document

["4043325319 91 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 understand counterparts\u2019 message. They used body language or drawing pictures to communicate. Moreover, some students revealed that they said, \u201cI don\u2019t understand\u201d and kept quiet. Sociocultural Bias The data analysis from the interview revealed that culture and mindset affected communication in the classroom between Thai students and cambodian students. It was found that Thai students and Cambodian students did not understand each other because of their cultural differences, leading to forming sociocultural biases. They also expected their interlocutors to have native-like English accent, so when the interlocutors used English with localized accents, they formed sociocultural biases against each other. For the cultural aspect, since Thai students and Cambodian students had different cultural backgrounds, the ways they communicated and delivered their messages were still rooted from their cultural beliefs and their first language repertoire. Therefore, the intended messages could be interpreted as having different meanings according to their sociocultural backgrounds. For example, during class time, Thai students and Cambodian students were playing charades in pair. The direction of the game was guessing the meaning of a word. A Cambodian student received the word metal basin. He gave the hint to Thai students that it was a kind of vehicle, used for transporting in the lake or the river. Thai student could not guess this word until the time was up. The Cambodian student told the answer that it was metal basin. The Thai students were surprised to learn how metal basin was used as transportation. Thai student said that water transportation sould be only ship or raft. Thai studentalso stated that in the Thai culture the basin only used for containing something such as water for wash the clothes. The Cambodian student ensured that in his country, children use metal basin as boat to go to nearby place. It is safe to conclude that the problems occurred because of different cultural backgrounds. Another aspect of the sociocultural bias was accent. Thai students expected that their interlocutors should have native-like English pronunciation, vocabulary, and grammar. Similarly, Cambodian students also expected Thai students to pronounce the accent like NES. They reported that they were unable to understand their","4043325319 92 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 interlocutors\u2019 accent. Some of Thai students said that their interlocutors\u2019 accent was very difficult to understand. Thais reported that Cambodian students spoke with one tone. Moreover, Thais felt that Cambodian student pronounce English with L1 interference, and the word arrangement is one of Cambodian students\u2019 communication need, which lead confusion. On the other hand, the needs of Thai students, which reported by Cambodian students that the final sounds of the words were not clear enough. They also reported that some Thai friends lack of confident to pronounce, which lead to misunderstanding. Moreover, Cambodian students revealed that the importatant problem of Thai student was that they use slang or translate word by word, which cannot guess the meaning. For example, Thai student said, \u2018I eat star egg (fried egg) as breakfast.\u2019 In addition, Cambodian students stated that some Thai interlocutor stress incorrectly, which may result in listeners translating and interpreting the message into a wrong meaning. Since, the culture was difference, when speakers did not understand the others\u2019 language and were unaware of the appropriate language to use in terms of the intrinsic meaning of words and signs. Speakers usually encountered intercultural communicative problems when they translated from one language to the other without changing the original meaning, and by misusing the genre of the language such as using slang words in a formal situation or in the classroom with ELF interlocutor. For mindset aspect, the data indicated that both Thai students and Cambodian students expected that the interlocutors should have native-like in proficiency. In the past, Thai students and Cambodian students studied English as a foreign language. It could not be denied that standard norm plays an important role for them. They learned to speak or act like native performance and proficiency. It was not surprised that the students' mindset related to native norm, and they expected native-like in proficiency from the interlocutors. The quotes below illustrate the responses.","4043325319 93 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 \u201cI think my interlocutors have his Khmer accent in their pronunciation\u201d (Thai student, interview) \u201cMy Thai interlocutor does not have good accent. It is very difficult to interpret about the meaning\u201d (Cambodian student, interview) From the above quotes, it showed that standard norm stills rooted in students\u2019 mindset. Moreover, it was found that norm effected to their language use. Research question 2: What are components of the communication strategies instruction? This section reports the development of communication strategies instruction to quench the communication problems as revealed in the first phase. The components in this study are informed by the instrional design, popularized by Richards and Rogers (2014), consisting of objectives, syllabus, teacher and learner roles, and instructional materials. Each presented below. Objectives The objective was to develop communication strategie used in ELF academic context. To achieve the objective, this study explored students\u2019 needs and design the lesson plans for communication strategies instruction. The first step is the need analysis phase. In this step, communication needs were explored to develop communication strategies used. Fifteen Thai and fifteen Cambodian students were interviewed. Two main needs were discovered: limited linguistic knowledge and sociocultural bias. However, limited linguistic knowledge was emphasized because this study investigated ELF academic context, which paid attention to negotiation of meaning rather than sociocultural bias need. For sociocultural bias problem, it was solved by giving the concept of ELF before starting the lesson. For limited linguistic knowledge, this study focused on two aspects: comprehension skills and inadequate vocabulary. To solve these problems, it was clear that the students did not have communication strategies to engage and to carry on conversation in the ELF academic context. Therefore, the communication needs were solved as presented below:","94 Table 16 Needs of communication in the classroom between Thai students and Cambodian students and ways to solve the problems Communication problems Aspects Communication strategies to solve the problems limited linguistic knowledge Comprehension - Comfirmation checks - Clarification requests skill - Circumlocution - Approximation 4043325319 Inadequate - Presenting ELF concept vocabulary Sociocultural Bias Cultural and BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 mindset towards accent The first aspect of limited linguistic knowledge was about comprehension skills. Thais and Cambodians faced with speedy talk and mother tongue language from thir interlocutors. Therefore, they could not comprehend the message from their interlocutors. Kohn (2020) recommends that students should practice comprehension skills with special attention to unfamiliar pronunciation and sentence structures, unclear utterance meanings, or weak discourse coherence. Moreover, Dornyei and Scott (1995) propose that comfirmation checks strategy or clarification requests strategy can assist students to achieve the communication goals. They define comprehension check as the learners can use this strategy for asking questions to check if they understand the message correctly. Long (1983a) claimed that confirmation check strategies provide learners with opportunities to resolve their comprehension difficulties and therefore make negotiation of meaning possible. Another strategy is clarification requests. Dornyei and Scott (1995) define this strategy as the learner can use it when he\/she want to request the explanation of unfamiliar meaning structures. Lloyd (1991) cited in Kasper and Kellerman (1997) claimed that clarification requests can also help learners develop their ability as independent communicators. As above mention, it could be concluded that confirmation checks and clarification requests could assist to solve this problem and help students to reach the communicative goals. Therefore, the lesson of confirmation checks and clarification requests were designed.","4043325319 95 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 The second aspect of limited linguistic knowledge was grammatical errors. Thai students reported that some of their counterparts used incorrected grammar such as tense, while Cambodian students stated that their counterparts used incorrect grammar such as sentence arrangement, which made them confused to negotiate meaning. However, this study focused on ELF situation, which emphasizes on negotiating meaning, rather than form (Alessia Cogo & Dewey, 2006). Similary, Seidlhofer (2001) proposed that ELF main feature is to promote communication in an international setting among non-native speakers of different mother tongue. It is not necessary mean acquiring a native like proficiency, which focuses on correctly form. Moreover, Cogo and Dewey (2006) also state that grammar patterns do not affect intelligibility and can instead increase clarity of meaning. Hence, this aspect did not include into the instruction. The third aspect of limited linguistic knowledge was inadequate vocabulary knowledge. From the interview, it was found that Thai students and Cambodian students faced with limited vocabulary to negotiate meaning. Since they study English as a foreign language, so their conversation seemed to be not smooth. However, they attempt to maintain the conversation to achieve communicative purposes. D\u00f6rnyei and Kormos (1998) recommended that ELF interactants should know communication strategies to avoid lexical problem in conversation. These strategies employed when resource deficits hinder the planning and encoding of the preverbal plan. This means that learners needed to resort to these strategies because of their limited command or lack of linguistic resources in the L2 such as circumlocution (Exemplifying, illustrating, or describing the properties of the target object or action) and approximation. Therefore, the lesson of circumlocution and approximation to solve this problem were designed. Moreover, Thai students and Cambodian students faced with socioculture bias needs. The first aspect of sociocultural bias was about culture. Thai students and cambodian students had different cultural background. The ways they communicated and deliverd their messages still rooted from their cultural beliefs and first language repertoires. Therefore, their detail of messages could be interpreted as having many different meanings according to interlocutors\u2019 backgrounds. Leung, Lee, and Chiu (2013) stated that an individual would deliberately select a typical message to","4043325319 96 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 communicate with a member of a certain culture by applying meta-knowledge of the culture. Therefore, unsuccessful cross-cultural communications may arise not only from the lack of motivation to take the perspective of individuals in a foreign culture, but also from inaccurate meta-knowledge of the foreign culture. Misunderstanding is possible when people from different backgrounds involve in an intercultural communication without shared cultural schemas. Coming from different cultural backgrounds, individuals tend to behave in a way that is appropriate to their own cultural norms. Therefore, a successful ELF speaker has to adopt new competence and strategies to achieve their communicative goals. Moreover, the students should be aware about cross-cultural understandings in English language learning, this study examined ELF speakers\u2019 use of strategies in cross-cultural communication in which English is being used as a Lingua Franca. Intercultural strategies are essential aspects of English language learning in the ELF context since learners are not only encouraged to maintain their native identities but also to understand various cultures of English-speaking people, which are not restricted to the native speakers\u2019 cultures (Suwannasom, 2019). Communication strategies are recommended to help negotiate meaning (D\u00f6rnyei & Kormos, 1998) such as clarification requests for clearing unclear points or confirmation checks for checking the corrected understanding. Another need of cultural bias was accent. Thai students reported that their interlocutors\u2019 accent was very difficult to understand, and Cambodian students spoke with one tone. While Cambodian students stated that some of Thai interlocutor stress incorrectly. This point made them confused for interpreting the meaning, which leads to wrong action and failure in communication. ELF users or non-native speakers should be allowed to speak their own \u2018accented\u2019 English as an expression of their ethnic distinctiveness since accent is a dominant social marker for individuals. Therefore, they needed not be expected to follow native norms as long as their communicative goals are achieved (Jenkins 2007; Kirkpatrick 2010; Seidlhofer 2005). As Walker (2001) proposed, since accent is in relation to several different issues ranging from sociopolitical power to a sense of identity felt by individuals, non-native speakers should be given the choice to retain their identities. Therefore, this need was skipped, and it did not include into the instruction.","4043325319 97 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 The last aspect of sociocultural bias concerned with mindset. For mindset