Interaction Management Strategies in English Literature Lectures in Indonesian University Setting

Interaction management strategies are increasingly set to become a vital factor in fostering active participants in university lectures. Following Rido, Ibrahim & Nambiar’s (2015) framework, this study investigated interaction management strategies used in English literature lectures in a university setting in Indonesia. This study employed a qualitative method and the data were gathered through video recordings. The findings showed that all literature lecturers employed three kinds of interaction management strategies such as code strategies, emotional strategies, and managing strategies. In code strategies, the lecturers used English during the entire class for clarity in opening, explanation, example, and closing. Meanwhile, in emotional strategies, the lecturers shared common strategies namely using non-verbal gestures and using humours or jokes in order to invite participation, to increase student’s motivation, and to create conducive learning environment. Then, in terms of managing strategies, the lecturers decided topic, controlled or switched the topic of discussion, decided who speaks, gave direction or commanded the students, gave extended wait time, and offered opportunity for student to speak in order to enab le the Akhyar Rido, Heri Kuswoyo, Rameliya Ayu 316 Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 5(2), 2020 students express their ideas and engage with the lectures. It is hoped that insights gleamed from this study will assist such lecturers to successfully manage their lectures and navigate the distribution of participation as well as content of the lesson.


INTRODUCTION
This study attempts to reveal interaction management strategies used in literature lectures in a university in Indonesia where English is used as the medium of instruction. In a university, lectures are considered the most common mode of teaching. During lectures, interaction occurs as an action in which the lecturer transfers and the students receive knowledge (Lestari, 2017;Rido, 2020a). Therefore, interaction management becomes important. Through interaction management, lecturers discover how to facilitate their students in dynamic interaction. This is salient as a key process of fostering active participation (Solheim, 2019) and, in the same time, improving communication skills (Lestari, 2017) which can create conducive learning environment (Rido, 2019).
This study is based on the premise that interaction management strategies of lecturers impact on the performance of students. In the 2008 Indonesia employer/employee survey of skills/labor demand and job vacancies involving 473 medium and large firms released by World Bank, it was reported that the Indonesian graduates' communication skill was the weakest among other demanded skills like technical and computer skills (World Bank, 2010;Di Gropello et al., 2011). One study on the incorporation of employability skills in the teaching-learning process also indicated that university graduates were strongly confident about their personal management and teamwork skills; but this was not the case with the their academic skills, especially the communication skills in English. Their poor communication skills meant they are unable to meet industries demands for competent workers and this affected their employability in the global market in future (Hendarman, 2010;Rido, 2020a).
Studies on the use of interaction management strategies in secondary and tertiary settings have widely been conducted (Amir & Jakob, 2020;Lovorn & Holaway, 2015;Rido et al., 2017;Rido, Ibrahim, Nambiar, 2015;Rido, 2010;Shi, 2013;Sirande, 2016). The results have shown that interaction management has been significant to promote learning and participation. Amir and Jakob (2020) state that a proper interaction management motivate students to be more active in the class. Rido, Ibrahim, and Nambiar (2015) believe that lecturers are the key factors for success learning as they are the architect of interaction who defines what to speak, who speaks, and when to stop. Here, they act as a teaching facilitator. In the same vein, Shi (2013) and Rido et al. (2017) claim that interaction management strategies used during lectures encourage students to express their feelings and thoughts comfortably as they are given opportunity to speak and ask the question. Here, critical thinking is also cultivated; in addition, the students experience linguistic improvements, mainly enlargement of vocabulary and enhancement of the command of technical terms. Lovorn & Holaway (2015) suggest the use of humor during lectures as it is effective for ice-breaking which can also facilitate engagement between lecturers and students. However, Sirande (2016) reminds that lecturers must give a clear signal while giving opportunity for students to speak in order to get their attention, to make them focus, and to indicate that the lecturer welcomes their contribution.
The present study is initiated in line with those concerns. All lecturers must perform effectively and facilitate as well as give the best learning experience to their students. To this end, it is important to investigate how they manage interaction in the lectures since all decisions about interaction are influenced by them. Thus, the research question is what are the types and functions of interaction management strategies used in English literature lectures in Indonesian university setting?

LITERATURE REVIEW
This study investigates interaction management strategies in English literature lectures in Indonesian tertiary setting. Interaction management is essential in the lectures and great lecturers must have distinctive interaction management strategies since they contribute to effective teaching. It is also stressed that lecturers have core roles in the lectures which beyond regulating group or pair work tasks to students. Therefore, the success of a lecture depends very much on the lecturer's ability to manage students' learning and contribution. Based on this standpoint, Rido, Ibrahim, and Nambiar (2015) classify types of interaction management strategies into three, they are code, emotional, and managing strategies as can be seen in figure 1 below.  First, code strategies belong to the use of language of instruction during the lecture. In the context of this research it consists of English, the official language of instruction in the lecture, and Bahasa Indonesia, the mother tongue of the lecturer and most of the students. Code strategies are important for clarity instruction, explanation, example, question, and feedback so students understand the materials at hand and engage in lectures.
Meanwhile, emotional strategies refer to gestures performed by the lecturer during the lectures. It comprises the use of non-verbal gestures such as facial expression, body language, hand gesture, and eye-contact. These also include the use of humours or jokes. The functions are to strengthen input through fulfilling students' visual needs, to emphasize statement, and to show enthusiasm so that students are attracted to the lecture. In addition, humour is to create a free-anxiety learning.
Finally, managing strategies are the roles of lecturer in managing the topic and turntaking, decide who speak, to whom, when, and how. These include deciding the topic, commanding students, controlling discussion direction, giving extended time, and offering opportunity for students to speak. The functions of managing strategies are to offer opportunity for students to think and speak, to know students personally, to make them alert and pay attention, and to be polite by calling their names.

Participants
The participants in this study were three lecturers, Mr. Dave, Mr. Shane, and Mr. Steven (pseudonyms), who were selected purposively based on a number of criteria. The lecturers have to possess master's degree in literature, teach literature courses, obtain recommendation from head of English literature department and their colleagues, and agree to participate in this research. In addition, they must have at least five year experiences teaching prose, drama, poetry, or literary criticism in a higher education institution in Indonesia using English as the medium of instruction.

Instruments
The instrument employed in this study was video-recording. In a study where the researchers seek to study real people in real situations, doing real activities, videorecording can be used. There are a number of advantages to video recordings. First, video recordings improve the density of data. Second, with the moving images, video recordings are superior as the researcher gains a more complete sense of who the people are, the settings that the participants are in and the role those people play in the interactions and the types of activities they engage in the nature of these activities. In other words, video recordings not only enable us to provide information about posture, gestures, and clothing, but more importantly in discourse studies, it also accurat ely identifies who is speaking. Gestures, facial expressions, and other visual interactional cues also provide important information both on the negotiation of meaning and the negotiation of affect. Third, non-native speakers of English, especially those whose linguistic means are limited, may rely extensively on extralinguistic means, as well as linguistic and paralinguistic means, to convey both their referential message and their relational message. Fourth, this kind of visual information can help us to disambiguate verbal messages by narrowing down the possible number of accurate interpretations. Another advantage of video recording is its permanence Researcher is able to experience an event repeatedly by playing it back. With each repeated viewing, focus can be redirected to another sequence or act which may have been overlooked altogether during the earlier viewings. Replaying the event also allows us more time to contemplate, deliberate, and ponder over the data before drawing conclusions. This is important as it allows the researcher to peel off the layers of discourse for a more thorough interpretation. Finally, the visual information in videos also provides information on directionality and intensity of attention, which can be particularly useful in determining the levels of comfort and involvement of the interlocutors. These kinds of visual contextual information, then, can enrich our database in many ways (Rido et al., 2017;Rido, 2020b).
In this current study, video recordings were used to capture both verbal and non-verbal behaviors of the lecturers in relation to their interaction management strategies. It also included gestures and physical proximity between the lecturers and the students, but not accent and stress. Using a video camera on a tripod placed at the back-corner of the lecture room, this study recorded Mr. Dave's prose (LE1), Mr. Shane's drama (LE2), and Mr. Steven's literary criticism (LE3) lectures with approximately 100 minutes duration for each lecture. In total, there were three lectures with 300 minutes duration collected in this study. After that, the videos the lectures were converted into DVD versions. Then, through the DVD, the researchers could hear and watch all activities during the lectures. The lecture recordings were transcribed orthographically based on transcription conventions by Jefferson (2004) and Simpson, Lee, and Leicher (2003) using a notebook and a headset. The recordings were played repeatedly in order to get detailed transcriptions. It took about six weeks to accomplish all the transcriptions. In transforming the video-recording into a transcribed form, the details of gestures, intonations, and postures during the lecture were also noted. After all, the transcriptions were typed in a Ms. Word program in a form of table. Line numbering indicating turn-taking was given on the left of the table to ease reference and facilitate analysis. Next, peer debriefing was conducted to ensure the validity of the gathered data. A linguistic expert helped the researchers in examining the accuracy of the results of transcriptions. Member checking was also carried out as an identification process to get confirmation from the participants. After the transcriptions were neatly written, all participants verified if the transcriptions have been correctly noted. This was done to establish credibility of the data obtained.

