Keeffe, A. (2004). ‘Like the wise virgins and all that jazz’: Using a corpus to examine vague categorisation and shared knowledge. In U. Connor and T.A. Upton (eds) Applied Corpus Linguistics (pp. 1-20). Brill.

Piaget, J. (1946/1951). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York, NY: Norton. (Originally published as La formation du symbole chez l’enfant. Neuchatel, Switzerland: Delchaux et Niestle.)

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Sacks, E., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.

Seedhouse, B. (2004). The interactional architecture of the second language classroom: A conversational analysis perspective. Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.

Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. SAGE.

Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language. Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass& C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 165–179). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning: Principles and practice      in applied linguistics. Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of            HG Widdowson, 125-144

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook on research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Thoms, B. (2012). Student perceptions of microblogging: Integrating Twitter with blogging to support learning and interaction. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 11, 179–197.

Thompson, M. C. (2020). The impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the socioeconomic future of young Saudis. Asian journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies14(3), 358-382.

Tsui, A. B. (1998). The ‘unobservable’ in classroom interaction. The Language Teacher, 22(7), 25–26.

Van Lier, L. (1988). The classroom and the language learner. London, United Kingdom: Longman.

Vaish, V. (2008). Interactional patterns in Singapore’s English classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 19(4), 366–377.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Harvard University Press.

Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3–23.

Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. Routledge.

Young, L. (1994). University lectures: Macro-structure and micro-features. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspective (pp. 159–176). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Zuengler, J., & Mori, J. (2002). Microanalyses of classroom discourse: A critical consideration of method. Applied Linguistics, 23(3), 283–288.

Received: 07/24/2023
Accepted: 06/24/2023 
Published: 07/24/2023

Dr. Mona Alkahtani is currently an assistant professor of Applied Linguistics at the Department of English, College of Language Sciences at King Saud University. She obtained her PhD from King Saud University in 2018. She was the vice chair of the English language department at KSU and currently is a board member in the Saudi Society of Linguistics. Her interest includes discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis and sociolinguistics. ORCHID ID: