The Group Oral and the Quiet Student
A class practises a group discussion task in preparation for the oral examination. Four students discuss whether school uniforms should be abolished. One student, Ayu, is the strongest linguistically but dominates, speaking about 60% of the time and interrupting others. A second student, Budi, is quiet, speaks twice in short sentences, and is never asked for his opinion. The teacher must give feedback that improves both students' exam performance, knowing the real oral examination may involve interaction with an examiner rather than peers, but the same interaction skills apply.
1. Explain what each of the two students is doing wrong in terms of the interaction skills the oral examination rewards.
Read the worked answer
Ayu (dominant): She is producing a lot of language but not demonstrating interaction. Interrupting and taking 60% of the talk time shows poor turn-taking and no invitation of others. In an examiner-led discussion this would translate into not responding to cues, not building on the examiner's points, and possibly not listening carefully. Quantity of speech is not the criterion; managing an exchange is.
Budi (quiet): He is not providing evidence. Two short sentences give the examiner almost nothing to credit for range, fluency, or interaction. He also does not volunteer or extend, and no one invites him, so the group dynamic hides his ability. In an examiner-led format he would likely give minimal answers and score low even if his underlying Indonesian is sound.
The shared problem: both are failing to co-construct a conversation. Ayu over-controls it; Budi opts out of it.
2. Design feedback and a follow-up activity that targets both students, and explain the reasoning.
Read the worked answer
Feedback:
- To Ayu: name the specific behaviour (talk-time share, interruptions) and reframe the goal as 'make space and build on others'. Give her a concrete rule: after making a point, invite someone else or ask a question.
- To Budi: set a minimum target of developed answers (answer plus one reason plus one example) and require him to volunteer at least twice and to state an opinion.
Follow-up activity: Run the same discussion with assigned roles: Ayu must act as a facilitator who speaks last on each round and must ask Budi a direct question; Budi must give one developed response per round. Rotate roles so both practise the missing skill.
Reasoning: The activity makes the invisible rules of interaction explicit and gives each student repeated practice in the exact behaviour they lack. It also mirrors the examiner-led format, where the student must both respond fully and manage turns, so the practice transfers to the real task.