Data Analysis Procedures
The data in this study were analyzed using five steps. The first step was building a database. All data gathered from video recordings were organized and labelled in separate files in one folder or database. Second, open-coding was done. Here, the data were studied carefully and the researchers were open to any possible categories. Third, after open-coding the data, similar interaction management strategies might be developed and the emergent themes were obtained. Fourth, after having the emerging themes, focused-coding was conducted to classify them into sub-categories. Fifth, final emerging themes were presented.

FINDINGS
This study shed new light on the interaction management strategies utilized by three Indonesian lecturers of English literature at tertiary setting. It looked at the types and functions of interaction management strategies used by the lecturers. The results showed that the English literature lecturers employed the three types of interactional management strategies proposed by Rido, Ibrahim, Nambiar (2015), namely code strategies, emotional strategies, and managing strategies. The results are presented in the following section.

Code Strategies
The findings demonstrated that the three literature lecturers used English in whole lectures for the clarity of instructions in the opening part, during the lecture, and in the closing part. In the following extract, Mr Dave began the lecture by using English. The extract above shows that Mr. Dave started the lecture with interesting way where he greeted the students and let them listen to the music first (lines 1-3). In lines 4-7, he said 'good morning' and asked their feeling. The students gave various responses of greeting (line 7).
Meanwhile, Mr. Shane started the lecture by reviewing the previous material given. A few lines from extract 2 below indicated that he also used English. Similarly, in literary criticism lecture, Mr. Steven opend his lecture using English by greeting the students. Extract 3 below is presented as the data sample.
Extract 3: (LE3) 1 2 3 4 5 L Good to have you today, this evening and this number, I wish that you're good, I'm good. And some of your friends, they're very busy to prepare for Saturday night program. I hope everybody support that even though you're not there but give your support in other ways, so the program will be successful, ok?
In the above extract, Mr. Steven began the lecture by greeting the students and hoping that they were doing well, indicating that he gave more attention as he understood that the students had to attend the lecture in the evening, on Saturday night (lines 1-3). He also encouraged his students to support their friends who conducted an event (lines 4-5).
Furthermore, English was also used during the main part of the lectures, while explaining the materials. It can be seen in extract 4 below. things actually (1.6) ya-(the individual who appears inside the story) or its characterization. So, I hope that later on ee-(0.5) we can be very familiar with this terminology ya-so whenever I say character o oke o doesn't mean that it's only like the individual but also its characterization also, ok.
Here, Mr. Shane used English when he was discussing character and characterization with the students. First, he introduced the terminolgy 'character and characterization' to the students (lines 55-57). Second, he scoped it by citing a statement from a scholar 'Stenton' (lines 56-59), continued by emphasizing that the students had to be familiar with the terminology (lines 60-64).
Apart from in explaining the material discussed earlier, Mr. Steven also used English in the lecture. It can be seen in extract 6 below. Furthermore, English was also used in the closing part of the lecture. The example is presented in extract 7 below. While closing the lecture, Mr Steven reminded that the students would have quiz in the following meeting. He, then, signed the end of the lecture by saying 'everyone thank you for coming, see you next meeting', continued by Islamic salaam (lines 1138-1139).

