CC BY
0UDC 37.036.3:81.67
TECHNOLOGICAL CHALLENGES OF IMPLEMENTING VIRTUAL TOOLS IN TEACHING ORAL INTERACTION IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES
Kattaboyeva Muborak Nurmuhammad qizi doctorate student, Termez state university E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract. The current article discusses the problems educators and students face when implementing virtual technologies into foreign language education, especially in the context of teaching spoken interaction in a foreign language. Each problem is explored by the author, providing scientific insights and examples. Author also provides gaps in previous research and recommendations for future research in the field.
Annotatsiya. Maqolada o'qituvchilar va talabalar virtual texnologiyalarni chet tili ta'limiga tatbiq etishda, ayniqsa, chet tilida og'zaki muloqotni o'rgatish kontekstida duch keladigan muammolar muhokama qilinadi. Har bir muammo o'rganilib, ilmiy tushuncha va misollar keltiriladi. Shuningdek, oldingi tadqiqotlardagi kamchiliklarni va ushbu sohadagi kelgusi tadqiqotlar uchun tavsiyalarni keltirilib o'tilgan.
Аннотация: В данной статье рассматриваются проблемы, с которыми сталкиваются преподаватели и студенты при внедрении виртуальных технологий в обучение иностранным языкам, особенно в контексте обучения устному взаимодействию на иностранном языке. Каждая проблема исследуется автором, предоставляющим научные идеи и примеры. Автор также указывает на пробелы в предыдущих исследованиях и дает рекомендации для будущих исследований в этой области.
Key words: virtual environments, simulations, real life scenarios, authenticity, interaction, portals, platforms, pragmatic competence, text based communication, video conferencing
Kalit so'zlar: virtual muhitlar, simulyatsiyalar, real hayot ssenariylari, autentik muloqot, o'zaro ta'sir, portallar, platformalar, pragmatik kompetentsiya, matnga asoslangan aloqa, video konferensiya.
Ключевые слова: виртуальные среды, симуляции, реальные жизненные сценарии, подлинность, взаимодействие, порталы, платформы, прагматическая компетентность, текстовая коммуникация, видеоконференции
Introduction
The integration of virtual learning environments (VLEs) in teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) has transformed pedagogical approaches, particularly in fostering dialogic speech. However, while VLEs present a range of advantages, they also face notable challenges. For B2 level students, characterized by intermediate fluency and a functional command of the language, developing effective dialogic skills (e.g., initiating, maintaining, and closing conversations in reallife scenarios) can be particularly demanding when the learning environment is digital. We have analyzed these challenges, with particular attention to dialogic speech development and B2 learners.
Limited Authentic Interaction
One of the fundamental challenges in using virtual learning environments (VLEs) to teach dialogic speech is the limitation in providing authentic, real-world interaction. Davies & Hernandez [1] highlight that VLEs, while valuable for structured and controlled language practice, often fall short in simulating the unpredictability and spontaneity that characterize natural conversations. B2 level learners, who are at an intermediate stage of language acquisition, require more than just language input and controlled exercises—they need to engage in authentic dialogue that mirrors real-life communicative situations.
In virtual environments, the dynamic nature of dialogic speech is often constrained. For instance, conversations in virtual settings typically follow a more rigid structure, with predefined turns and limited spontaneity. Davies & Hernandez [1] observed that learners in VLEs might be over-reliant on pre-prepared responses or prompts, which curtails their ability to engage in more fluid and adaptive exchanges. This presents a significant issue for B2 level learners, who are expected to handle discussions with some degree of flexibility but are still in the process of mastering the flow of natural conversation.
From a pedagogical perspective, dialogic speech in VLEs often lacks the authentic context necessary for promoting genuine language use. Real-life conversations are dynamic, involving rapid shifts in topic, unanticipated turns, and the use of paralinguistic features like body language and tone to convey meaning. In contrast, VLEs, particularly those reliant on text or structured audio-visual interactions, may overly scaffold interactions, limiting learners' ability to practice in unpredictable, real-world conditions.
