The Differences in Communication Strategies Between Pair, Small Group and the Dominantly Used in Discussion among Inbound Mobility Students

Mobility program is an international program among students either in the university or school level, but mostly are among university students. This is because mobility program gives a lot of positive impact to the participants in their study progress, amazing experiences as well as better future exploration. The objectives of this study are to identify the differences in communication strategies used by pair and small group subjects and the dominantly used of communication strategies among inbound mobility students at Universiti Putra Malaysia. The samples of the study consist of 30 respondents and they are only 8 male and 22 female mobility students from Asian and European universities who are attending mobility program at Universiti Putra Malaysia. The methods involved in this study were observation sessions with the subjects. The observation sessions were video-taped. The video-taped were transcribed for analysis afterwards. The study only focuses on the communication strategies used among inbound mobility students and the understanding, opinion and idea of the mobility program to the inbound mobility students at Universiti Putra Malaysia. As for the procedure of the study, the subjects were informed about the observation sessions which were video-taped and discussions are in pair and small group. An area of topics was given to the subjects to be discussed. This study used Communication Strategies Theory by Dornyei& Scott (1997). conversation is in C5 by P5 as they used communication strategies 26 times during their conversation. The dominantly used of communication strategies for small group conversation is in C12 by G2 as they used communication strategies 24 times during their conversation. It can be proposed that further research can be done towards different types of subjects and identify the use of communication strategies among them as it should show differentiation in the use of communication strategies in various type of subjects.


Introduction
Classroom communication is a critical issue in helping building up students' self-esteem as well as producing a better learning atmosphere (Hill, 2009). Students tend to communicate with others by expressing their opinions and thoughts and do not tend to keep their opinions or thoughts to themselves. In Malaysian universities, local and international students will try their best to participate in the classroom activities. The classroom activities will help in the process of learning (Devito, 2009). The learning environment created by the lecturer will enhance their learning desire and create positive impact towards learning. Students are given the chance to speak individually, pair or small group. The pair and small group discussions will help them to speak and give ideas towards the topic of the discussion. Pair and small group discussion also help the students to be confident in giving ideas. They also listen well to the questions and messages delivered by their pairs and others from the group. This shows that the students are trying their best to be part of the discussion. However, most students tend to have communication barrier in the discussion especially from the international students who are not speaking English as their first language. The communication intent from them is not being understood by the listener. This will create confusion and conflicts towards the content of the message that they heard and therefore, miscommunication will take place (Roslan, 2017).
Communication is a tool used in connecting from one person to another. In communication, language plays an important aspect in getting messages across to another person. In this multilingual world, a lot of languages are being used in communication. First, there will be the mother tongue language which comes from these students' origin of culture and country. Then, there are second and third language learned by a lot of people in this world trying to improve themselves in understanding others. Due to that, people tend to travel around the world to gain new experience such as studying abroad, learning the culture, foods, believes as well as new language. Sometimes, communication barrier tends to appear without people realizing it. Therefore, communication strategies are created when communicating in order to have a smooth communication without any confusion.
According to British Council Research (2018), the growing number of students who went abroad to participate in the mobility program showed that students tend to miscommunicate in the English language. This is due to the fact that most students who participated in the mobility program comes from a non-English speaking country, therefore, they faced problem in communication with the people around them. It is common that most universities around the world mainly focus on fixing and upgrading their mobility program generally. However, none focuses on the issues that the students actually faced during their mobility program at the host university to which is the communication barrier among themselves and the others (British Council Research, 2018). Incoming mobility students will have to face such issue by themselves and can only get minimum help from their friends. That is the reason most mobility students will face hardship in getting comfortable environment in classes at the beginning of the semester. Based on such issues, students need to use different types of strategies in communication in order to communicate on a daily basis. British Council Research (2018) also mentioned that those who came from different countries that do not speak or use the English language as the main language for daily communication will have a toughest time facing communication issues. For them, in order to learn to communicate only in English when they are aboard being a new thing for them to learn from A to Z. As the host university, it is important for us to provide such help for the students so that they will not feel left out or even think that studying is hard in another country just because it is taught in a different language.

Literature Review
In today's world, communication is the key action for everyone to deliver or receive a message, especially with smart technologies enabling communication from the tips of the fingers. The main tool of communication is language and it provides information towards society, be it being delivered or received or even expressed through a person, it is communication that helps us learn about the different people around us. According to Roslan (2020c), mobility program is an assurance of a relationship as well as communication between universities around the world. Host universities dealing with mobility students will need to ensure that there are no communication barriers between the university and the students in order for a smooth running of the process and the program itself. It is common that students who participate in the mobility program does not use English as their first language to communicate daily, therefore they might face problem in communication during their study abroad either between the mobility students itself or with the local people in the country. It can be said that communication barriers are common among mobility students around the world especially in Malaysia. Roslan et. al (2020c) study focuses on finding out the communication barriers among mobility students at universities in Malaysia. The result of the study revelaed that it is definite that communication barriers do exist among mobility students. Since the students does not have any other option in communication, the need to converse in English to communicate is there. The students were able to communicate in English, however the language spoken were hard to be understood by the listener. Students tend to face various communication problems Roslan et al (2020b) study also showed that the use of communication strategies among students help in the process of learning in the classroom. Classroom interactions are very important when it comes to encourage student to build their self-confidence, therefore making classroom interaction the key point in this study. Not only does it build the student self-confidence, but is also provides important information on how students and teachers interact with each other in the classroom. Furthermore, it is shown that effective interaction in classrooms can results into a successful teaching which has been observed by many scholars (Mahmud, 2017).
According to Masithoh and Fauziati (2018), the speaker and listener will be able to easily achieved good communication if it is the meaning is delivered by using the first language. However, problem will arise if the speaker and listener start to communicate by using second or foreign language with each other. Communication gaps appears between speaker and listener due to their grammatical limitation or linguistic knowledge. Therefore, learning a new or foreign language focusing on the speaking skill is a big necessity in the communication and globalization area nowadays. Having the ability to speak good English will not just focus on making it easier for the speaker to communicate in English, it will also help them to deliver the information in the right way without being misunderstood or misinterpreted. Masithoh and Fauziati (2018) also mentioned that as part of having a good English speaking skill when communicating, using English to deal with various communicative messages can also help the speaker and listener to communicate effectively. On the other hand, communication strategies are influenced from the effective ways the people communicate that has the presence of deficiencies which can compensate inadequacies learners have towards the language the learners want to communicate in. This study by Masithoh & Fauziati (2018) is in line with a study by Rahim (2018) where analyzing the interaction by using communication strategy approach is important for a better communication and understanding.
It is important to analyse and understand the communication strategy used, as there are underlying implicit message through the communication strategy and it is also one of the effective communication methods (Rahim, 2018). Second language acquisition is majorly influenced by the communication strategies (CS). The communication strategies are a reflection of the communicative competence as mentioned by Canale & Swain (1980) where the study clarifies the communicative competence and strategic competence concept. According to Ahmed and Pawar (2018), the strategic competence was introduced in the 1970s as the main part of the competence that foreign language learners need to develop for communication purposes. During the second half of the last centuries, it has acted as a component in each of the communicative competence models that have occurred. Though there has been a debate on what strategic competence includes as some consider learning strategies as a part of communication strategies, it has remained there as a main component of learners' communication competence in all models and refers to the coping strategies that one uses to compensate for insufficiency of linguistic competence. It is believed that those learners who are at their earlier stages of learning a new or foreign language are often in need to use communication strategies since they struggle to get the meanings across due to their linguistics deficiency in the new language. Due to this reasoning, various research on communication strategies were done in the last decades and a lot more attention was paid in developing the learners' strategic competence as part of learning a new language for them. The communication strategy approach seemed to be important when analyzing the interaction as it helps in the process of meaningful communication (Rahim, 2019).
A study by Mestriani, Seken & Putra (2018), stated that the students who are involved in the study are from different cultural backgrounds as well as nations. Although the students are from different cultural background and nation, they are taught by an English native speaker for their English session. In the study, it shows that the students sometimes understand the teacher's intention, however the students do not understand at all at some parts of the sessions. With this, the teacher needs to be very careful and should be able to communicate with the students so that misunderstanding can be avoided between the students and the teacher in the English lesson. This study by Mestriani, Seken, & Putra (2018) was aimed to find, define and clarify the communication strategies used in the English lesson classroom by the English native speaking teacher and to also study the learning process used in order to communicate in English towards the students. The result of the study shows that thirteen communication strategies were used by the English native speaking teaching for the students teaching and learning process. Mestriani, Seken, & Putra (2018) study are in line with the study done by Pamolango (2015) about using multiple communication strategies by English native speaking teacher during English sessions at a foreign country. Pamolango (2015) also mentioned that by using filler when communicating with none English native speaker, it is really helpful. It helps to make the teaching process run smoothly and look more comfortable. Without the fillers, the teaching process would be awkward and too formal. Mestriani, Seken, & Putra (2018) are also in line with the study by Nothash & Karafkan (2015) whereby one may content that foreign language classroom discourse is a rich source for exploring the nature, and purposes of interaction. Even more interesting it can be the teacher-employed strategies that serve different communicative purposes. According to Nothash & Karafkan (2015), teachers have made a significant effort to maintain the flow of a conversation with students. With this, it involves a significant amount of strategies that need to be employed which may indicate the teacher's desire to continue verbal interactions with students as a source of motivation within the classroom through interaction and oral performance involvement with the learners.
According to Rofiatun (2018), the use of communication strategies really helped to improve students' ability to speak as well as reassured them in communicating in English. In order for that to happen, teachers are encouraged to make use various communication strategies in order to encourage students in being active and assured when speaking during the English teaching and learning session. However, English teachers are not competent enough in applying such teaching process thoroughly. It was found that even English teachers' often used code switching during the teaching and learning process. Even so, the use of code switching is not recommended and should be strictly forbidden in the process of teaching and learning foreign language in the classroom (Cook, 2001). Cook (2001) agreed with Chaudron (1988) and Ellis (1984) as the advocates of intralingual teaching strategy assert that the use of code-switching will give negative transfer in foreign language learning. On the other hand, the advocates of target language exclusivity mentioned that it is not necessary for learners to understand everything said by the teachers using target language and that code switching is part of learning process (Doqaruni, 2017). Therefore, that is the reason the study by Rofiatun (2018) uses code switching strategies in order to simplify students' understanding and to deal with the lack students' responses towards English learning. Generally, it is assured that communication strateges used in communication in order to be able to deliver the information effectively so the listener could comprehend the information comprehensively. It is suggested by Rofiatun (2018) that the use of communication strategies should be implemented more in the process of teaching and learning the English language in the classroom in order to help and encourage the students to be more confident and active in communicating in the target language. Ahmed & Pawar (2018) and Rofiatun (2018) agreed with Carvantes & Roddringuez (2012) whereby if the students' English proficiency is low, they tend to switch into their mother tongue language in order to proceed with the communication.
According to Roslan et al (2020a) by involving students in the student-centred learning, can increase the way students perceive information and teachers are encouraged to do such ways. From there, teachers can expect students to learn more independently and creatively.