Emotional Strategies
This study also found that all lecturers employed emotional strategies. The use of emotional strategies by the lecturers will be presented in the following section.

Use Non-Verbal Gestures
Using non-verbal gestures generally deals with body language and hand gesture. Extract 10 indicated that Mr. Dave used body language during the lecture.
Extract 10: (LE1) 536 537 538 L Ok, thank you. Next, goes to the man. Yes, man. Lady ((point a group of male students)), the man ((point a group of female students)) 539 Ss ((laugh)) 540 541 L We have to change actually (.) lady ((point a group of female students)) and the man ((point a group of male students)). 542 Ss ((laugh)) While lecturing, Mr. Dave realized that there were two groups of male and female students by pointing them out (lines 536-538). So, in order to grab their attention and to ensure that he gave equal opportunities for all the students to contribute instead of gender, again by pointing his finger, he told the students that he had to change the turntaking, firstly female (line 540), then male students (line 541). This visual bodygesture helped the students to understand what he meant.
Meanwhile, the following extract proofed that Mr. Shane's lecture used body language while presenting the material. Before line 256, Mr. just started explaining types of character using power point slides so he looked at the screen. He, kept continuing his explanation about reasoning of analyzing characters and the parameter (lines 257-262), again looked at the screen (lines 258 and 262). This was done in order to make the students pay attention and read his presentation slides on screen. In responding his explanation, a student raised his hand, asking a question (line 263). He said 'yes' and approached the student's chair, indicating that he allowed him to speak (line 263).
Furthermore, in this following extract 15, Mr. Steven used his head gestures while lecturing activity. After that, he emphasized that his explanation would be important for thier next quiz and mentioned names of the students who made the reaction (lines 1018-1019). This indicated that he also read the students' body gestures during the lecture.

Use Humours or Jokes
In the next strategies, the lecturers used humour or joke during lecture activities. Interestingly, they did it in different ways and in different activities. Some examples are presented in the following extracts. During the lecture, Mr. Shane offered the students an opportunity to ask question (lines 453-454). Suddenly, there was a student interrupted and raised his hand (lines 455-457). The lecturer said 'yes', indicating that he allowed the student to say something. However, the student stated that he just wanted to go to toilet. Responding that, the lecturer teased the student not to ask his friend to accompany him (line 458). Realizing that it was a funny joke, in lines 459-560, the students laughed.
Mr. Steven had his own style in using a humour in the lecture. The sample of data can be seen in extract 15 below. While explaining 'literary work as an autonomous body' to the students, he gave example by drawing something on whiteboard and said 'this is cat' (lines 1045 -1047).
The students suddenly laughed after seeing the picture (line 1048). He kept insisting that it was a cat (lines 1049 and 1051) and this made the students even laughed harder (line 1050) because they thought he drew a chicken (line 1052). In lines 1053-1054, he still questioned why the students thought it was a chicken. This made the room full of laughter.

Managing Strategies
The findings revealed that all lecturers employed common strategies namely deciding topics, directing or commanding students, controlling or switching discussion direction, giving extended wait time, and offering opportunities for students to speak.