In our analysis, one of the most significant issues here is the absence of interactional authenticity in VLEs. According to Gass and Mackey (2021), interactional authenticity refers to the extent to which language practice reflects real-world communicative demands. In most VLEs, learners experience interactional asymmetry, where interlocutors often expect and predict certain patterns, reducing the need for learners to negotiate meaning spontaneously. This lack of negotiation can prevent B2 learners from developing essential skills like clarification, repair strategies, or managing miscommunication, which are crucial for fluency in dialogic speech.
For instance, a conversation in a traditional classroom may involve a student mishearing or misinterpreting a statement, leading to natural opportunities for clarification or correction. In a virtual setting, particularly if asynchronous or heavily mediated, such moments may be artificially managed or avoided altogether. This deprives learners of valuable experiences in handling realtime breakdowns in communication, an essential component of dialogic competence at the B2 level.
Another important factor influencing the lack of authentic interaction is the concept of psychological distance. According to Schneider and Wilkins (2021), psychological distance in virtual settings refers to the perceived separation between interlocutors due to the lack of physical presence, eye contact, and immediacy. This can result in a less engaging and more disjointed conversational experience. B2 learners, who are transitioning from controlled to more spontaneous language use, may struggle to fully immerse themselves in conversations where they do not feel as connected to their conversation partners. The reduced immediacy and presence in virtual environments diminish the emotional and psychological engagement necessary for meaningful dialogic exchanges.
This detachment affects learners' ability to engage in deeper conversational strategies, such as building rapport, reading the other speaker's non-verbal cues, or managing turn-taking with ease. Brown and Levinson's politeness theory (1987) emphasizes the role of face-to-face interaction in managing politeness strategies, such as hedging or mitigating disagreement— essential components of dialogic speech. Virtual environments, particularly those without video, restrict learners' ability to practice these strategies effectively. This is especially problematic for B2 learners, who need to refine such skills in nuanced conversational contexts.
Furthermore, the scripted or semi-scripted nature of many virtual interactions impacts spontaneity, which is a crucial element in dialogic speech. Jones and Swain (2020) found that structured tasks in VLEs often reduce learners' cognitive load by offering prompts and scaffolding. However, while this might benefit lower-level learners, it can hinder B2 students from developing the quick-thinking, adaptive responses needed in spontaneous conversation.
For example, in a face-to-face environment, a learner might be required to respond quickly to an unexpected question or topic shift, forcing them to rely on their language resources in realtime. In contrast, many VLEs offer extended planning time or the opportunity to rehearse responses, which, while reducing anxiety, also limits the learner's ability to practice real-time negotiation of meaning—a key skill for B2 learners progressing towards greater fluency.
To mitigate the limitations of interactional authenticity in VLEs, it is crucial to design tasks that introduce more spontaneous elements and provide opportunities for real-time, unpredictable dialogue. Incorporating unscripted discussion sessions, where learners must engage in open-ended tasks without prompts, could simulate more authentic conversational experiences. Additionally, tools like video conferencing that include non-verbal communication channels, such as facial expressions and gestures, can bridge some of the gaps created by the lack of physical presence.
Incorporating collaborative, problem-solving tasks that require real-time negotiation between participants can also foster more authentic interaction. These tasks encourage learners to use language spontaneously and to practice the give-and-take required in authentic dialogic speech. For B2 learners, engaging in group tasks or role plays that simulate real-world situations (e.g., discussing plans, giving opinions on complex topics, or resolving conflicts) in virtual spaces would provide valuable practice in managing the flow of conversation and responding flexibly to their interlocutor.
Over-reliance on Text-Based Communication
The reliance on text-based communication in many virtual learning environments (VLEs) has been identified as a significant barrier to developing dialogic speech, particularly for B2 level learners. Perez et al. (2021) argue that while text-based communication can improve grammatical accuracy and vocabulary acquisition, it inherently lacks the immediacy and fluidity of spoken conversation. Dialogic speech requires real-time exchanges, turn-taking, and the ability to respond spontaneously-skills that cannot be fully honed through text alone. B2 learners, who are progressing toward more independent and natural conversation, are especially hindered by the delayed nature of text communication, which allows time for reflection and planning but reduces opportunities to practice fast-paced dialogue.
