.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Holding presenters accountable for their posters during post-presentation discussions in a project-based EFL classroom
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
M
DOI：10.1016/j.system.2026.104098.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
This study examines follow-up discussions after students' poster presentations in a project-based English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) classroom at an upper-secondary school in Sweden. As part of this project, students designed posters based on George Orwell's Animal Farm, presented them in a whole-class setting, and then engaged in post-presentation question–answer exchanges. Drawing on conversation analysis, the study shows how audience members (i.e., peers) hold presenters accountable for meeting the task expectations by prompting them to explain how their posters are grounded in the book and to justify their design choices. In doing so, peers mobilize a range of account-seeking questions, including when-type questions that ask presenters to situate their posters within the storyline, questions that embed candidate explanations of specific features of the posters, and why-interrogatives that ask presenters to account for particular design choices. The analysis of the presenters' responses shows that they consistently orient to their epistemic primacy over the design and meaning of the posters by providing accounts that explain poster–book connections and justify or defend particular design choices in response to their peers' questions. The findings demonstrate that post-presentation discussions in project-based language classrooms afford rich interactional spaces for sustained task-relevant L2 use. The study concludes by emphasizing that oral presentations, in addition to serving as an effective assessment tool, can be leveraged to develop students' questioning and responding practices through systematic engagement in post-presentation discussions.
Keywords:
EFL
Project work
Post-presentation discussions
Question–answer sequences
Account-seeking
Account-giving
Conversation analysis
Journal
IF:
5.6
Papers:
479
Citations:
9.7K
Organization
No organization information available
Cited Papers