Introduction According to Bygate (1987), in order to achieve a communicative goal through speaking, there are two aspects to be considered

knowledge o! the language, and skill in using this knowledge" #t is not enough to possess a certain amount o! knowledge, but a speaker o! the language should be able to use this knowledge in di!!erent situations" Being able to decide what to say on the spot, saying it clearly and being !le$ible during a conversation as di!!erent situations come out is the ability to use the knowledge %in action&, which creates the second aspect o! speaking ' the skill, Bygate notes" (eveloping speaking skills includes several aspects that in!luence this process" #t is more than obvious that the students together with the teacher are the most important ones" )he way this process can be in!luenced !rom the position o! the teacher will be the aim o! the thesis" *odern teaching methods o! !oreign languages count on involving the use o! di!!erent organi+ational !orms and activities which support such a development" According to Bygate (1987), both speakers and listeners, besides being good at processing spoken words should be %good communicators&, which means %good at saying what they want to say in a way which the listener !inds understandable&" )his means being able to possess interaction skills" ,ommunication o! meaning then depends on two kinds o! skill- routines, and negotiation skills"

Assessments *y attempt is to contribute to an understanding o! the dynamics o! conversation in a learning community" )he transcribed conversation is analy+ed !or patterns o! participation !acilitation and compensation devices used particular conversation" (uring this conversation, they were developing a plan !or their speaking, so an authentic task and determinate schedule may have helped shape the dynamics o! the conversation" )he speakers were !amiliar with each other and had multiple additional relationships" ,ommon theoretical grounding and assumptions about the sub0ect matter had drawn these persons together in the endeavor to understand community and individual learning" )he discussants were man and women" *any o! these !actors would increase the e$pectation that sel!'similarity would predominate over di!!erentiation in the data" A .uestion would be asked" ,onversation would move slowly with additional .uestions and responses" 1ew conte$ts, de!initions, and perspectives would be added" )he conversation would accelerate with the addition o! new and interesting ideas" )he talk would reach a crescendo, an integrating concept would be stated, they would laugh, and the energy would drop" A!ter a !ew moments o! silence, the cycle would begin again" )his cyclical pattern was so pervasive, that they pattern underlay their discourse" )he beginning conversation was like popcorn''individual statements o! insight arose !rom one then another" )he movement was almost random with an idea !rom here and an idea !rom there" )hese random pops and sparks served as a prelude to our more methodical investigations" )he pattern o! discourse was so clear that it is almost a physical presence" )he .uestion came !irst, always" Anyone could ask it" began to wonder aloud i! some deep by various speakers and patterns o! se.uence o! types o! comments" /everal !actors a!!ected the dynamics o! this

)hey circled through .uestions, e$plored connections and previous understandings" )hey would come together around a .uestion, e$plore connections among di!!erent perspectives, point out connections !rom di!!erent disciplines, and then the energy, the .uestions, con!usion, and the e$citement would build and until someone would make a point, a discovery, which seemed to resolve the issue" )he speakers talk about a dynamic pattern in the e$perience o! the conversation" )he pattern is recogni+able as it emerges !rom the talk" 3ach interaction is simple'conte$ts in terms o! individual meanings, personal relationships, and recognition o! place and time" 3ach took away a deeper understanding o! the content o! the conversation" 3ach was trans!ormed in some way" )he process o! discourse among individuals is an e$cellent conte$t in which to study the comple$ adaptive systems o! learning and thinking" #n discourse, evidence o! individuals4 schema and changes in those schema can be captured and analy+ed