aspect, the data indicated that both Thai students and Cambodian students expect that the interlocutor should have native like in proficiency. Generally, both Thai students and Cambodian students are non-native English speaker. They could not perform as native-like. However, this problem showed that standard norm rooted to the students\u2019 mindset. According to the students\u2019 mindset, it shows that norm atill effected to their language use. Canagarajah (2005) against this believed that the students need to change their attitude to the term of ELF that norm was not necessary. The ELF potential is that they can negotiate meaning with interlocutors or reach their communication purposes. Sifakis (2014) claims for changing students\u2019 mindset that teachers need to replace a \u201cnormative mindset\u201d with an understanding that norms are \u201ccontinually shifting and changing\u201d (Seidlhofer 2008: p. 33\u201334). According to Canagarajah (2005) and Sifakis (2014), ELF focuses on negotiation of meaning and the diversity of English was accepted. Moreover, Dang (2016) states that communication between cultures are likely to be less effective because of the violation of cultural norms; in fact, people are unlikely to know if they are expected to follow others\u2019 cultural norms or behave according to their regular culture. Therefore, this cultural and students\u2019 mindset need did not include into the instruction, but the lesson was designed to explain the concept of ELF, the norm shifting and changing in early lesson. The second step of this phase was to design communication strategies instruction. After the communication needs from the first step was considered and attempted to solves these communication needs by designing four lesson plans to overcome the problems, which was presented below:","98 Table 17 Lesson plans to solve communication problems Thai students and cambodian students 4043325319 Lesson plans How to solve problems Approximation synonym Circumlocution describing object or action Confirmation checks try to check their correct understanding Clarification requests use when need more explanation or unclear point BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 The Table 17 showed the four lesson plans for solving communication problems between Thai students and cambodian students in academic context. Syllabus When designing the syllabus, it is important to select the appropriate model to quence communication needs. Through the literature review, many researchers (e.g., Meierkord (2000); Willems (1987)). who proposed approaches for communication strategies instruction. However, this study selected Dornyei (1995) approach as syllabus model since his model included awareness-raising in this approach. Galloway and Rose (2014) advocated that ELT in Global Englishes or ELF learners should have the content of raised learners\u2019 awareness and critical thinking. Therefore, Dornyei (1995) six procedures was considered. Syllabus model involved with content and organized of the lessons (Jack C Richards & Rodgers, 2014). In this current study, the content of the lessons related to communication strategies and the organization was framed by six procedures of Dornyei (1995). He also points out that communication strategies should be developed through focused instruction. He proposed that the most efficient approach for training communication strategies was direct informed and included awareness-raising in this approach. Therefore, the syllabus model was design in six procedures. The first procedure was that teacher should inform the objectives, situations, and the outcome of the activities to make them realize that these strategies could work. The second procedure, teacher should encourage students to employ communication strategies without being afraid of making errors. Willems (1987) also argues that the more they used or practiced, they","4043325319 99 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 were clearer and more familiar in situation used. The third step is to illustrate how to use certain communication strategies and getting learners to identify, categorize, and evaluate strategies used by in the academic context. The fourth procedure, it relates various degrees of stylistic appropriateness associated with communication strategies, differences in the frequency used, as well as differences in the verbalization of particularly communication strategies. The fifth procedure is to teach communication strategies through the activities The last procedure is to give opportunities for students to practice in strategy use. Roles of teacher and learners Roles of teacher and learners were very crucial in planning the instruction. Richard and Rodger (2014) defined teacher and learner roles that it was the type of interaction characteristic of classrooms in which a particular method is being used. Learners\u2019 roles are closely linked to the teacher's status and function. Teacher roles are similarly involved ultimately both assumption about language and language learning at the level of approch. Teacher's role as facilitator, consultant, guide, and model for learning. Moreover, teacher\u2019s role was a modeators to control how learning takes place and motivated students to interact with the activities in the classroom. In the lesson plans, teacher\u2019s role was giving concept of each communication strategies, illustrated by the examples, acting as modorater in exercise and suggesting and motivating when students faced with problems or kept quiet. Students\u2019 role was that students had to study, share their culture idea, and interact with interlocutor in pair work.","100 4043325319 Instructional materials The last component of communication strategies instruction was BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 instructional materials. This component was very important since it influenced learners\u2019 learning. Brown (1995) defined instructional materials as tools the teachers use to assist their students\u2019 learning the target language; means used to increase students\u2019 access to that language; every instrument that contributes greatly to students\u2019 progress; anything which is used by teachers and learners to facilitate the learning; and the keys to have influence on what goes on in the classroom. Richards (2001) also claimed that instructional materials generally serve as the basis of much of the language input that learners receive and the language practice that occurs in the classroom. The roles of instruction material related with the primary goal of materials (e.g., to present content, to practice content, to facilitate communication between learners, or to enable learners to practice content without the teacher's help). Moreover, a particular design of instruction material should support of the syllabus, teacher, and learners (Jack C Richards & Rodgers, 2014). In this study, the instructional material was designed in four lesson plans to solve communication needs: circumlocution, approximation, clarification equests, and confirmation checks. All of them was framed by Dornyei (1995) instructional model, which was presented in the Table 18: Table 18 Lesson plans of communication strategies instruction. Communication Objectives Activities strategy Circumlocution - Describe the concept 1.Introduction: English as a or function of Lingual Franca (ELF) and communication communication strategies\u2019 strategies concept and usefulness - Describe unfamiliar 2. Raise students\u2019 awareness of circumlocution objects and 3. Explaining and encouraging situations in which students to take risks and use they do not know","101 Communication Objectives Activities strategy 4043325319 exact vocabulary circumlocution - Use circumlocution 4. Highlighting cross-cultural BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Approximation differences in the use of strategies in circumlocution communicative 5.Providing examples of the use context effectively of circumlocution - Apply 6.Teaching circumlocution by circumlocution using ESP method to the students strategy in ELF 7. Providing opportunities for academic context practice circumlocution use 1.Raise students\u2019 awareness of - Describe alternative approximation vocabulary and 2. Explaining and encouraging situations without students to take risks and use knowing exact approximation vocabulary 3.Highlighting cross-cultural differences in the use of - Practice approximation approximation 4.Providing examples of the use strategies for of approximation communication 5.Teaching approximation by effectively using ESP method to the students 6.Providing opportunities for - Apply practice approximation use approximation strategy in ELF academic context Clarification - Describe and 1.Raise students\u2019 awareness of requests generate clarification Clarification requests questions to learn 2. Explaining and encouraging new information, students to take risks and use","102 Communication Objectives Activities strategy and to ask for Clarification requests explanation and 3.Highlighting cross-cultural repetition. differences in the use of - Practice clarification Clarification requests 4043325319 requests for 4.Providing examples of the use communication of Clarification requests BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 effectively 5.Teaching Clarification requests - Apply clarification by using ESP method to the requests strategy in students ELF academic 6.Providing Clarification requests context for practice approximation use Confirmation - Describe and check 1.Raise students\u2019 awareness of checks information with Confirmation checks interlocutor 2. Explaining and encouraging - Practice students to take risks and use confirmation checks Confirmation checks strategies for 3.Highlighting cross-cultural communication differences in the use of effectively Confirmation checks - Apply confirmation 4.Providing examples of the use checks strategy in of Confirmation checks ELF academic 5.Teaching Confirmation checks context by using ESP method to the students 6.Providing opportunities for practice Confirmation checks use","4043325319 103 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Evaluation The students were evaluated by performing pre-post communication strategies tasks. The test was in the form of multiple choice, which contained ten items communication task. In the test, communication situations were provided to know the communication strategies used by high and low proficiency students. Students had to complete the task to compare effects of communication strategies instruction on ability to use English in an ELF academic context. Moreover, this task could indicate that whether communication strategies were used to achieve their communicative goals or not. Moreover, it can point out that what types of communication strategies are selected to overcome communication problems. Research question 3: What are the effects of the communication strategies instruction on ability to use English in an ELF academic context? The section reports the effects of the communication strategies instruction on the ability to use English in an ELF academic context. To answer this research question, quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed. Quantitative data were obtained from the pre-test and the post-test communication strategies tasks. Qualitative data were gathered from students\u2019 reflections and observational notes. The participants were 28 students, consisting of 13 Thai and 15 Cambodian students. To explore the effects in detail, the participants were separated into high and low proficiency groups, categorized by using the standardized Oxford Placement Test, to observe how different proficiencies respond to the instruction of communication strategies. There were six high proficiency students and 22 low proficiency students. After that, the students completed pre-post communication strategies tasks, in which communication situations are provided to know the communication strategies used by high and low proficiency students. The quantitative data from the score of pre-post communication strategies tasks were analyzed. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were performed. Before running inferential statistics, assumptions were checked. It was found that the assumption of normality was not met, so the non-parametric test \u2013 Wilcoxon signed-rank test \u2013 was used. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze","104 the behavior of communication strategies used to investigate the tendency of the effects of communication strategies instruction on ability to use English in an ELF academic context, which was presented in saperating Table of high and low proficiency level. The results of the score comparing were presented in the Table 19. Table 19 Comparison between the pre-test and the post-test scores of communication strategies tasks of high proficiency students 4043325319 Test Median Standard Wilcoxon (Z) P-value Deviation test Pre-test BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Post-test 33 2.09762 -1.095b .273 34 2.68328 As shown in Table 19, for the high proficiency student group, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated that post-test score was not statistically significantly higher than pretest score Z = -1.095, P = 0.273 Table 20 Comparison between the pre-test and the post-test scores of communication strategies tasks of low proficiency students Test Median Standard Wilcoxon (Z) P-value Deviation test .020 Pre-test 29.4545 Post-test 31.1364 4.59531 -2.335b 4.38933 From the above Table 20, for the low proficiency students, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated that post-test score was statistically significantly higher than pretest rank Z = -2.335, P = 0.020. According to the above results, it can be concluded that the comparison scores between pre-test and post-test of communication strategies task of high proficiency students were not statistically significant. On the other hand, the comparison scores of low proficiency students, the post-test was statistically significant higher than the pretest. It can be said that this communication strategies","4043325319 105 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 instruction was more suitable for training low proficiency students rather than high proficiency students since it can solve communication needs for low proficiency students. The second part presents students\u2019 attitude towards communication strategies instruction. The data was gathered from reflections and researcher\u2019s observational notes. After the data was analyzed, the two main themes of students\u2019 attitudes were found. The first theme is percieved better language use in the classroom and the second theme is positive attitudes towards communication strategies instruction Percieved better language use in the classroom The data from observational notes showed that students attempted to speak English and maintain their conversations. Low proficiency students initiated to speak and use communication strategies in their conversation to make comprehension of their listening and responses with interlocutors rather than keep quiet. In this part, it was found that communication strategies instruction can assist students about language used, which can be seperated into two aspects:1) students gain more knowledge for communication in the classroom, and 2) satisfaction with communication strategy instruction. For the first aspect, most Thai students and Combodian students (n = 28) reported that they had more understanding about communication strategies and how to solve communication problems from the same situation. For example, a student from Cambodia reported that before he was in this training class. He did not understand the meaning of the vocabulary that his counterpart said. He kept quiet. However, after the training, he asked his counterpart by using the sentence \u201cWhat do you mean?\u201d for clarifying the meaning. Upon asking, before the training, the students did not know the name of the strategies or do not have any background of communication strategies and some of them did not know how to overcome language difficulty.","4043325319 106 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 \u201cI never know about the name of the strategy, and I discover that I had new methods to overcome language difficulties\u201d (Thai student, reflection) \u201cI think learning communication strategies in class is fun and helping me to have a good connection with other students, teacher and expanding my knowledge.\u201d (Cambodian student, reflection) \u201cI have learned something new, which I never know how to reach communicative goal, I always keep quiet or smiling if I do not know how to make my friend understand my expression\u201d (Cambodian student, reflection) \u201cI had a big communication problem that I cannot comprehend or catching interlocutors\u2019 word. After I finish these lessons, I think it can help me.\u201d (Thai student, reflection) The data from the observation also supports that the students gain more knowledge about communication strategies. They frequently used communication strategies when they did not understand interlocutors\u2019 message. If the interlocutor still did not understand, the speaker had choices to describe or presented their ideas to reach communicative goals. \u201cHe reported that he only used\u2019 again, please\u2019 to ask for repetition, but he change to use \u2018pardon?\u2019 instead\u201d (Researcher, observational note) It was surprising to find that, after the training, several students in low proficiency group have changed their behaviors. At the early class, they seemed to be nervious about communication with foreigner. Upon asking, they revealed that they fear to speak incorrect words\/ sentences and they may not understand message from interlocutor because of low listening competency. If he\/she did not understand, he\/she kept quiet and smiling or spoke \u201cI don\u2019t understand\u201d. After the training, he\/she attempted to use communication strategies from the lesson to ask interlocutors and initiate to speak with partners.","4043325319 107 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 For example, C7: Have you ever go to the temple? T7: Temple? \u2026errr\u2026 you mean\u2026monk live there (Comprehension check) The second aspect involves students\u2019 confidents to speak English. Most Thai students and Cambodian students (n=24) did not have confident to speak English with interlocutors in early class. Teacher tried to motivate them to speak up or express their ideas. They said that they have an anxiety and did not confident to use English. \u201cAt first, I fear to speak English with friend because I had limited vocabulary. I think I may not understand what my interlocutor said. After the lesson, I have more confident to speak with my interlocutors, I had just known how to make my friends understand my message.\u201d (Thai student, reflection) \u201cI like these lessons because it makes me confident to communicate with people.\u201d (Cambodian student, reflection) The data from researcher\u2019 s observational note also supports that student had more confidents to speak with interlocutor. However, it was found that almost high proficiency students had their confidents to speak English, particularly, Cambodian students. Thai students seem to be a bit nervous at first, but after finishing the first lesson, they had more confident to interact with interlocutors. For low proficiency group, students attempted to use short sentences for communication. If they did not understand they tried to used communication strategies to solve communicative problems, instead of keeping quiet as early class. Positive attitudes towards communication strategies instruction The data from students\u2019 reflection indicated that all students reported positive attitudes towards communication strategies instruction, particularly those in the high proficiency group. They reported enjoying learning in the communication strategy lessons. In practicing part, they revealed that they felt exciting as same as","4043325319 108 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 playing game. For low proficiency students, most of them enjoy for these lessons, but they had a bit nervious for their listening and speaking skills. After finished the lessons, they felt that their communicative skills were improved. Moreover, they stated that they know the ways to overcome language difficulty. \u201cI think it is great to learn about the communication strategies in this class and I am really excited about it, because I haven't had this kind of program before, and I think this is my opportunity to speak English. I really enjoy with this class\u201d (Thai student, reflection) \u201cAfter finished the class, I found that it makes my learning easier, quicker, and more enjoyable\u201d (Cambodian student, reflection) \u201cI'm really interested in these communication strategies, I feel that it can help me when I had some communicative problems\u201d (Thai student, reflection) \u201cI think I may use these communication strategies for solving my communication problem and I want to learn more about communication strategies. It really useful for me\u201d (Cambodian student, reflection) In conclusion, the data from the Wilcoxon signed-rank test result, students\u2019 reflection and researcher observational note presents that communication strategies instruction impact to the students\u2019 ability to use English. The quantitative data from Wilcoxon signed-rank test results showed that low proficiency students had obviously improvement since the post-test was statistically significant higher than the pre-test scores. Contrasty, high proficiency students\u2019 post-test score had not statistically significantly higher than pretest score. It can be assumed that this communication strategies may be suitable for solving communication problems for low proficiency students. students got higher score. Moreover, qualitative data also presented that students percieved better language use in the classroom, and they had positive attitudes towards communication strategies instruction. It can be assumed that communication strategies instruction effected to the students. They had more","4043325319 109 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 understand in using communication strategies. These communication strategies instruction can help them from language used anxiety and communication problems. They also enjoyed with the instructions in the classroom. Chapter summary This chapter presents the results of the study, framed by three research questions. It was found that the students reported two main themes of needs for communication: limited linguistic knowledge and sociocultural bias. Since this study focused on ELF. Therefore, limited linguistic knowledge was paid more attention. There were two aspects of common communication needs: comprehension skills and inadequate vocabulary for reaching the communicative goals. Therefore, four lesson plans (circumlocution, approximation, clarification requests, and confirmation checks) was designed as communication strategies instruction to solve the common communication needs. The findings of the study indicated that communication strategies effected the common communication needs. It can be seen from the data both quantitative and qualitative data. For quantitative data, low proficiency students got post-test score higher than pre-test score, which showed that students have more knowledge about communication skills. Moreover, it was found that, this communication strategies instruction was suitable for low proficiency students. They may have more ability to use English in ELF academic context. For qualitative data, percieved better language use in the classroom, and they had positive attitudes towards communication strategies instruction.","4043325319 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 This chapter presents the summary of reserch, summary of the finding, discussion of the results, implications of the study, and recommendations for further study, and conclusion. 5.1. Summary of the Study English communication is very important in real-life situations. Recent studies have focused on ELF academic communication context. Therefore, many scholars pay more attention to assist non-native speakers to overcome communication difficulties. Communication strategies are recommended for coping with communication difficulties. Consequently, this study aimed to develop communication strategies of non-native English learners in an academic situation, where English is used as a Lingua Franca (ELF) in academic context. To achieve the purpose, the R & D approach was employed as a methodology to guide the data collection. Therefore, this study consisted of three phases: This first phase was to research common communication needs in an ELF academic context. In this phase, the students and their Thai professors were interviewed to explore the communication needs in the ELF academic context. Semi-structure interview was used as a method. The interviewed questions were tried out with a group of students who have similar characteristics with the target participants. The data from the interview were analyzed by using the coding method. The second phase, the developmental phase, communication strategies instruction was developed and tried out with the pilot group. Observation was recorded, and researcher\u2019s reflection was performed to reivse the communication strategies instruction. The data from researcher\u2019s reflection was analyzed by coding method. In the third phase, or implementation phase, the revised communication strategies was implemented to explore the effects of the instruction on learners\u2019 ability to use English in an ELF academic context. To explore the effects, the learenrs performed a pre-post communication strategies task and they are observed. Field notes with video records were used to document the effects. After","4043325319 111 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 completing each strategy, the students did the student\u2019s reflection. The data from the observational field notes and video recorder were transcribed. 