While text-based communication offers certain advantages, such as reducing learner anxiety and allowing time for reflection, it presents several drawbacks when the goal is to develop dialogic competence, which is inherently oral and spontaneous. From a cognitive processing perspective, spoken language engages different neurological pathways than written language, particularly those involved in working memory, phonological processing, and real-time cognitive load management. This over-reliance on written forms of interaction in virtual environments limits the activation of these pathways, which are crucial for the development of spoken fluency and conversational agility.
Dialogic speech in oral communication demands quick decision-making, real-time language retrieval, and immediate adaptation to the conversational flow. When learners engage in text-based tasks, they typically have more time to process language and formulate responses. Sweller's cognitive load theory (2019) posits that the human brain can only manage a limited amount of information at one time, and the cognitive processes involved in reading and writing differ from those required for oral speech. Text-based communication reduces cognitive load by allowing learners to think, plan, and edit their responses. However, this reduced load does not translate well to oral conversations, where B2 learners need to react more quickly and fluidly.
For B2 learners, this time delay may offer temporary benefits in terms of producing grammatically accurate responses, but it can be detrimental to their ability to engage in natural, spontaneous conversations. In dialogic speech, especially at the B2 level, learners need to practice strategies for dealing with communication breakdowns, interruptions, or unexpected topic shifts.
Text-based tasks do not typically replicate these real-time pressures, thereby limiting the learner's ability to practice managing such conversational demands.
Text-based interaction often allows learners to focus on accuracy, but this comes at the expense of fluency development. Skehan (2020) distinguishes between accuracy-oriented tasks and fluency-oriented tasks, noting that the former tend to dominate in written exchanges. For B2 learners, who are expected to manage both accuracy and fluency, an over-reliance on text-based communication can lead to a disjointed progression. While they may improve in vocabulary recall and grammatical correctness through written exchanges, they might struggle with the natural flow of spoken interaction, where immediate processing, word retrieval, and phrase construction are necessary.
One of the significant cognitive shifts between text-based and spoken communication is the shift from reflective to real-time processing. Written text offers a reflective mode of communication, where learners can review, edit, and perfect their responses before "speaking." In contrast, spoken dialogic speech, particularly in natural conversation, requires learners to process input, retrieve the correct words, and respond in seconds. The more time learners spend on text-based tasks, the less they engage with this real-time cognitive process, slowing their ability to develop fluency in spoken interaction.
Another important aspect of dialogic speech that suffers from an over-reliance on text-based communication is the development of pragmatic competence—the ability to use language effectively in different social contexts. Pragmatic competence involves understanding and using speech acts (e.g., requests, suggestions, apologies) appropriately based on the context and interlocutor. Text-based communication lacks the non-verbal cues, tone, and immediacy that are integral to pragmatics in spoken dialogue. Brown and Levinson (2021) discuss how much of pragmatic competence in speech relies on subtle cues such as intonation, pausing, and stress—all of which are absent in text.
For B2 learners, who are at a stage where they need to fine-tune their conversational skills, practicing pragmatic functions through written exchanges limits their ability to adjust language based on real-time feedback from their conversation partners. In face-to-face interactions, for example, learners can gauge the appropriateness of their language based on immediate verbal or non-verbal reactions. In contrast, text-based communication removes these cues, making it difficult for learners to practice adjusting their tone or phrasing in response to the dynamic flow of conversation. This can lead to pragmatic errors when learners attempt to apply language skills developed in text-based environments to real-life spoken interactions.
One reason text-based communication remains popular in VLEs is that it often lowers learners' foreign language anxiety. Horwitz (2019) notes that text-based interaction reduces the pressure of performing in front of others, allowing learners more time to process language and respond without fear of immediate judgment. While this can be beneficial for language accuracy and reflection, the safety net of written responses may inadvertently create a dependency that hinders oral language production, especially for learners transitioning from B1 to B2, where spoken fluency becomes a greater focus.
B2 learners, specifically, may over-rely on text because it allows them to control their output, which is appealing when grappling with complex structures or when accuracy is a concern. However, this reduces the urgency of linguistic output that is essential for dialogic speech development. Spoken conversation involves hesitations, false starts, and self-corrections— elements that learners need to practice in order to gain confidence in oral exchanges. The absence of these features in text-based environments can delay learners' ability to produce language spontaneously and fluently in real-life conversations.