Techniques can differ according to the teachers teaching the student, but one of the techniques often used for student-centred learning is by assigning student to present in classrooms. Other than that, teachers can also implement group discussions in class by giving topics for the students to discuss in groups and then attain feedback from teachers. With this technique, it encourages the students to be more open in having discussions in class. From there, it shows that communication strategies in class are indeed important. Therefore, teachers and students need to be made aware and implement effective communication strategies to have more positive outcomes. Nur Maisarah Roslan et al., (2020b) study also showed that the use of communication strategies among students help in the process of learning in the classroom. Classroom interactions are very important when it comes to encourage student to build their self-confidence, therefore making classroom interaction the key point in this study. Not only does it build the student self-confidence, but is also provides important information on how students and teachers interact with each other in the classroom. Furthermore, it is shown that effective interaction in classrooms can results into a successful teaching which has been observed by many scholars (Mahmud, 2017). In Milal's (2011) study, for example, there are "positive relations between the activities in the lesson, the types of communicative acts performed and the power exercised in the class and the effective achievement of the pedagogical objectives" (pp. 13-14). The success of teachers teaching objectives can be a result from the activities set and done by the teachers and students in the classroom. Dornyei (1995) study found that the subjects in the treatment group after the training program ended, showed improvement in measures related to both the quality and quantity of communication strategies used, where it resulted to positive outcomes in relation to their fluency in the pre-test but only fillers affected speech rate in the post test, with respect to the students' level of L2 proficiency, the effectiveness of the training was found unrelated to the learners' EFL competence. Below are the communication strategies taxonomy by Dornyei and Scott (1997, 173-210): Avoidance Strategies (Dornyei and Scotts, 1997: 173-210) 1.
Message abandonment: Leaving a message unfinished because of language difficulties. Example: It is a person er...who is responsible for a house, for the block of house... I don't know...

2.
Topic avoidance: Avoiding topic areas or concepts that pose language difficulties. Reducing the message by avoiding certain language structures or topics considered problematic language wise or by leaving out some intended elements for a lack of linguistic resources. Example: I was looking for "satisfied with a good job, pleasantly tired," and so on, but instead I accepted less (Dornyei and Scott, 1997).

4.
Approximation: Using an alternative term which expresses the meaning of the target lexical item as closely as possible such as a super ordinate or a related term, which share semantic features with the target word or structure. (e.g. ship for sailboat). Example: plate instead of "bowl" (Dornyei and Scott, 1997).

5.
Use of all-purpose words: Extending a general, empty lexical item to contexts where specific words are lacking (e.g. the overuse of thing, stuff, what-do-you call-it, thingie). Example: I can"t work until you repair my...thing (Dornyei and Scott, 1997). 6.
Prefabricated patterns: Using memorized stock phrases, usually for "survival" purposes (e.g., Where is the ___ or Comment allez-vous? where the morphological components are not known to the learner). 8.
Literal translation: Translating literally a lexical item, idiom, compound word, or structure from L1 to L2. Example: I made a big fault [translated from French] (Dornyei and Scott, 1997). 10.
Code-switching: Using a L1 word with L1 pronunciation or a L3 word with L3 pronunciation while speaking in L2. This may involve stretches of discourse ranging from single words to whole chunks and even complete turns. Example: Using Latin "ferrum" for "iron" (Dornyei and Scott, 1997 Stalling or time-gaining strategies: Using fillers or hesitation devices to fill pauses and to gain time to think (e.g., well, now, let's see, uh, as a matter of fact). (2018) claimed in their study that students' linguistic difficulties can be aided through communication strategies. Communication strategies are big help for students in their fluency in speaking as they can communicate without borders. The study shows high proficient students are able to utilize higher communication strategies as compared to the low proficient students which leads to the survival of high proficiency level of students to communicate well. However, it is still a huge struggle for the low proficiency students to communicate.

Masithoh, Fauziati & Supriyadi
Studies on mobility program seemed to be carried out actively. This might be because the mobility program has helped students in experiencing their studies in another country and therefore, helped in the process of active learning in a different environment. Trower and Lehmann (2017) claimed that the existence of the mobility program has helped university students in escaping from the normal environment in their own countries. The program managed to boost up students' motivations of personal growth and instrumental benefits in studying abroad. Tower and Lehmann (2017) study focused on Canadian students embark in mobility program. Here, the study found that the program has given the students opportunities in experiencing the culture differences and this would also help them in understanding the situation. Trower and Lehmann (2017) also proclaimed that mobility program is one way in which university students can develop personal capital and distinguish themselves as part of the labour market. The result of the study revealed that studying abroad provides employment benefits for the low socio-economic status backgrounds thus, create greater positive effects among the students. The result from Trower & Lehmann (2017) study is parallel to the study of Prazeres (2013), Chankseliani (2015) and Kritz (2013) where students who joined the mobility program were motivated and exposed to employment opportunities. On the other hand, Chankseliani (2015) agreed with Prazeres (2013) and Kritz (2013) where mobility students will understand more during the process of learning and they were actively involved in the classroom environment and appreciate the culture differences.