5.2 Summary of the findings The findings of the current study could be summarized that Thai students and Cambodian students reported two main communication needs: limited linguistic knowledge and sociocultural bias. For limited linguistic knowledge aspect, it consisted of three needs 1) listening comprehension, 2) grammatical errors, and 3) inadequate vocabulary. For the sociocultural bias aspect, it consisted two needs: culture differences and mindset. It was clear that the students did not have communication strategies to carry on conversation in the ELF academic context. Therefore, communication strategies instruction was designed to solve common communication needs in the aspects of comprehension skills and students\u2019 inadequate vocabulary. Moreover, the aspect of sociocultural bias need was solved by giving the concept of ELF before starting the lessons. The components of this instruction consisted of objectives, syllabus, teacher and learner roles, and instructional materials. Instructional materials had four lesson plans of communication strategies: circumlocution, approximation, clarification requests and confirmation checks. It was found that communication strategies instruction increased students\u2019 ability to use English in an academic context. The quantitative data indicated that after the training, low proficiency students had higher scores than before training. It can be assumed that this communication strategies instruction could solve the common communication needs for low students since they had gained more knowledge from the training. Qualitatively, the students perceived better language use in the classroom. They had more confident to speak with their interlocutors. They attempted to use communication strategies to help them for overcoming language difficulties. Moreover, they had positive attitudes to this communication strategies instruction.","4043325319 112 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 5.3 Discussion This study contributes to the literature of communication strategies instruction. In Thailand, communication strategies were investigated in many dimensions which mostly in EFL of teacher-student context. Although, some researchers examined communication strategies in ELF context, they focused on communication strategies employed on the mutual understanding between non-native speakers, who are not students (e.g., Inkeaw (2018); Rajprasit and Hemchua (2018)). This study fulfills the gap of communication strategies in ELF, this study emphasizes communication strategies in communication between students in formal situation of ELF and pedagogies, which can be quite challenging for all involved. This section presents a discussion of two points found in this study. They include: 1) the common communication needs for non-native speakers, and 2) the effects of communication strategies instruction training 5.3.1 Common communication needs for non-native speakers This study aimed to explore common communication needs encountered in an ELF academic context. This study paid more attention to learners\u2019 real needs. It is currently needed to consider before designing the training instruction since it can help researchers to solve the real communicative needs and select appropriate communication strategies for each context. The finding of the study discovered two main themes of communication needs from Thai students and Cambodian students: limited linguistic problems and sociocultural bias. This study investigated in ELF context, the diversity of English was accepted, and negotiation of meaning were more focused rather than norms. Therefore, this study emphasized only on limited linguistic needs. According to the findings of the study, three aspects of communication needs were found: 1) listening comprehension, 2) grammatical errors, and 3) inadequate vocabulary. Similar to EFL context, students in ELF also experience difficulties as a study, reported by Wiriyajitra (2002). Moreover, Boonkit (2010) investigated the development and enhancement of speaking skills for non-native English speakers, the findings revealed that the main problems among non-native with speaking English were pronunciation and grammatical errors. Khamkeaw (2009) conducted a study to explore the needs and problems in English listening and speaking skills of Thai","4043325319 113 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Metropolitan Police officers. He also reported that the main problem of non-native speakers was about listening failure and to understand the various tourist accents. Moreover, they cannot speak for basic expression because they had limited vocabulary. However, the previous studies were conducted in both ELF and EFL workplace context. This study emphasized on academic context, which is quite limited. Moreover, this study presented communication strategies between student- student communication (Thai students and Cambodain students) in ELF context, which is quite limited in Thailand. From the above discussion, it presented that students lacked of communication skills such as listening comprehension skill and inadequate vocabulary problems. Communication strategies are the necessities that learners have to know to function effectively in communication, since it can help students to fulfill their knowledge and overcome language difficulties. Dornyei (1995) proposes that the cause of communication problems come from the students. They do not know how to manage the difficulties when faced with a communicating situation. For assisting non-native speaker to achieve mutual understanding, Canale (1983) and Ogane (1998) stated that teaching communication strategies should help students solve some of their problems in communicating in English and provide them with the necessary tools for coping with difficult linguistic situations. 5.3.2 Effects of communication strategies instruction This study examined the effects of the communication strategies instruction on ability to use English in an ELF academic context. The quantitative data indicated that after the instruction, the scores of the pre-test and post-test were difference for low proficiency students. It presented that the students had higher scores. They gain more knowledge from the training. Qualitatively, the students perceived better language use in the classroom. They had more confident to speak with their interlocutors. They attempted to use communication strategies to help them for overcoming language difficulties. It had surprised that low proficiency students initiated to speak out and tried to solve their communicative problems by using communication strategies. Moreover, they had positive attitude to this communication strategies instruction. While high proficiency students also had positive attitude with","4043325319 114 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 the lessons. Moreover, some of the students said they had new ways to overcome language difficulties. The findings of this study were consistent by previous studies (Dimosky, Yujobo, & Imaim, 2016; Dornyei, 1995; Kongsom, 2009; Lin, 2007; Nakatani & Goh, 2007). previous scholars conducted the effects of communication strategies instruction with EFL students. However, all of them did not separate students to high and low proficiency. After the training, it was found that the communication strategies instruction effects the learners since, it increases students\u2019 ability to use communication strategies effectively. They had more confident to communicate with their interlocutors. Moreover, the result from Kongsom (2009), who conducted the effects of teaching communication strategies to Thai learners of English, presented that student had positive attitude towards the communication strategy training. According to the previous studies mention, it can be assumed that communication strategies training can assist learners to improve and maintain their communication skills. In addition, many scholars, such as, Chamot et al. (1999), Canagarajah (2005), and Cohen and Macaro (2007) confirmed that communication strategies are possible approach to assist students, particularly low proficiency students, to improve their oral communication and maintain their conversation to reach communicative goals. D\u00f6rnyei (1995) claimed that communicative skills can be improved by developing specific communication strategies and raising low-proficiency students\u2019 awareness of strategies for solving potential communication problems, leading to the development of their oral communication ability. Nakatani (2005) also supports these recommendations that communication strategies trained students significantly improved their oral proficiency test scores and their success partly due to an increased awareness of communication strategies. Moreover, some scholars such as Dornyei (1995), Galloway and Rose (2014), and Canagarajah (2005) stated that explicit program of communication strategies training is needed and should be designed specifically for implementation in ELF academic context. However, this study was presented the different new approach for selecting appropriate communication strategies for the training instruction in statistically, on the other hand, the previous study analyzes the communication strategies for training instruction from the texts or","4043325319 115 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 literature reviews. It is very challenging for language teachers to discover the new approach for presenting learners\u2019 needs and show the results in statistic. However, this study had several limitations. The first limitation concerns with the higher scores of the students. Since the number of participants in this study was small size, which had no control group. The interpretation of this research should be conducted with caution. Even though this study yielded the communication strategies instruction effects on students\u2019 ability to use English in an ELF academic context, the effects cannot be interpreted as causal relationship. Another limitation involved with Coronavirus inflectious disease (COVID-19), the classroom situation moved from on-site classroom to online classroom. It was found that online classroom effects to the process of learning and teaching, which is more complexity than on-site classroom. For example, in online classroom internet network was very important since it could interrupt the learning and teaching process because of the stability. Then, it led to time consuming to run all activities. Moreover, it is more complex to use multiple program to moderate the activities. Therefore, training onsite classroom may had more effective and discover the different findings 5.4 Implications The implications of this study are theoretical and practical. As per the theoretical implication, this study presents an attempt to develop communication strategies in ELF academic context. It fills the gap of research on enhancing communication strategies or helping ELF students since this field of research in Thailand is limited. In addition, Bialystok\u2019s (1990) confirmed that there were little empirical research conducting communication strategies pedagogy, so descriptions and evaluations of any procedure are somewhat speculative. Moreover, this study attempted to fulfill the pedagogy and communication strategies employed by ELF to assist them to reach communicative goals and promote mutual understanding. Additionally, for the practical implication, the findings might be appealing for English teachers who has similar experience or currently teaching non-native speakers in their academic context rather than focusing on improving grammar skills. Teacher may consider for improving communication strategies. However, it is conserved that the teachers played an important role when implementing","4043325319 116 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 communication strategies. They need to motivated low proficiency students for speaking the responses or used communication strategies when the students faced with language difficulties. Moreover, teachers\u2019 feedback can encourage students to have more confident to speak or express the ideas. Moreover, this study might contribute to the researchers for designing communication strategies training instruction by considering learners\u2019 real problems or needs and presented in statistically, rather analyzed from the texts or literature reviews 5.5 Limitations and recommendations for further studies According to the findings of the study, it presented that this study has some limitations. Therefore, further research is needed. Firstly, this study was designed to investigate the effects of communication strategies instruction on the ability to use English in an ELF academic context. The participants were a group of the students. It cannot claim that the scores of the post-test higher than pretest because of the training. The higher scores may occur from the other factors because it had not control group for comparing or confirming the results. In short, the current study cannot claim in causal relationship. Hence, the further studies may conduct by using more robust research design. Secondly, in order to see the qualitative changes in students\u2019 communication strategies use, a longitudinal study is recommended in further study. The communication strategies instruction took six hours, and a longer period of training is needed. Therefore, the further studies may conduct longitudinal studies to examine the change of students\u2019 communication strategies behaviors and their perceptions about the strategies use over time. Conclusion This study attempts to assist Thai students and Cambodian students in academict context to solve communication needs by offering communication strategies instruction. The results are promising. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare the pre-test and post-test scores. The results showed that low proficiency students had higher post-test scores, which can be assumed that this instruction may assist low proficiency students to have more ability to use English in ELF context since they gain more knowledge of communication strategies and had","4043325319 117 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 more confidents to speak English with foreigners. In addition, in this current study, the new procedure to select communication strategies for the training instruction by focusing on learners\u2019 need rather than reviewing from the previous literature. Moreover, this study used quantitative data to present the effects of communication instruction on ability to use English in an ELF academic context by employing non- parametric statistic. However, the promising evidence might be beneficial for other teachers. As more and more internationalization come to Thailand and the paradigm shift. Maybe, it is time that we should develop and teach communication strategies to the students by designing new communication strategies instructions to expand our new pedagogy. These instructions are compared with a springboard to equip learners with tools to cope with diversity: in the open seas of language use outside of language classrooms.","REFE REN CES REFERENCES (Allan, 2004; Allwright, 1982; Alpte kin, 20 02; Altbach, 20 04; Ba ker, 2015; Ball & Lindsay, 2013; Berns, 200 8; Bialysto k, 199 0; Biyaem, 1997; Bjor kma n, 2014; Boo nkit, 2010; Bo ud, Keog h, & Wa lker, 1985; Breen & Candlin, 1980; H. D. Brown, 19 94; Ja mes D ean Brown, 1995; J. D Brown, 1996; Bygate, 19 87; Canagarajah, 2005; Mic hael Ca nale, 201 4; M Cana le & Swa in, 1980; C ha mot & O\u2019 ma lley, 199 4; Chen, 1990; C hoi, 2003; Coa kes & Steed, 2003; A. Co go, 200 9; A Cogo, 2 010; Aless ia Cogo & Dewey, 2006; A. Cog o & Jenkins, 20 10; Cooley & Ro ach, 19 84; Creswell, 2003; Crozet & Liddicoat, 20 00; Dearden, 2014, 2 015; Dimos ky et al. , 2016; Dor nyei, 199 5; D\u00f6rnyei & Kor mos, 1 998; Dornyei & Scott, 1995 a, 1995 b, 1 997; D\u00f6rnyei & Scott, 1995; D uff, 2007; Ellis, 19 91; C Faerch & Ka sper, 198 3, 1983 b; C. Faerch & Kas per, 1986; Fie dler, 2011; Firt h, 19 96; Fly ma n, 1997; F uente, 200 2; Gall, Borg, & Gall, 20 07; N. Gallowa y & Rose, 20 15; Garc\u0131a & Wei, 2014; Gass & V aronis, 199 1; Giles & Coupla nd, 1991; Gnutzma nn, 2000; Graddol, 1997, 2 006; Greenwood, 2 002; Grenfell & Macaro, 2007; Grice, 1957; Gumus , 2007; Gur uz, 2011; Haegema n, 20 02; Ha ll, 19 59; Ha mbleton & Rovi nelli, 1986; Hewstone & Giles, 1 986; Ho use, 1 999; Hua ng, 201 2; Hy mes, 1 967; I nkeaw, 2 018; Jeharsae, 2014; J Jenkins, 20 05; Jennifer Jenkins, 2007; J Jenkins, 20 14, 201 5; Kachr u, 198 8, 1992; Kaur, 2011; E. Keller ma n & Bialysto k, 1 997; E Keller man & Kas per, 1997; Ketamo n et al., 2 017; Kha mkaew, 2009; A. Kir kpatric k, 2007a , 2007 b, 20 10; Ko hn, 2020; Ko ngso m, 2 009; Kumar & Sharo n, 20 08; L, 1 972; Lam, 2004; Leung, Lee, & Chiu, 201 3; Levelt, 198 9; Lij uan, 2010; Lin, 200 7; Little more, 2001, 2 003; M. Long, 1996; M. H. Long, 1983; E. Low & Ao, 201 8; E. L. Low & Ha shim, 2012; Luca s, 2009; M & R, 2008; Ma, 20 04; Macaro et al., 2018; Mac ke y & Gass, 2005; Ma ldo na do, 20 16; Matsumoto, Frank, & Hw ang , 2012; Ma urane n, 2006 , 2007, 2012; McArthur, 1 998; McDono ug h & McDonoug h, 19 97; McKay, 2 002; McMilla n & Schumacher, 2010; Meier kor d, 2000; Milner, 201 1, 2012; Morrow, 19 77; Mufida h et al., 20 12; Na katani, 2005; Na kata ni & Goh, 2007; Nation & Maca lister, 2010; Na ult, 20 06; Nguyen, 20 18; No mnian, 2018; Norto n & To ohey, 2 011; OECD, 2002, 201 7; Oga ne, 1998; Oliver, 20 02; Oxfor d, 1990; Pariba kht, 1984; A Pe nnycoo k, 1 994; Alasta ir Pennycoo k, 2001, 2010; P hil lipso n, 1992; P ica, 1987, 1994, 2002; Pornpibul, 2 005; Po ulis se, 1987, 1993; Po ulisse et al., 19 87; Priny ajarn, 20 07; Rajpras it & He mchua, 201 8; Rasch & Tiku, 2012; Reisinger, 2009; Jac k C Ric hards, 2017; J. C. Richar ds, Platt, & Platt, 1992; J ac kC Ric har ds & Rodgers, 2014; Rose & Galloway, 20 19; Ross iter, 2003; Rost & Ross , 1991; Salda na, 20 09; Scarcella & Oxford, 1 992; Sc hmidt -Unterberger, 2018; Schwa b, 2 017a; Seidlhofer, 2001, 2003, 2004; Seidlhofer, 2005; Seidlhofer, 2006; Seidlhofer, 2008; Seidlhofer, 2010, 201 1; N. Sifa kis, 201 9a, 201 9b; N. C. Sifa kis, 2014; N. C . Sifa kis & Tsa ntila, 2018; Siqueira, 2015; Smit, 2010; Statistics, 1999-2015; Suwannas o m, 2019; Swain, 1 985; Taro ne, 1977 , 1980, 1983, 1 984; Ting & Phan, 2 008; J. Tseng , 1999; Y. H. Tseng, 2002; Tu pas, 2018; Vettorel, 2017; Vygots ky, 1 978; Wag ner & Firth, 1 997; Wa lker, 200 1; Wa nnar uk, 2002; Weerara k, 2 003; Widdowso n, 19 78, 199 9; Willems, 1987; Wiriyac hitra, 2002; Wolf, 19 97; Wo ngsawa ng, 2001; Xu, 2007; Yo shida , 2004; Y u, 201 5; X. Yuan, 2006; Y. Y ua n, 2012; Y ule & Tarone, 19 97) 4043325319 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41","4043325319 REFERENCES BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Allan, D. (2004). Oxford Placement Test. Oxford University Press. Allwright, R. (1982). Perceiving and pursuing learners' needs. In M. Geddes and G. Sturtridge (Ed.) Individualization. Oxford: Modern English Publications. Alptekin, C. (2002). Toward intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal, 56(1), 57-64. Altbach, P. G. (2004). Globalization and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. In National Education Association (Ed.),The NEA 2005 almanac of higher education. Washington DC, National Education Association. Baker, W. (2015). Research into Practice: Cultural and intercultural awareness. Language Teaching, 48(1), 310-141. Ball, P., & Lindsay, D. (2013). Language demands and support for English-medium instruction in tertiary education. Learning from a specific context. English- medium instruction at universities: Global challenges, 4466. Berns, M. (2008). World Englishes, English as a Lingual Franca and Intelligibility. World Englishes, 27(3-4), 327-334. Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication Strategies.Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd. Biyaem, S. (1997). Learner training: Changing roles for a changing world, educational innovation for sustainable development. 3rd UNESCO-ACEID International conference. Bangkok, Thailand. Bjorkman, B. (2014). An analysis of polyadic English as a lingua franca (ELF) speech: a communicative strategies framework. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 112-138. Boonkit, K. (2010). Enhancing the development of speaking skills for non-native speakers of English. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 2(2), 1305- 1309. Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London. UK: Kogan Page. Breen, M., & Candlin, C. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 89-112. Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in Language Programs. NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Reclaming the local in language policy and practice. New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Canale, M. (2014). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. cited J.C. Richards, and R.W. Schmidt (Eds.) Language and communication (pp. 14-40). Harlow: Longman. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communication approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-7.","4043325319 119 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Chamot, A. U., & O\u2019malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach. NY: Adison Wesley Longman, Inc. Chen, S. (1990). A study of communication strategies in interlanguage production by Chinese EFL learners. Language Learning, 40(2), 155-187. Choi, S. (2003). Negotiation of meaning in oral discussion tasks among L2 learners in a Hong Kong secondary school. Retrieved from http:\/\/hub.hku.hk\/bitstream\/10722\/30599\/15\/FullText.pdf?accept=1 Coakes, S. J., & Steed, L. G. (2003). SPSS: Analysis Without Anguish: Version 11.0 for Windows. 1st End., John Wiley, Milton.QLD. Australia. Cogo, A. (2009). Accommodating difference in ELF conversations: A study of pragmatic strategies. In Anna Mauranen & Elina Ranta (eds.), English as a lingua franca. Studies and findings, 254-273. Cogo, A. (2010). Strategic use and Perceptions of English as Lingua Franca. Retrieved from http:\/\/eprints.soton.ac.uk\/186021\/1\/fulltext.pdf. Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2006). Efficiency in ELF communication: From pragmatic motives to lexico-grammatical innovation. Nordic journal of English studies, 5(2), 59-93. Cogo, A., & Jenkins, J. (2010). English as a lingua franca in Europe: A mismatch between policy and practice. European Journal of Language Policy, 2, 271- 294. Cooley, R. C., & Roach, D. A. (1984). Theoretical approaches to communication competence: A conceptual framework. Beverly Hills, CA. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Crozet, C., & Liddicoat, A. J. (2000). Teaching Culture as An Integrated Part of Language: Implications for The Aims, Approaches and Pedagogies of Language Teaching IN LIDDICOAT, A. J. & CROZET, C. (Eds.). Teaching Languages, Teaching Cultures.Melbourne: Language Australia. Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction\u2013a growing global phenomenon. British Council. Retrieved from http:\/\/www. britishcouncil. org\/education\/ihe\/knowledgecentre\/english-language-higher- education\/report-english-medium-instruction Dearden, J. (2015). English As a Medium of Instruction \u2013 A Growing Phenomenon. Retrieved from https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/0013191610140107 Dimosky, B., Yujobo, Y., & Imaim, M. (2016). Exploring the Effectiveness of Communication Strategies Through Pro-Active Listening in ELF-Informed Pedagogy. Language Education in Asia, 7(2). Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 55-85. D\u00f6rnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (1998). Problem-solving mechanisms in L2 communication: A psycholinguistic perspective. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(3), 349-385. Dornyei, Z., & Scott, M. (1995a). Communication strategies: What are they and they not? Paper presented at the annual Conference of the American Association for Applied Laniuistics (AAAL): Long Beach: CA.","4043325319 120 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Dornyei, Z., & Scott, M. (1995b). Communication strategies: An empirical analysis the retrospection. In J.S. Turley, and K. Lusby (Eds.). Selected papers from the proceedings of 21st Annual Symposium of the Deseret Lanuguage and Linguistics Society, 155-168. Dornyei, Z., & Scott, M. (1997). Review article: communication strategies in a second language: definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning, 47(1), 173-210. D\u00f6rnyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. (1995). Communication stragegies: An empirical analysis with retrospection. Deseret Language and Linguistic Society Symposium, 21, 137-150. Duff, P. A. (2007). Second language socialization as sociocultural theory: Insights and issues. Language Teaching, 40(4), 309-319. Ellis, R. (1991). The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. In E. Sadtono (ed.), Language Acquisition in the Second\/Foreign Language Classroom. Anthology Series, 28, 179-211. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Plans and strategies in interlanguage communication. In C. Faerch, and G. Kasper (Eds.). Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. New York: Longman, 20-60. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983b). On identifying communication strategies in interlanguage production. In C. Faerch, and G. Kasper (eds.). Strategies in interlanguage communication. London: Longman. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1986). Cognitive Dimensions of Language Transfer. In E. Kellerman, & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.). Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition New York: Pergamon Press. Fiedler, S. (2011). English as a lingua franca. A native- culture-free code? Language of communication vs language of identification. Journal of Applied Language Studies, 5(3), 79-97. Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality. On \u201clingua franca\u201d English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(2), 37-59. Flyman, A. (1997). Communication strategies in French as a foreign language. Department of Linguistics, Lund University: Working Papers, 46, 57-73. Fuente, M. (2002). The roles of input and output in the receptive and productive acquisition of Words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(1), 81- 112. Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (2007). Educational research: An introduction. NY: Pearson Education. Galloway, N., & Rose, H. (2015). Introducing Global Englishes. Abingdon: Routledge. Galloway, N., & Sahan, K. (2021). An investigation into English Medium Instruction in higher education in Thailand and Vietnam. British Council. Garc\u0131a, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan. Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1991). Miscommunication in nonnative speaker discourse. In N. Coupland, H. Giles, and J. Wiemann. (Eds). Miscommunication and problematic talk. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 121-145. Giles, H., & Coupland, N. (1991). Language: Contexts and consequences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks\/Cole.","4043325319 121 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Gnutzmann, C. (2000). Lingua franca\u2019. In Byram, M. (ed.). 2004. Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning. London: Routledge, 356- 359. Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English. London. The British Council. Graddol, D. (2006). English Next: Why global English may mean the end of \u2018English as a Foreign Language\u2019. London: British Council. Greenwood, J. (2002). The role of teaching English pronunciation: Issues and approaches In International Conference IPBA. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Grenfell, M., & Macaro, E. (2007). Language learner strategies: Claims and critiques. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Grice, H. P. (1957). Meaning. Philosophical Review, 6(3), 77-88. Gumus, P. (2007). A study into the impact of language proficiency on the use of communication strategies by high school students (Unpublished MA thesis). \u00c7anakkale: \u00c7anakkale Onsekiz Mart University. Guruz, K. (2011). Higher education and international student mobility in the global knowledge economy. Albany: SUNY Press. Haegeman, P. (2002). Foreigner talk in lingua franca business telephone calls. In: Karlfried Knapp and Christiane Meierkord (eds.) Lingua Franca Communication. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 135-162. Hall, T. (1959). The Silent Language. New York: Doubleday. Hambleton, R. K., & Rovinelli, R. J. (1986). Assessing the dimensionality of a set of test items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10, 278-302. Hewstone, M., & Giles, H. (1986). Social groups and social stereotypes in intergroup communication: a review and model of intergroup communication breakdown. In W.B. Gudykunst, (Ed.) Intergroup Communication. Baltimore. Edward Arnold:. House, J. (1999). Misunderstanding in intercultural communication: Interactions in English as lingua franca and the myth of mutual intelligibility. In C. Gnutzmann (Ed.) Teaching and learning English as a global language: Native and non-native Perspectives: T\u00fcbingen: Stauffenburg. Huang, L. (2012). Use of Oral Reflection in Facilitating Graduate EAL Students\u2019 Oral-Language Production and Strategy Use: An Empirical Action Research Study. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2). Hymes, D. (1967). \u201cOn Communicative Competence\u201d, cited Brumit and Johnson (eds.). The Communication Approach to Language Teaching: Oxford: OUP. Inkeaw, M. (2018). An Exploration of English as a Lingua Franca Communication: A Case Study of How English is Used as a Lingua Franca among Non-native Speakers for Mutual Understanding in an International Golf Tournament. Reflection, 25(2), 48-52. Jeharsae, F. (2014). English oral communication problems and strategies used by Thai employees in an international workplace to communicate with native and non-native English speaking customers. (Unpublished master\u2019s dissertation). Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand. Jenkins, J. (2005). English as a lingua franca: Past empirical, present controversial, future uncertain. In J. Foley (Ed.). New Dimensions in the Teaching of Oral","4043325319 122 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Communication: Proceedings of the 40th SEAMEO RELC International Seminar (pp.1-19). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. UK: Oxford University Press. Jenkins, J. (2014). English as a lingua franca in the international university: The politics of academic English language policy. Oxon: Routledge. Jenkins, J. (2015). Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a lingua franca. Englishes in Practice, 2, 49-85. Kachru, B. (1988). The sacred cows of English. English Today, 16(4), 3-8. Kachru, B. (1992). Models for non-native Englishes. In B. Kachru (Ed.): (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Kaur, J. (2011). Raising explicitness through self-repair in English as a lingua franca. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(11), 2704-2715. Kellerman, E., & Bialystok, E. (1997). On psychological plausibility in the study of communication strategies. In G. Kasper, and E. Kellerman (Eds.). Communication strategies: Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives: London: Longman. Kellerman, E., & Kasper, G. (1997). Communication strategies: psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives. London: Longman. Ketamon, T., Pomduang, P., N., N. P., & Hanchayanon, A. (2017). The Implementation of CEFR in the Thai Education System. Hatyai Academic Journal, 16(1), 77-88. Khamkaew, S. (2009). Needs and Problems in English Listening and Speaking Skills: a Case Study of the Metropolitan Police Officers at Counter Service at Chana Songkram Police Station. (Unpublished master's thesis). Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok. Kirkpatrick, A. (2007a). World Englishes: Implications for International Communication and English Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kirkpatrick, A. (2007b). The communicative strategies of ASEAN speakers of English as a lingua franca. In D. Prescott. (ed.). English in Southeast Asia: literacies, literatures and varieties.Newcastle: Cambridge ScholarsPublishing, 212-139. Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN: A Multilingual Model. Hong Kong. Hong Kong University Press. Kirkpatrick, A. (2012). English as an international language in Asia: Implications for language education English as an international language in Asia: Implications for language education (pp. 29-44): Springer. Kohn, K. (2020). A pedagogical lingua franca approach: Emancipating the foreign language learner. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 13(2), 1-14. Kongsom, T. (2009). The effects of teaching communication strategies on Thai learners of English. Retrieved from http:\/\/eprints.soton.ac.uk\/69653\/1.hasCoversheetVersion\/Tiwaporn_Kongso m_24_11_09.pdf","4043325319 123 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Kumar, S., & Sharon, S. (2008). Southeast Asia: The diversity dilemma: How Intra- regional contradictions and external forces are shaping Southeast Asia Today. Singapore: Select. L, S. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL, 10, 209\u2013231. Lam, W. K. (2004). Teaching strategy use for oral communication tasks to ESL learners. . Unpublished PhD. thesis. University of Leeds. Leung, A. K.-Y., Lee, S.-l., & Chiu, C.-y. (2013). Meta-knowledge of culture promotes cultural competence. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(6), 992-1006. Levelt, W. J. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lijuan, Q. (2010). An empirical study of meaning negotiation from the perspective of Task characteristics: Task difficulty and task complexity. Chinese Journal Applied linguistic (Bimonthly), 33(4), 45-63. Lin, G. H. (2007). A case study of seven Taiwanese English as a Foreign Language freshman non-English majors\u2019 perceptions about learning five communication strategies. Unpublished PhD. dissertation. Texas A&M University, College Station. Littlemore, J. (2001). An empirical study of the relationship between cognitive style and the use of communication strategy. Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 241-265. Littlemore, J. (2003). The communicative effectiveness of different types of communication strategies. System, 31, 311-347. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (eds.). Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 2, 413-468. Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker\/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input1. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126-141. Low, E., & Ao, R. (2018). The Spread of English in ASEAN: Policies and issues. RELC Journal, 49(2), 131-148. Low, E. L., & Hashim, A. (2012). English in Southeast Asia: Features, policy and language in use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Lucas, J. M. (2009). American Higher Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. M, B., & R, P. (2008). Understanding cross-cultural management. Princeton Hall. Ma, D. M. (2004). Main factors affecting the process of meaning negotiation in interaction. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 7, 32-36. Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J., & Dearden, J. (2018). A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36-76. Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Maldonado, M. (2016). Communication strategies used by different level L2 English learners in oral interaction. Revista Signos, 49(90), 71-93. Matsumoto, D., Frank, G., & Hwang, H. S. (2012). Nonverbal communication. Science and applications. Mauranen, A. (2006). Signaling and preventing misunderstanding in English as lingua franca communication. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 177(1), 123-150.","4043325319 124 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Mauranen, A. (2007). Hybrid voices: English as the lingua franca of academics. In: Flottum, K (ed.). Language and Discipline Perspectives on Academic Discourse, 2, 43-59. Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring ELF. Academic English Shaped by Non-native Speakers. Cambridge University Press. McArthur, T. (1998). The English Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McDonough, J., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research Methods for English Language Teachers. London: Arnold. McKay, S. (2002). Teaching English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McMillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson. Meierkord, C. (2000). Interpreting successful lingua franca interaction. An analysis of non-native\/nonnative small talk conversations in English. Linguistik Online, 5. Milner, A. (2011). Analyzing Asian regionalism: What is an architectural perspective? Australian Journal of International Affairs, 65(1), 109-126. Milner, A. (2012). Studying ASEAN regionalism: What skillset is required. Kyoto Center of Southeast Asian Studies Newsletter, 65, 10-14. Morrow, K. (1977). Techniques of evaluation for a notional syllabus. London, UK: Royal Society of Arts. Mufidah, S., Rukmini, D., & Faridi, A. (2012). Academic Language Functions in Teaching Content Subjects. Journal of Language and Literature, 7(1), 81-91. Nakatani, Y. (2005). The effects of awareness-raising training on oral communication strategy use. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 86-91. Nakatani, Y., & Goh, C. (2007). A review of oral communication strategies: focus on interactionist and psycholinguistic perspectives. In A.D. Cohen, and E. Macaro. (Eds.). Language learner strategies. New York: Oxford University, 207-227. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language Curriculum Design. New York &. London: Routledge. Nault, D. (2006). Going Global: Rethinking Culture Teaching in ELT Contexts Language. Culture and Curriculum, 19(3), 314-328. Nguyen, T. (2018). Perspective on Intercultural Communication in a Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Classroom. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Learning, 4(1), 13-19. Nomnian, S. (2018). Synergizing Transcultural Learning of Global Englishes:Voices Of Chinese Students. Bangkok: ELT Education (Thailand). Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2011). Identity, language learning, and social change. Language Teaching, 44(4), 412-446. OECD. (2002). Frascati Manual: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development. Paris, France: OECD. OECD. (2017). Education at a glance 2017. OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. Ogane, M. (1998). Teaching Communication Strategies. ERIC document (ED 419384).","4043325319 125 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 1, 97-110. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House. Paribakht, T. (1984). The relationship between the use of communication strategies and aspects of target language. Qu\u00e9bec: International Centre for Research on Bilingualism. Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an international language. London: Longman. Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. UK: Routledge. Pennycook, A. (2010). Language as a local practice: Routledge. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Pica, T. (1987). Second-language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics,, 8, 3-21. Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: what does it reveal about second-language earning conditions, processes, and outcomes? . Language Learning, 44, 493- 527. Pica, T. (2002). Subject matter content: How does it assist the interactional and linguistic needs of classroom language learners? . Modern Language Journal, 85, 1-19. Pornpibul, N. (2005). Quantitative and qualitative views of EFL learners\u2019 strategies: A focus on communication strategies. Journal of English Studies, 2, 64-87. Poulisse, N. (1987). Variations in learners\u2019 use of communication strategies. Paper presented at the European Seminar on Learning Styles: France. Poulisse, N. (1993). A theoretical account of lexical communication strategies. cited R. Shreuder, and B. Westens (eds.). The Bilingual Lexicon. Amsterdam:John Benjamins, 157-189. Poulisse, N., Kellerman, E., & Bongaerts, T. (1987). Strategy and system in referential communication. In R.Ellis (Ed.). Second language acquisition in context: Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International. Prinyajarn, G. (2007). Teaching communication strategies to science and technology graduate students. Retrieved from http:\/\/sutir.sut.ac.th:8080\/sutir\/handle\/123456789\/2686. October 12, 2011. Rajprasit, k., & Hemchua, S. (2018). Communication Mobility and Communication Strategies Used in BELF Communication: Self-Report of Thai Human Resources Professionals in a Multinational Corporation. Reflection, 25(2), 1- 20. Rasch, D., & Tiku, M. L. (2012). Robustness of statistical methods and nonparametric statistics. German: Springer Science & Business Media. Reisinger, Y. (2009). International tourism: Cultures and behavior. New York, NY:Routledge. . Richards, J. C. (2017). Curriculum development in language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press Cambridge. Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Essex: Longman.","4043325319 126 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. UK: Cambridge university press. Rose, H., & Galloway, N. (2019). Global Englishes for language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rossiter, M. (2003). It\u2019s like chicken but bigger: Effects of communication strategy in the EFL Classroom. Canadian Language Review, 60, 191-121. Rost, M., & Ross, S. (1991). Learner use of strategies in interaction: Typology and teachability. Language Learning, 41, 235-273. Saldana, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Scarcella, R. C., & Oxford, R. L. (1992). The Tapestry of Language Learning: The Individual in the Communicative Classroom. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Schmidt-Unterberger, B. (2018). The English-medium paradigm: a conceptualisation of English-medium teaching in higher education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(5), 527-539. Schwab, K. E. (2017a). Thailand - Towards a Competitive Higher Education System in a Global Economy. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11, 134-158. Seidlhofer, B. (2003). Controversies in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Seidlhofer, B. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 9-39. Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT Journal, 59, 339-341. Seidlhofer, B. (2006). English as a lingua franca in the expanding circle: What it isn't. In R. Rubdy & M. Saraceni (Eds.). English in the world: Global rules,global roles, 40-50. London: Continuum. Seidlhofer, B. (2008). Of norms and mindsets. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 33.31-33.37. Seidlhofer, B. (2010). Lingua franca English: The European context\u2019 in A.Kirkpatrick (ed.). The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes.Routledge, 35-71. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding ELF. Oxford University Press. Sifakis, N. (2019a). ELF Awareness in English Language Teaching: Principles and Processes. Applied Lingulistic, 40(2), 288-306. Sifakis, N. (2019b). ELF Awareness in English Language Teaching: Principles and Processes. Applied Linguistics, 40(2), 288-306. Sifakis, N. C. (2014). ELF awareness as an opportunity for change: A transformative perspective for ESOL teacher education. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 3(2), 317-335. Sifakis, N. C., & Tsantila, N. (2018). English as a lingua franca for EFL contexts. UK: Multilingual matters. Siqueira, D. (2015). English as a Lingua Franca and ELT materials: is the \u2018plastic world\u2019 really melting? In: BAYYURT, Y.; AKCAN, S. (Eds.). Current perspectives on pedagogy for English as a Lingua Franca. Berlin. Mouton de Gruyter, 239-258. Smit, U. (2010). English as a lingual franca in higher education. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.","4043325319 127 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Statistics, U. I. f. (1999-2015). Data Centre Custom tables. Suwannasom, T. (2019). A Study on intercultural strategies in English as a lingua franca communication of Naresuan University graduate students. Journal of Liberal Arts Prince of Songkla University, 11(1), 307-337. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input And comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass (eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition, Rowley. MA: Newsbury House. Tarone, E. (1977). Conscious Communication Strategies in Interlanguage: A Progress Report, cited H.D. Brown, C.A. Yorio. and R.H. Crymes. (Eds.). On TESOL\u201977 teaching and learning English as a second language\u2019 Trends in resource and practice, 194-201. Tarone, E. (1980). Communication strategies, foreign talk, and repair in interlanguage. Language Learning, 30, 417-431. Tarone, E. (1983). Some thoughts on the notion of \u201ccommunication strategy\u201d. In C. Fearch & G.Kasper (eds.). Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. New York: Longman, 61-74. Tarone, E. (1984). Teaching strategic competence in the foreign language classroom. cited S.J. Savignon, and M.S. Berns. (Eds.). Initiatives in communicative language teaching.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 127-137. Ting, S., & Phan, G. L. (2008). Adjusting communication strategies to language proficiency. Prospect, 23, 28-36. Tseng, J. (1999). Cross-cultural Exchange for Junior High Students in Taiwan:A Case Study. The Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China Taipei, The Crane Publishing Co. Tseng, Y. H. (2002). A Lesson in Culture. ELT, 56, 11-21. Tupas, R. (2018). (Un)framing Language Policy and Reform in Southeast Asia. RELC Journal, 49(2), 149-163. Vettorel, P. (2017). Communication strategies, ELF and ELT materials. Feira de Santana. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/322780214_Communication_Strate gies_ELF_and_ELT_materials. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wagner, J., & Firth, A. (1997). Communication Strategies at Work. In G. Kasper and E. Kellerman (Eds.). Communication strategies: psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives, 323-344. New York: Longman. Walker, R. (2001). Pronunciation priorities, the Lingua Franca Core, and monolingual groups. Speak Out, 18, 4-9. Wannaruk, A. (2002). Communication Strategies in an EST Context. Institute Research of Development, Suranaree University of Technology. Weerarak, L. (2003). Oral communication strategies employed by English Majors taking listening and speaking 1 at Rajabhat Institute Nakhon Ratchasima. Master Thesis in Science Education, Suranaree University of Technology. Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Notional-functional syllabuses: 1978 (PI. 4). In C. H. Blatchford & J. Schachter (Eds.),. On TESOL \u201878: EFL, policies, programs, Practices, 33-35.Washington, DC: TESOL.","4043325319 128 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Widdowson, H. G. (1999). Aspects of Language Teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. Willems, G. (1987). Communication strategies and their significance in foreign language teaching. System, 15, 351-364. Wiriyachitra, A. (2002). English language teaching and learning in Thailand in this decade. Thai TESOL focus, 15(1), 4-9. Wolf, R. M. (1997). Questionnaires. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.). Educational research, methodology, and measurement: An international handbook, 422-426. Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon. . Wongsawang, P. (2001). Culture-specific notions in L2 communication strategies. Second Language Studies, 19(2), 111-135. Xu, Y. (2007). Strategic analysis on cross-cultural human resources management. In. Market Modernization, 19, 274-275. Yoshida, K. (2004). The fish bowl, open seas, and international English. In Expanding Horizons: . Techniques and Technology in ELT. Proceedings of the 12th Annual KOTESOL International Conference, Seoul: Korea TESOL. Yu, M. H. (2015). Developing critical classroom practice for ELF communication: a Taiwanese case study of ELT materials evaluation. In: BOWLES, H.; COGO, A. (Eds.). International perspectives on English as a Lingua Franca. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. (Pedagogical insights). Yuan, X. (2006). Intercultural education for college English teachers. Journal of Xi\u2019an International Studies University, 14(1), 94-96. Yuan, Y. (2012). Pragmatics, perceptions and strategies in Chinese college English learning. Queensland University of Technology. Yule, G., & Tarone, E. (1997). Investigating communication strategies in L2 reference: Pros and cons. In G. Kasper, and E. Kellerman (Eds.). Communication strategies: Psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics perspectives.","APPENDICES BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 4043325319","4043325319 130 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Appendix A: Questions for the in-depth interviews of Cambodian students 1. When you got a scholarship to study in Thailand, how did you feel about using English to communicate with your Thai classmates or Thai friends? \u1793\u17c5\u1793\u17c1\u179b\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1794\u17b6\u17c1\u1791\u1791\u17bd\u179b\u17a2\u17b6\u17a0\u17b6\u179a\u179a\u1794\u17bc \u1780\u179a\u178e\u1798\u17cd \u1780\u179f\u1780\u17b7 \u179f\u17b6\u1793\u17c5\u1794\u1794 \u17c1\u1791\u179f\u1790\u17c3\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1798\u17b6\u17c1\u17a2\u17b6\u179a\u1798\u1798\u178e\u17cd \u1799\u17b6\u17c9 \u1784\u178e\u17b6\u178a\u17c2\u179a\u1785\u17c1\u17c6 \u1793\u17c7 \u17c7 \u1780\u17b6\u179a\u17c1 \u1793\u1794\u1794\u1797\u17be \u17b6\u179f\u17b6\u17a2\u17d2\u1784 \u17c1\u17cb \u1793\u179b\u179f\u1780\u17c1\u17bb\u1784\u1780\u17b6\u179a\u1791\u17c6\u1793\u17b6\u1780\u1791\u17cb \u17c6\u17c1\u1784\u1787\u17b6\u1798\u17bd \u1799\u1798\u17b7\u178f\u17d2\u178f\u1797\u1780\u178f\u17d2\u17b7 \u1787\u17c1\u1787\u17b6\u178f\u17d2\u17c7\u17d2 \u17b7\u1790\u17c3? 2. When you talk in English with your Thai classmates, do you understand what they say? \u1793\u17c5\u1793\u17c1\u179b\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u17c1\u1793\u1794\u1794\u1797\u17be \u17b6\u179f\u17b6\u17a2\u17d2\u1784 \u17cb\u17c1\u1793\u179b\u179f\u1780\u17c1\u1784\u17bb \u1780\u17b6\u179a\u1791\u17c6\u1793\u17b6\u1780\u17cb \u1791\u17c1\u17c6 \u1784\u1787\u17b6\u1798\u17bd \u1799\u1798\u17b7\u178f\u17d2\u178f\u1797\u1780\u178f\u17d2\u17c1\u17b7 \u17b7\u1784\u1798\u178f\u17b7 \u17d2\u178f\u179a\u1798\u17bd \u1790\u17d2\u1793\u1793\u1780\u17a2\u17cb \u17d2\u1793 \u1780 \u17a2\u17b6\u1785\u1799\u179b\u17cb\u17c1\u1784\u17b7 \u179f\u17b6\u17c7 \u1794\u17cb\u1794\u17b6\u17c1\u17c1\u17bc \u179c\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u17b8\u178a\u17c2\u1793\u179b\u17c7\u1780\u17bd \u17c1\u179b\u17c1\u17b7\u1799\u1799\u178a\u17c2\u179a\u179a\u17c1\u1791? 3. What are the problems you face when communicating with your Thai classmates? \u17c1\u178f\u17d2\u1793\u17d2 \u17c7\u17be\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1798\u17b6\u17c1\u1794\u1789\u17d2\u17b6\u17a0\u179a\u17a7\u1794\u179f\u179b\u1782\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u17b8\u1781\u17d2\u1793\u17c7\u1793\u17c7 \u17c7 \u1780\u17c1\u17bb\u1784\u1780\u17b6\u179a\u179f\u17c1\u1791\u1793\u17b6 \u1787\u17b6\u1798\u17bd \u1799\u1787\u17c1\u1787\u17b6\u178f\u17d2\u17d2\u17c7\u17b7\u1790\u17c3\u1787\u17b6\u1797\u17b6\u179f\u17b6\u17a2\u17d2\u1784 \u17cb\u17c1\u1793\u179b\u179f? 4. How do you solve your problems? \u17c1\u178f\u17d2\u17d2\u1793\u17c7\u17a2\u17be \u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1793\u1793\u17b6\u1793\u17c7 \u17c7 \u1794\u17b6\u1799\u1794\u1789\u17d2\u17b6\u17a0\u17c1\u1793\u17b6\u1793\u17c7 \u17c7 \u1793\u1793\u17b6\u1799\u179a\u17c1\u1793\u1794\u17c0\u1794\u178e\u17b6? 5. In your opinion, what makes you not understand what your Thai classmates say? \u17c1\u178f\u17d2\u17d2\u1793\u17c7\u17be\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u17b8\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u179b\u17b7\u178f\u17d2\u17d2 \u1793\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1798\u17b7\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u17cb\u17c1\u17bc \u179c\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u17b8\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u1798\u17b7\u178f\u17d2\u178f\u179a\u1798\u17bd \u1790\u17d2\u1793\u1793\u1780\u17cb\u179a\u1794\u179f\u17cb \u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1794\u17b6\u17c1\u17c1\u1799\u17b7 \u1799? 6. If you do not understand what your Thai classmates say, how do you solve the problem? \u1793\u17c1\u179b\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1798\u17b7\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u17c1\u17cb \u17bc \u179c\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u17b8\u178a\u17c2\u1793\u179b\u17c7\u17bd\u1780\u17c1\u179b\u17c1\u1799\u17b7 \u1799\u17c1\u178f\u17d2\u17d2\u1793\u17c7\u17a2\u17be \u17d2\u1793 \u1780 \u1793\u1793\u17b6\u1793\u17c7 \u17c7 \u1794\u17b6\u1799\u1794\u1789\u17d2\u17b6\u17a0\u1799\u17b6\u17c9 \u178a\u1784\u17c7\u1785\u17bc \u17c1\u1798\u178f\u17d2\u1785? 7. If your Thai classmates do not understand what you say, do you try to make your classmates understand? How? \u1793\u17c5\u1793\u17c1\u179b\u1798\u178f\u17b7 \u17d2\u178f\u1797\u17d0\u1780\u178a \u17b7\u1790\u17c3\u179a\u1794\u179f\u17cb\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1798\u17b7\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u17cb\u17c1\u17bc \u179c\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u17b8\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u17c1\u1799\u17b7 \u1799 \u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u17c1\u17b9\u1784\u17c1\u17b6\u1799\u1798\u17c1\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u17cb\u1793\u17a2\u17b6\u1799\u17c1\u17bd\u1780\u1793\u1782\u1799\u179b\u17cb\u178a\u17c2\u179a\u17ac\u1793\u1791? \u17c1\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u17cb \u1793\u17c4\u1799\u179a\u1793\u1794\u17c0\u1794\u178e\u17b6? 8. When you communicate with your Thai classmates, how do you know that they understand you? \u1793\u17c5\u1793\u17c1\u179b\u178a\u17c2\u179b\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u179f\u17c1\u1791\u1793\u17b6\u1787\u17b6\u1798\u17bd \u1799\u1787\u17c1\u1787\u17b6\u178f\u17d2\u17d2\u17c7\u17b7\u1790\u17c3\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u17a2\u17b6\u178a\u1785\u17c7\u17b9\u1784 \u1793\u1793\u17b6\u1799\u179c\u1792\u17b7 \u178e\u17b8 \u17b6\u1793\u17c3\u1793\u17c7\u17bd\u1780\u17c1\u179b\u1799\u179b\u17cb\u17a2\u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u17ac\u1798\u17b7\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u17cb? 9. Do you have any other effective strategies that help promote better understanding when you communicate with your classmates?","131 \u17c1\u178f\u17d2\u17d2\u1793\u17c7\u17a2\u17be \u17d2\u1793 \u1780\u1798\u17b6\u17c1\u179c\u1792\u17b7 \u17b8\u179f\u17b6\u179f\u17d2\u179f\u179f\u178f\u17d2\u17a2\u17d2\u179c \u178a\u17b8 \u17c2\u179b\u1787\u17bd\u1799\u17c1\u17a2\u17b6\u1799\u178a\u17c3\u179b\u17bc \u179f\u17c1\u1791\u1793\u17b6 \u1794\u17b6\u17c1\u1799\u179b\u1780\u17cb \u17c1\u17bb\u1784\u1793\u17c1\u179b\u179f\u17c1\u1791\u1793\u17b6? 