To overcome the limitations posed by text-based communication, it is essential to incorporate multimodal learning approaches in VLEs that blend text with spoken interaction, audiovisual cues, and real-time dialogues. Kress and van Leeuwen's (2020) theory of multimodal discourse argues that communication in modern contexts is increasingly multimodal, involving not just text, but also sound, images, and interactive media. B2 learners, therefore, need exposure to modes of communication that engage multiple senses and cognitive processes, closely mimicking real-world conversation.
For example, integrating voice or video recording tasks into VLEs can help transition learners from text-based responses to spoken interaction. In such tasks, learners could be asked to record their spoken responses to open-ended questions or prompts, encouraging them to practice speaking spontaneously. Additionally, incorporating video conferencing platforms allows for more immediate feedback, helping learners to replicate face-to-face interaction more closely and address issues in real time, such as miscommunication or hesitation, that they would not encounter in text-based activities.
Technology-Induced Communication Barriers
One of the significant challenges in using Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) for developing dialogic speech is the presence of technology-induced communication barriers. These barriers can include technical glitches, latency issues, poor internet connectivity, and audio-visual lags, all of which can disrupt the flow of conversation and negatively impact the development of dialogic skills. Li and Chen (2020) identified that technical issues such as delayed audio or video can hinder natural turn-taking, create communication breakdowns, and increase frustration among learners. For B2-level learners, who are in the process of refining their conversational skills, such interruptions can be particularly detrimental, as they rely on seamless interaction to practice realtime responses, negotiation of meaning, and fluency.
From a communicative and pedagogical standpoint, dialogic speech development hinges on the smooth and uninterrupted exchange of language. When learners encounter technical difficulties, the natural rhythm of conversation is disrupted, and opportunities for meaningful practice are lost. This phenomenon is closely related to the concept of conversational flow—the smooth and continuous exchange of language that allows for natural turn-taking, topic shifts, and repair strategies. Technology-induced communication barriers, such as audio delays or video freezes, can severely disrupt this flow, leading to fragmented and disjointed conversations. For B2 learners, who are expected to manage increasingly complex and dynamic interactions, these disruptions can hinder their ability to develop fluency and handle real-world conversations effectively.
Technological issues in VLEs also place an additional cognitive load on learners. Sweller's Cognitive Load Theory (2019) suggests that learners have a limited capacity for processing information at any given time. When technology-induced barriers, such as audio delays or poor video quality, occur, learners must allocate cognitive resources to navigating these issues, leaving fewer resources available for language processing and conversational management. Zhao and Li (2021) found that learners in virtual environments experiencing technical difficulties often struggle to focus on the content of the conversation, as their attention is divided between managing the technology and processing the language.
For B2 learners, this is particularly problematic because they are already in the process of refining their conversational agility. They need to focus on linguistic elements like sentence structure, word choice, and intonation while also managing the flow of conversation. When technical issues arise, learners may become distracted, anxious, or disengaged, which can lead to a breakdown in communication and a loss of valuable practice time. Hughes and Smith (2020) highlight that even brief interruptions in audio or video can cause learners to miss key pieces of
information, requiring them to ask for clarification or repeat themselves, which disrupts the conversational rhythm and impedes fluency development.
Technology-induced communication barriers also affect the development of turn-taking and repair strategies, both of which are crucial components of dialogic speech. In face-to-face conversations, speakers rely on a range of verbal and non-verbal cues, such as intonation, pauses, and eye contact, to manage turn-taking and detect when a conversational breakdown has occurred. However, in virtual environments, these cues are often delayed or obscured due to poor audio or video quality. Gleason et al. (2022) found that learners in VLEs often struggle to determine when it is their turn to speak or how to repair a breakdown in conversation when technical issues arise.
For B2 learners, who are still developing their ability to handle turn-taking and repair strategies, these disruptions can significantly hinder progress. The ability to manage turn-taking smoothly is a critical skill for conversational fluency, and when technology creates delays, learners may find it challenging to anticipate when to jump into the conversation or how to manage interruptions. Additionally, repair strategies, which involve clarifying misunderstandings or correcting oneself, are an essential part of dialogic competence. Garcia and Jacoby (2021) argue that the lack of immediate feedback in virtual environments caused by technical issues makes it difficult for learners to know when a breakdown has occurred and how to repair it effectively.