Based on the research problems mentioned by previous studies as stated above, therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate the use of communication strategies between pair and small group among inbound mobility students at Universiti Putra Malaysia.

Methodology
This study uses qualitative method in order to analyze the data. Quantitative data as in the numbers of strategies used for each subjects will also be discussed from the data obtained.
The study focuses on inbound mobility students studying at Universiti Putra Malaysia, who were involved with the mobility program from Asian and European universities. The sample of the study consists of 8 male and 22 female respondents at the age between 20 to 30 years old. They were selected from the mobility programs at Universiti Putra Malaysia. The respondents were randomly chosen. Respondents are from a country that does not use English as their first language to communicate daily. Therefore, the subjects' English language proficiency is at the level of intermediate and low. The respondents' self-confirmed their level of English language proficiency. However, this study does not take into account the English language proficiency. In this study, there are only 30 respondent's cases found based on the subjects' background of origin. Only a small number were managed as the number of inbound mobility students were decreasing due to the visa issues as well as the world health issues.
The method used in this study is observation. The participants were informed of the study and the video tape was used during the class. The subjects were also given a topic in order to have a smooth conversation between pair and small group about their opinions on mobility program. The interview session took place for 20 minutes for pair and 30 minutes for small group students. A clearer description or discussion of the transcription method used, data coded and sampling techniques are identified as below: Observation sessions were done during the Basic Malay Language class. Observation is focused on the communication strategies used by inbound mobility students in pair and small group discussion. The observation sessions were semi structured. A specific topic was given to the students based on the focus of the research.
As for the procedure of the study, the subjects were informed about the observation session that will be carried out and video-taped during the class session. Topics were given based on the focus of the study. This study will be using Communication Strategies Taxonomy by Dornyei & Scott (1997) to analyse the data. Data of the conversation will be transcribed and communication strategies used by the subjects will be identified according to the examples and explanation given by Dornyei & Scott (1997). CS  C1  C2  C3  C4  C5  C6  C7  C8  C9 C10  T  Percentage  CS1  3  2  2  1  3  0  0  3  0  0 Table 2 above shows how often communication strategies are being used among inbound mobility students in pair conversations. Out of the 13 communication strategies by Dornyei & Scotts (1997), only 9 communication strategies were used by 20 subjects in the pair conversations. The other 4 strategies were not being used due to its uncommonly strategies and known to the subjects. CS1 which is message abandonment were used 14 times for the whole 10 pair conversations by the subjects with the percentage of 8.1% out of the overall used of communication strategies among the others. CS1 were mostly used in C1, C5 and C8 by 3 times by the subjects. Based on the pair conversations, subject tend to abandonment a message given to them if they are unsure on how to respond back or due to lack of language understanding. Next, CS2 which is topic avoidance were used more often for 22 times by the subjects for all 10 pair conversations with the percentage of 12.7% which were mostly used in C2 by 5 times. For some subjects, instead of abandoning the message, they tend to avoid the topic altogether with either no respond or a respond with a new topic. This is due to the lack of language knowledge and to avoid feeling uncomfortable during the conversation. Following to that, CS3 which is circumlocution were mostly used by 80 times in the 10 pair conversations with the percentage of 46.2% which is the highest percentage of communication strategies used among the subjects. C10 uses CS3 a lot in the conversation. Subjects have a tendency of using CS3 a lot in their conversation once they feel the need to further explain in more details of their points and respond. Due to this, it shows that the subjects are comfortable with each other and they feel the need to express their opinion even more to the other person. On the other hand, CS4 which is approximation was used 7 times with the percentage of 4% from the overall 10 pair conversations. CS4 was mostly used in C10 when subjects tend to use alternate terms in describing something or a situation as they are unsure of the exact word which were supposed to use. Then, CS6 which is word coinage were used 2 times both in C10 with the percentage of 1.2%. In a conversation, subjects may randomly create their own word which they think is