4043325319 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41","4043325319 132 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Appendix B: Questions for the in-depth interviews of Thai students by the researcher 1. What do you feel with your Cambodian classmates? \u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e23\u0e39\u0e49\u0e2a\u0e36\u0e01\u0e2d\u0e22\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e07\u0e44\u0e23\u0e40\u0e21\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e21\u0e35\u0e19\u0e34\u0e2a\u0e34\u0e15\u0e01\u0e21\u0e31 \u0e1e\u0e39\u0e0a\u0e32\u0e21\u0e32\u0e40\u0e23\u0e35\u0e22\u0e19\u0e23\u0e48\u0e27\u0e21\u0e2b\u0e49\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e01\u0e1a\u0e31 \u0e04\u0e38\u0e13 2. When you talk in English with your Cambodian classmates, do you understand what they say? \u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e20\u0e32\u0e29\u0e32\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e31 \u0e01\u0e24\u0e29\u0e01\u0e1a\u0e31 \u0e40\u0e1e\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e37 \u0e19\u0e0a\u0e32\u0e27\u0e01\u0e21\u0e31 \u0e1e\u0e0a\u0e39 \u0e32\u0e40\u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e43\u0e08\u0e17\u0e35\u0e48\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e37 \u0e19\u0e1e\u0e39\u0e14\u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48 3. What are the problems you face when communicating with your Cambodian classmates? \u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e21\u0e35\u0e1b\u0e31\u0e0d\u0e2b\u0e32 \u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d \u0e2d\u0e38\u0e1b\u0e2a\u0e23\u0e23\u0e04\u0e2d\u0e30\u0e44\u0e23\u0e43\u0e19\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e20\u0e32\u0e29\u0e32\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e31 \u0e01\u0e24\u0e29\u0e01\u0e1a\u0e31 \u0e40\u0e1e\u0e2d\u0e37\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e0a\u0e32\u0e27\u0e01\u0e21\u0e31 \u0e1e\u0e39\u0e0a\u0e32 4. How do you solve your problems? \u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e41\u0e01\u0e1b\u0e49 \u0e31\u0e0d\u0e2b\u0e32\u0e17\u0e35\u0e48\u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e21\u0e35\u0e2d\u0e22\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e07\u0e44\u0e23 5. In your opinion, what makes you not understand what your Cambodian classmates say? \u0e17\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e04\u0e34\u0e14\u0e27\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e2d\u0e30\u0e44\u0e23\u0e40\u0e1b\u0e47\u0e19\u0e40\u0e2b\u0e15\u0e38\u0e1c\u0e25\u0e17\u0e35\u0e48\u0e17\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e23\u0e39\u0e49\u0e2a\u0e36\u0e01\u0e27\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e44\u0e21\u0e40\u0e48 \u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e43\u0e08\u0e17\u0e35\u0e48\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e19\u0e0a\u0e32\u0e27\u0e01\u0e21\u0e31 \u0e1e\u0e0a\u0e39 \u0e32\u0e1e\u0e14\u0e39 6. If you do not understand what your Cambodian classmates say, how do you solve the problem? \u0e40\u0e21\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48\u0e40\u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e43\u0e08\u0e17\u0e48\u0e35\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e19\u0e0a\u0e32\u0e27\u0e01\u0e21\u0e31 \u0e1e\u0e0a\u0e39 \u0e32\u0e1e\u0e14\u0e39 \u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e41\u0e01\u0e1b\u0e49 \u0e31\u0e0d\u0e2b\u0e32\u0e2d\u0e22\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e07\u0e44\u0e23 7. If your Cambodian classmates do not understand what you say, do you try to make your classmates understand? How? \u0e40\u0e21\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e2a\u0e19\u0e17\u0e19\u0e32\u0e01\u0e1a\u0e31 \u0e40\u0e1e\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e19\u0e0a\u0e32\u0e27\u0e44\u0e17\u0e22\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48\u0e23\u0e39\u0e49\u0e40\u0e23\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e44\u0e14\u0e1e\u0e49 \u0e22\u0e32\u0e22\u0e32\u0e21\u0e2d\u0e18\u0e34\u0e1a\u0e32\u0e22\u0e43\u0e2b\u0e40\u0e49 \u0e1e\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e37 \u0e19\u0e02\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e17\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e40\u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e43\u0e08\u0e43\u0e19\u0e2a\u0e34\u0e48\u0e07\u0e17\u0e48\u0e35 \u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e15\u0e2d\u0e49 \u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e08\u0e30\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48","133 8. When you communicate with your Cambodian classmates, how do you know that they understand you? \u0e40\u0e21\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e01\u0e1a\u0e31 \u0e0a\u0e32\u0e27\u0e01\u0e21\u0e31 \u0e1e\u0e39\u0e0a\u0e32 \u0e17\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e23\u0e39\u0e49\u0e44\u0e14\u0e2d\u0e49 \u0e22\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e07\u0e44\u0e23\u0e27\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e04\u0e39\u0e48\u0e2a\u0e19\u0e17\u0e19\u0e32\u0e40\u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e43\u0e08\u0e17\u0e35\u0e48\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e1e\u0e39\u0e14\u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48 9. Do you have any other effective strategies that help promote better understanding when you communicate with your classmates? \u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e21\u0e35\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e2d\u0e37\u0e48\u0e19\u0e17\u0e35\u0e48\u0e21\u0e35\u0e1b\u0e23\u0e30\u0e2a\u0e34\u0e17\u0e18\u0e34\u0e20\u0e32\u0e1e\u0e43\u0e19\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e0a\u0e48\u0e27\u0e22\u0e43\u0e2b\u0e04\u0e49 \u0e38\u0e13\u0e41\u0e25\u0e30\u0e04\u0e39\u0e2a\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e17\u0e19\u0e32\u0e40\u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e43\u0e08\u0e01\u0e19\u0e31 \u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48 4043325319 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41","4043325319 134 Appendix C: Questions for in-depth interview of English teacher 1. What were challenging experiences when you teach diverse students? 2. How difference between Thai students and cambodian students in the classroom 3. How about the students in term of communication? 4. What were communication problems between you and these students? 5. In your opinion, how can they solve their communicative problems? BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41","4043325319 135 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 Appendix D : Reflection questionnaires about communication strategies training activities. Direction: The following questions are about your views of communication strategy instruction and its usefulness. Please write down your answers for each item. \u0e04\u0e32\u0e0a\u0e49\u0e35\u0e41\u0e08\u0e07: \u0e04\u0e32\u0e16\u0e32\u0e21\u0e02\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e07\u0e25\u0e48\u0e32\u0e07\u0e40\u0e1b\u0e47\u0e19\u0e04\u0e32\u0e16\u0e32\u0e21\u0e40\u0e01\u0e35\u0e48\u0e22\u0e27\u0e01\u0e1a\u0e31 \u0e04\u0e27\u0e32\u0e21\u0e04\u0e34\u0e14\u0e40\u0e2b\u0e47\u0e19\u0e02\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e15\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e01\u0e34\u0e08\u0e01\u0e23\u0e23\u0e21\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e1d\u0e36\u0e01\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23 \u0e2a\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e41\u0e25\u0e30\u0e1b\u0e23\u0e30\u0e42\u0e22\u0e0a\u0e19\u0e4c\u0e02\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23 \u0e01\u0e23\u0e38\u0e13\u0e32\u0e40\u0e02\u0e35\u0e22\u0e19\u0e04\u0e32\u0e15\u0e2d\u0e1a\u0e02\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e43\u0e19\u0e41\u0e15\u0e48\u0e25\u0e30\u0e02\u0e2d\u0e49 1. How do you feel about communication strategies activities training? (\u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e23\u0e39\u0e49\u0e2a\u0e36\u0e01 \u0e2d\u0e22\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e07\u0e44\u0e23\u0e15\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e01\u0e34\u0e08\u0e01\u0e23\u0e23\u0e21\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e1d\u0e36\u0e01\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Whe ther or not these communication strategies activities training useful? (\u0e04\u0e38\u0e13\u0e04\u0e34\u0e14\u0e27\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e01\u0e34\u0e08\u0e01\u0e23\u0e23\u0e21\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e48 \u0e1d\u0e36\u0e01\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e40\u0e2b\u0e25\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e49\u0e35\u0e21\u0e35\u0e1b\u0e23\u0e30\u0e42\u0e22\u0e0a\u0e19\u0e4c\u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48 \u0e2d\u0e22\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e07\u0e44\u0e23) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. What kinds of communication strategies activities training do you like? Why? (\u0e04\u0e38\u0e13 \u0e0a\u0e2d\u0e1a\u0e01\u0e34\u0e08\u0e01\u0e23\u0e23\u0e21\u0e43\u0e14\u0e43\u0e19\u0e01\u0e34\u0e08\u0e01\u0e23\u0e23\u0e21\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e2d\u0e48\u0e37 \u0e1d\u0e36\u0e01\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23 \u0e40\u0e1e\u0e23\u0e32\u0e30\u0e40\u0e2b\u0e15\u0e38\u0e43\u0e14) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------","4043325319 136 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 4. Can these communication strategies activities training develop your communicative skills? Which skills do you think these communication strategies activities training can develop your knowledge? (\u0e17\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e04\u0e34\u0e14\u0e27\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e01\u0e34\u0e08\u0e01\u0e23\u0e23\u0e21\u0e40\u0e1e\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e1d\u0e36 \u0e01\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e0a\u0e48\u0e27\u0e22\u0e1e\u0e12\u0e31 \u0e19\u0e32 \u0e17\u0e01\u0e31 \u0e29\u0e30\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e48\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e02\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e2b\u0e23\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e44\u0e21\u0e48 \u0e41\u0e25\u0e30\u0e1e\u0e12\u0e31 \u0e19\u0e32\u0e17\u0e01\u0e31 \u0e29\u0e30\u0e43\u0e14) Yes, these activities can develop my skills in ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, these activities cannot develop my skills because -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. How can communication strategies help you in the future? (\u0e17\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e19\u0e04\u0e34\u0e14\u0e27\u0e32\u0e48 \u0e43\u0e19\u0e2d\u0e19\u0e32\u0e04\u0e15\u0e01\u0e25\u0e27\u0e18\u0e34 \u0e35 \u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2a\u0e37\u0e48\u0e2d\u0e2a\u0e32\u0e23\u0e17\u0e32\u0e07\u0e20\u0e32\u0e29\u0e32\u0e2d\u0e07\u0e31 \u0e01\u0e24\u0e29\u0e21\u0e35\u0e1b\u0e23\u0e30\u0e42\u0e22\u0e0a\u0e19\u0e15\u0e4c \u0e48\u0e2d\u0e17\u0e48\u0e32\u0e19\u0e43\u0e19\u0e14\u0e32\u0e49 \u0e19\u0e43\u0e14) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- @@@@ Thank you @@@@","137 Appendix E: Oxford Placement Test 2 Grammar Test PART 1 Name\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 Total listening \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\/ 100 Total Grammar Part 2 \u2026\u2026\u2026\/ 50 Total Grammar Part \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\/ 50 Grand total .\u2026\u2026..\/ 200 4043325319 Look at these examples. The correct answer is ticked. BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 \uf0fca In warm climates people like \/ likes \/ are liking sitting outside in the sun \uf0fcb If is very hot. They sit at \/ in \/ under the shade. Now the test will begin. Tick the correct answers. 1\u2026 1. Water be freezing\/is freezing \/freezes at a temperature of 0\u2103 2\u2026 2. In some countries there is \/ is \/ it is dark all the time in winter. 3\u2026 3. In hot countries people wear light clothes for keeping \/ to keep \/ 4\u2026 for to keep cool. 4. In Madeira they have the good\/ good \/ a good weather almost 5\u2026 all year. 6\u2026 5. Most Mediterranean countries are more warm \/ the more warm \/ 7\u2026 8\u2026 warmer in October than in April. 9\u2026 6. Parts of Australia don\u2019t have the \/some \/any rain for long periods. 7. In the Arctic and Antarctic it is \/ there is \/ it has a lot of snow. 8. Climate is very important in most of\/ most \/ the most people\u2019s lives. 9. Even now there is little \/ few \/ less we can do to control the weather.","138 4043325319 10. In the future we\u2019ll need \/ we are needing \/we can need to get a lot of 10\u2026 power fromThe sun and the wind. BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 11\u2026 11. Pele is still perhaps most \/ the most \/ the more famous footballer in the World. 12\u2026 13\u2026 12. He had been \/ is \/ was born in 1940. 13. His mother not want \/ wasn\u2019t wanting \/ didn\u2019t want him to be 14\u2026 15\u2026 a footballer. 14. But he used \/ ought \/ has used to watch his father play. 15. His father made him to \/ made him \/ would make him to practice every day Subtotal \u2026\u2026..\/15 16. He learned to use or his left foot or \/ and his left foot and \/ both his 16\u2026 left foot and his right. 17. He got the name Pele when he had only ten years \/ was only ten \/ 17\u2026 was only ten years. 18. By 195 he has joined\/ joined \/ had joined Santos and had scored 18\u2026 in his first game. 19. In 1957 he has been picked \/ was picked \/ was picking for the 19\u2026 Brazilian national team. 20. The World Cup Finals were in 1958 and Pele was looking forward 20\u2026 to play\/to playing \/to be playing. 21. But he hurt this \/ the \/ his knee in a game in Brazil. 21\u2026 22. He thought he isn\u2019t going to \/ couldn\u2019t \/wasn\u2019t going to be ableto play 22\u2026 in the finals in Sweden.","139 23. If he hadn\u2019t been \/weren\u2019t \/wouldn\u2019t be so important to the team. 23\u2026 He would have been Left behind. 24. But he was a such \/ such a \/ a so brilliant play, they took him anyway. 24\u2026 25. And even though \/ even so \/ in spite of he was injured he helped 25\u2026 Brazil to win the final 4043325319 26. The history of the World Cup in quite a \/ a quite \/ quits short one. 26\u2026 27. Football has been\/ is being \/ was played for. 27\u2026 BUU iThesis 61810053 dissertation \/ recv: 20082565 23:43:30 \/ seq: 41 28. Above \/ over\/ more that a hundred years, but the first World Cup. 28\u2026 29. Competition did not be\/ was not \/ was not being held until. 29\u2026 30. 1930. Uruguay could win\/ ere winning\/ had won the Olympic 30\u2026 football. 31. Final in 1924 and 1928 and wanted be\/ being\/ to be World 31\u2026 Champions for the third time. 32. Four teams entered from Europe, but with a little \/ few \/ little 32\u2026 success. 33. It was the first time which \/ that \/ when professional tearns. 33\u2026 34. Are playing \/ woule play \/ had played for aworld title. 34\u2026 35. It wasn\u2019t until four years later \/ more \/ further that a. 35\u2026 36. European team succeeded to win \/ in winning \/ at winning. 36\u2026 37. For the \/ a \/ its first time. The 1934 World Cup was. 37\u2026 38. Again won by a \/ the \/one home team. 38\u2026 39. What \/ this \/ which has been the case several times since. 39\u2026 40. Then. The 1934 final was among \/ between \/ against two. 40\u2026 41. European teams. Czechoslovakis and Italy. Which \/ that \/ who won. 41\u2026 42. Went on to win \/ winning \/ to have won the 1938 final Winning. 42\u2026"]