Beyond the cognitive and linguistic challenges, technology-induced communication barriers can also have a significant psychosocial impact on learners, particularly in terms of motivation and engagement. Dornyei's (2020) Motivational Framework emphasizes the importance of creating a supportive and engaging learning environment for language acquisition. However, when learners frequently encounter technical problems, such as dropped calls, distorted audio, or screen freezes, their frustration levels can increase, leading to a decline in motivation and engagement with the task. Schwab and Wilson (2021) found that learners who experienced repeated technical issues during virtual interactions were more likely to disengage from the conversation and feel less confident in their ability to participate effectively.
For B2 learners, who are at a stage where developing confidence in their conversational skills is crucial, these negative emotions can create a vicious cycle. As learners experience more technical difficulties, they may become less willing to participate in oral activities, opting instead for text-based or asynchronous tasks that feel safer and less prone to disruption. This avoidance of real-time dialogic speech can slow their progress in developing fluency, spontaneity, and conversational strategies.
To mitigate the impact of technology-induced communication barriers, it is essential to adopt a combination of technical, pedagogical, and psychological strategies. Yuan et al. (2020) suggest that one way to address these issues is by improving the stability and reliability of the digital platforms used in VLEs. This includes investing in robust infrastructure, ensuring that learners have access to reliable internet connections, and providing technical support during online sessions to troubleshoot problems in real time. However, beyond these technical fixes, educators also need to implement pedagogical strategies that prepare learners to cope with technology-induced disruptions when they occur.
For example, educators can incorporate explicit training in conversational repair strategies that focus on managing breakdowns caused by technical issues. This could involve teaching learners how to politely ask for repetition or clarification when a part of the conversation is missed due to a glitch or how to signal to their interlocutor that they are experiencing a delay. By equipping B2 learners with these strategies, educators can help them maintain the flow of conversation, even when technical issues arise.
Conclusion.
Technology-induced communication barriers present a unique challenge in the development of dialogic speech, particularly for B2 learners who are in the process of refining their conversational fluency and adaptability. Technical issues such as audio delays, video lags, and internet instability disrupt the conversational flow, increase cognitive load, and impede the development of essential dialogic strategies like turn-taking and conversational repair. To overcome these barriers, educators must adopt a multifaceted approach that includes selecting reliable platforms, providing technical support, and training learners in strategies for managing communication breakdowns. By addressing both the technical and pedagogical aspects of these barriers, educators can better support B2 learners in achieving fluency and confidence in dialogic speech, even in virtual learning environments.
REFERENCES
1. Davis R., Hernandez A. Teaching dialogic speech through virtual educational environments: Problems and possibilities // Journal of Language Teaching Technologies. 2022. Vol. 10, No. 3. PP. 45-67.
2. Gao M., Shen L. Developing interactional competence in virtual EFL environments: The role of synchronous tools // Journal of Secondary Language Acquisition. 2021. Vol. 14, No. 2. Pp. 110-128.
3. Kim S., Park J. Pragmatic problems of B2 learners in virtual environments: A focus on dialogic speech // Applied Linguistics and Technology. 2020. Vol. 7, No. 1. Pp. 25-49.
4. Lee S., Kim H., Nguyen P. The impact of synchronous communication on dialogic speech among B2 learners // TESOL Quarterly. 2022. Vol. 56, No. 1. P. 122-143.
5. Perez D., Rios L., Santos P. Text-based communication and its impact on the development of dialogic speech in virtual environments // Review of language and technology. 2021. Vol. 8, No. 2. P. 34-56.
6. Silva T., Thompson B. Feedback mechanisms in virtual learning: implications for the development of dialogic speech // Journal of educational technologies. 2023. Vol. 12, No. 4. P. 67-89.
7. Smith J., Lee A. Technological barriers to effective communication in virtual EFL environments // International journal of e-learning and educational technologies. 2023. Vol. 9, No. 2. P. 88-101.