Decide Topic
The following strategies belong to decide topic by the lecturers. In extract 16, the data showed that Mr. Dave introduced topic in the beginning of the lecture. Yes. Ok, so we will talk about what is character and characterization-whether it is real or not so you can try to proof it later. So this is one, as-as I have told you that we are going to scope of our study-is not only talking about character and characterization but here theme, plot, setting, point of view, and language style-it will be ee discussed later in the next meeting.
In lines 75-76 and 78-79, right after opening the lecture, he mentioned that he wanted to discuss character and characterization. Besides that, he also told some topics for the next discussion so that the students could relate them with the current topic (lines 81-83).
Along the same vein, Mr. Shane mentioned topic in the opening part of his lecture.
Extract 17: (LE2) 15 16 17 18 19 L ok. nah, starting from today ee (.) we are going to continue the materials, ok, ee (.) starting from the story fact of intrinsic elements (0.5) that exist, ok, inside of those kind of fictions. (1.6) Ok, this particular material ee-((move his position to right side)) maybe until next meeting also ya-we will deal with characters.
Mr. Shane brought the students to understand that they were discussing intrinsict element of fictions (lines 15-17). After that, he emphasized by telling the students that the focus would be on characters until the following meeting (lines 18-19).
Meanwhile, in extract 18, Mr. Steven clearly decided all the topics and told it to the students. L This is our agenda today, match day 3, meeting 3. Today, first we'll review about last meeting materials, ok limited to the discussion of why literature does matter? , ok, everybody agreed at that time, literature does matter, please refresh our understand ing, or our mind, and then we define "what is literary criticism", after that meeting two we discuss about approach and theory.. most particularly in the literature analysis, and the last one based on our agenda we discuss about M. H. Abrams critical orientation to literature, ..
In the beginning of the lecture, Mr. Steven reviewed the previous material; first, why literature does matter, (lines 11-14). After that, he revisited 'what literary criticism is' (line 15). Then, in lines 18-19 he introduced topic for the particular meeting, 'Abram's crticial orientation to literature'.

Decide Who Speak
After deciding topic, the lecturers also decided who speak during the lectures. In the extract, Mr. Dave called on a specific student to speak. Mr. Steven was revisiting previous material with the students in the beginning of the lecture 'why literature does matter?' (lines 86-88). Therefore, he wanted the students to give their thought, then nominated a student named Ratna (lines 89-90). Here, he actually wanted to ensure that the students have understood the materials at hand before continuing to the next discussion.

Direct/Command Students
The results also showed that the lecturers directed and commanded students during the lecture. The way Mr. Dave employed the strategy can be seen below. In the lecture, Mr. Dave was discussing character and characterization with the students (lines 99-10). So, he gave instruction to a student to write one of her friend's name on the whiteboard (lines 100-102). After that, the student came to the front and wrote something on the whiteboard, indicating that she listened and followed the instruction.
Mr. Shane also gave command to his student during the lecture. A few lines from extract 23 below illustrate this strategy. In lines 43-44, Mr. Shane noticed that somebody knocked the door while he was just started the lecture; therefore, he instructed a female student (Putri Diana) to see the person. The students followed the instrution and walked out through the door (line 45). After realizing that there was few students who came late, he told Putri Diana to tell them that they were not allowed to attend the lecture (line 46).
In addition, Mr. Steven also commanded his students in the lecture. The example is presented in extract 24 below. Mr. Steven was discussing literary criticism with the students and he wanted one of the students to give an ecample (lines 25-27). However, the student gave a signal with her finger, indicating that she was unsure from where she had to stand and talk (line 30). Then, the lecturer instructed her to come to the front, instead of sitting on her chair (lines 33-34).

