The Speaking Pair Where One Learner Dominates
In a paired oral interaction task, two B1 learners must reach a joint decision in 4 minutes about which of three venues to book for a class trip. In the first minute, Learner A speaks 85% of the time, proposes a venue, and asks no questions. Learner B says "yes, okay" twice and nothing else. The teacher must decide how to assess each learner against an interaction rubric that rewards initiating, responding, and negotiating, and whether to intervene during the task.
1. How should each learner be assessed on interaction, given what happened?
Read the worked answer
Assess them separately, and do not let A's fluency hide B's non-performance (or excuse A's monologue).
- Learner A: strong on initiating (proposed a venue), weak on interaction specifically - no questions, no turn-giving, no response to B. A monologue is not a negotiation. On an interaction rubric, A should score low on responding and negotiating even though output volume is high.
- Learner B: minimal evidence. Two "yes, okay" tokens show responding only at the lowest level; no initiating, no negotiating. The rubric cannot award credit for interaction B did not produce.
The key judgement: talk time is not the same as interaction. A talked most but interacted least with B. Both learners have gaps, in different dimensions.
2. Should the teacher intervene during the 4 minutes? Argue both sides and decide.
Read the worked answer
Default: do not intervene mid-task; note it and address it after. Intervene only if the task is about to fail entirely.
- Case against intervening: the task is a sample of interaction. Stepping in changes what is being assessed and can rescue a performance the rubric is meant to record. It also signals to B that the teacher will fill silences, reducing B's need to initiate.
- Case for intervening: if A continues to monopolize, B produces no assessable interaction at all, and the pair fails the joint-decision goal. A brief prompt ("B, what do you think?") can unlock the task.
Decision: at the one-minute mark described, wait. If by ~2:30 B still has not contributed and no decision is forming, give one neutral prompt directed at turn-taking, not at content ("Remember to ask your partner"). Record that a prompt was given so the assessment notes it.
3. Design a short follow-up that gives B a fair chance to show interaction, without penalizing A unfairly.
Read the worked answer
A short re-pair or role-reversal task, scored on the same rubric.
Option 1 - role reversal: same decision task, but B must open and must ask A at least two questions before deciding. This gives B a structured chance to initiate and negotiate. Option 2 - information gap: give each learner half the venue details, so a decision is impossible without exchanging information. This makes interaction necessary rather than optional.
Fairness to A: score A on the same dimensions in the new task. A is not penalized for the first task beyond what the rubric recorded; A simply gets a fresh chance to show turn-giving and questioning. The goal is evidence for both learners, not punishment for either.
Note for the record: keep both samples. The follow-up supplements the first performance; it does not erase it.