Control/Switch Discussion Direction
The next managing strategies are controlling/switching direction of discussion. In extract 25 below, the lecturer utilized the strategy during the lecture. In the above extract, Mr. Dave was discussing character and characterization. In line 153, he used discourse markers 'ok' folowed by 'that is about the characerization', indicating that the discussion was done. After that, the lecturer used another discourse markers 'so now' (line 154), continued by a statement ''here is Leonardo Di Caprio' and a qustion 'what about his non physical characterization?' to the entire class (lines 155-156), showing that he wanted to continue and invited the students for further discussion. In line 157, the students gave their response 'kind'.
Meanwhile, the way Mr. Shane controls the discussion direction can be seen in extract 26 below.
Extract 26: (LE2)   108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116 L Ok, full of humor. Ok. So, that's the thing. So, Agus-alright-can not stand alone. (0.5) sometimes if somebody asks you. Eh (.) do you know Agus? Yes, the one who is tall, (0.5) who is funny. Alright (.) so that's the things. So, that's why I say this is related. So whenever later on-ya-you analyze character, ok. You will also see the characteristic of it. What makes one character different with another character. Ok (.) Nah, and how to analyze that? (.) In general, ya, there are four classifications of characters (0.3) you need to analyze each of them Mr. Shane was talking about character and characterization during the lecture and he agreed with one of the student's response that said his friend was full of humour, then, switched the discussion direction which was indicated by the use of discourse markers 'so, that's the thing'(line 108). Next, he added an explanation about the relations between character and characterization (lines 109-110), followed by dicourse markers 'alright (.) so that's the thing' (line 111), indicating that he finished with the explanation and was ready to move to the next discussion. After that, by utilizing discourse markers 'so' (line 112) and 'ok (.) nah' (line 114), he directed the students to the next discussion which was about 'how to analyze a character' and 'four classification of characterization ' (lines 114-116) In the next extract, Mr Steven also controlled the discussion direction duri ng the lecture. In line 250, Mr. Steven thanked his student who just gave her opinion and examples towards the previous material 'literary criticsm and its category'. After that, he moved to the next discussion. So, he used discourse markers 'ok' and said 'we proceed' to indicate the trasition (lines 250-251), followed by a summary that literary criticism is a discipline of science (lines 252-255).

Give Extended Wait Time
The findings also revealed that all lecturers gave extended wait time. The examples can be found in the following extract. In drama lecture, Mr. Shane also gave extended wait time to the students. His utterance can be seen in extract 29 below. In the lecture, Mr. Steven wanted his students to present their thought about the materials at hand and he ended up by nominating a student (lines 866-868). Noticing that the student needed time to share his standpoint; therefore, he gave him two minutes (lines 868-869).

Offer Opportunity for Students to Speak
Based on the results of this study, all lecturers offered opportunity for the students to speak. The data sample can be seen in the following extract. In extract 31, Mr . Dave was discussing character and characterization during the lecture and he offered the students to give their opinion (lines 767-768). A student initiated by raising her hand (line 769) and he allowed her to talk (line 774). First, the student mentioned that she wanted to talk about 'speech from the boy' (line 776). After that, she gave her elaboration (lines 777-779).
Next, in data sample below, Mr. Shane also gave opportunity for the students to speak through initiating questions.
Extract 32: (LE2) 246 S Sir (/) ((a student raises his hand)) 247 L Yes (/) 248 249 S How about the character who make-who make ee conflict but in the-in the end of the story they-they solve-their problem? 250 L They solve their problem themselves? 251 S Yes 252 253 254 255 256 L They solve their problem themselves. Then still-still-ok-still it is antagonist character. Later on we discuss ya-later on we discuss after this maybe ((pointing out the screen). Related to the development (0.5) of the character inside of the story because sometimes character also develops based on the flow of the plot 257 S Sir (/) ((a student raises her hand)) 258 L Yes ( S As I read the.. Some .. Some source , literary theory is the prelude the relation between author and the work, and in some approach, there are sociological criticism which focus on the cultural, economy, and political context, and the second is mytho.. mythological criticism is emphasis the psychology and history of the work, and the reader response is how, in this case , its.. it is how to, the reader response or interpret the work, and…. and then the deconstructionist criticism is focus on the languages that author use in this work Mr. Steven was discussing approach and theory in his literary criticism lecture (line 338). In lines 339-340, he invited the student to share their thoughts. After the invitation, a student raised her hand (line 341) and the lecturer mentioned her name, indicating the he allowed her to speak (line 342). After that, the student directly gave a long response (lines 343-351). This showed that Mr. Steven provided space and time for the students to express their ideas.

DISCUSSION
This study examined the use of interaction management strategies in English literature lectures in university setting in Indonesia. The emergent themes have indicated that all lecturers used a number of common interaction management strategies, consisting of code, emotional, and managing strategies.
In terms of code strategies, they used English as the language of instruction during the lectures in the beginning, main, and end part of the lectures. Pennycook (1994) states that in learning situated in a non-native environment with non-native lecturers teaching non-native students, the more target language use the better. Shi (2013) even underlines that the use of target language can improve lingustic capability of students, especially vocabulary technical terms. Since all lectures require the use of English as the medium of instruction, this also indicates that the lecturers are competent communicators (Kuswoyo et al., 2020;Mahmud, 2017;Marsella, 2020;Soraya, 2020).
In terms of emotional strategies, the lecturers used non-verbal gestures and humours or jokes. Jones (2007) asserts that the use of body gestures encourage students to be more active as they enliven interaction. Even though non-verbal communication like body gestures can be universal and local (Amir et al. 2017), but Singelis (1994) believes that the use of non-verbal communication like body gestures has critical role to compliment verbal language (Knapp et al., 2014). Meanwhile, humours or jokes are helpful in engaging the lecturer with the students and creating a relaxed learning atmosphere. The use of humour also increases students' motivation (Akbar et al., 2019;Bakar & Kumar, 2019;Lovorn & Holaway, 2015;Tunnisa et al., 2019).
Finally, in terms of managing strategies, the lecturers decided topic, controlled or switched the topic of discussion, decided who speaks, gave direction or commanded the students, gave extended wait time, and offered opportunity for students student speak. Domizio (2008) and Rido et al. (2017) state that announcement of the topic of lesson is important in the introductory part of lecture so the students know what to learn. Meanwhile, switching topic of discussion is salient and lecturers need to signal the transition from one topic to another topic or sub-topic by the use of discourse markers so that the students can follow the structure or move of the lecture (Rido, 2010;Walsh, 2011) as this aids comprehension (Kuswoyo et al., 2020;Rido et al., 2017). Next, turn-taking-allocation and student nomination create opportunities for the students to express their ideas and share their voices (Amir & Jakob, 2020; Namaziandost & Nasri, 2019;Sulistyorini, 2019). Rido, Ibrahim, and Nambiar (2015) add that this strategy facilitates less confident or shy students to participate as the lecturer allots them a turn. Further, giving direction and command indicates that the lecturers are the navigators of the lectures and the students are under their supervision (Kuswoyo et al., 2020;Rido et al., 2017). Another strategy, extended-wait time gives the students more time to think deeply about the questions and tasks given, resulting a better learning outcomes (Ingram & Elliott, 2015;Mercer & Dawes, 2008).
What is clear from the findings is that the lecturers used various interaction management strategies which promoted students' involvement and they approached learning through interactive way. All lecturers also ensured that the students got opportunity to speak, express their personal standpoint, ask question, give response, and discuss in pair or group. In short, all lecturers fostered interaction by encouraging the students to speak and stimulating them with questions and discussions which could improve communication and develop their critical thinking skills.To some extent, the findings of this study are similar to Rido et al. (2017), Shi (2013), and Sirande (2016).

CONCLUSION
This study investigated interaction management strategies in English literature lectures in Indonesian university setting. The findings revealed that all lecturers used code strategies, emotional strategies, and managing strategies. They used English as the medium of instruction, body gestures, and humours or jokes during the lectures. They also decided topic, controlled or switched the topic of discussion, decided who speaks, gave direction or commanded the students, gave extended wait time, and offered opportunity for students to speak. All interaction management strategies were used by the lecturers for clarity in the opening, main, and closing parts of the lectures so that the students could understand the materials at hand. The use of the strategies were able to invite participation, to increase student's motivation, and to create conducive learning environment. The strategies also enabled the students express their ideas and engage with the lectures.
To conclude, the use of interaction management strategies made all lecturers occupied more interactional space of the lectures, but the students still had the opportunities to contribute their ideas. By using the interaction management strategies, the lecturers also successfully navigated the distribution of participation as well as content of the lessons. Thus, lecturers should manage the turn-taking and give the students chances to speak. Students will have interactional space and freedom in both what they say and when they say it, but still under the lecturers' close supervision