most suitable to describe the situation they are in or the items they wanted to explain when they get too excited or too scared in getting the message across to the other person. CS6 is the second least of communication strategies used among the subjects. Following to that, CS8 which is nonlinguistic signals was only used once in C8 with the percentage of 0.6% only. CS8 was used to show any nonverbal interaction among the subjects. However, it was not used often since the subjects were informed that the discussion should be verbal only. CS8 is the least of communication strategies used among the subjects. Next, CS10 which is foreignizing was used 3 times with the percentage of 1.7% which is the third least of communication strategies used among the other strategies. Subjects tend to use CS10 in conversation unknowingly as they are communicating in English which is their second or third language. Therefore, such use of CS10 are bound to happen from time to time. On the other hand, CS12 which is appeal for help was used 23 times with the percentage of 13.3% for the whole 10 pair conversations. CS12 was mostly used in C5 which leads it to be the second highest communication strategy used by the subjects. It is common for people to seek for help in a conversation in order to give them CS  C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 C20 T  Percentage  CS1  2  5  2  1  1  0  0  0  0  1  12  7.1  CS2  2  2  1  1  0  0  2  1  2  1 Table 3 above shows how often communication strategies are being used among inbound mobility students in small group conversations. Out of the 13 communication strategies by Dornyei&Scotts (1997), only 8 communication strategies were used by 30 subjects in the small group conversations same as the pair conversation. The other 5 strategies were not used due to its uncommonly strategy and known to the subjects. CS1 which is message abandonment was used 12 times with the percentage of 7.1% in small group conversations. CS1 was often used by C12 for 5 times compared to the others. Subjects tend to abandon message due to language difficulties even in a small group conversation. Due to having more than 1 person to talk to may cause difficulties for someone to respond back properly. Next, CS2 which is topic avoidance was also used 12 times with the percentage of 7.1%. CS2 is usually used together with CS1 in conversation by most subjects as it relates to each. Subjects tend to avoid a topic altogether if they abandon a message due to language difficulties or lack of language knowledge. Following to that, CS3 which is circumlocution was used 77 times with the percentage of 45.8% by the small group subjects in their conversations. It is normal to feel the need to elaborate your feedback in a certain situation often when you feel comfortable and assured with the people around you. CS3 was mostly used by all 10 small group subjects in their conversation among the other communication strategy. After that, CS4 which means approximation was only used 1 time with the percentage of 0.6%. This may be due to the fact that the subjects would not make up words when having a discussion with more than 1 person with them to avoid embarrassment. Then, CS8 which means nonlinguistic signals was used 16 times with the percentage of 9.5% in the small group conversation. Since the subjects have done the pair conversation first, most of them were placed in the same small group as the pair conversation. Therefore, they feel more comfortable to be able to talk to the same person again and some were just happily shocked to find out that they actually go to the same faculty as each other and this is the first time seeing each other having discussion related to mobility program. Next, CS10 which is foreignizing was used 4 times with the percentage of 2.4%. Sometimes subjects feel like they need to use a common language which maybe a foreign language to the other person in their conversation because they are unsure of what the actual word is in English. After that, CS12 which is appeal for help was used 13 times with the percentage of 7.7% in the small group conversation. Subjects will seek for help from the other person in the group if they forget something or wanted to be sure of something so that they do not make any mistake which may offend the person around them or give negative feedback from others. Lastly, CS13 which is stalling or time-gaining strategy was used 33 times with the percentage of 19.6%. Small group conversations tend to use more CS13 in their conversation due to the need to think of an answer or feedback. Another reason to use CS13 so often is because when you are having a conversation with more than 1 person, you might feel left out or you just do not know what else to say as the other people in the group might have already said what you wanted to say, so you ended up by not saying anything and just stalling the time away instead of just being quiet and make the situation awkward.

The differences in communication strategies for small groups
It can be seen in Figure 2, CS3 shows the highest ranked of communication strategy among the other strategies which follows by CS13, CS8, CS12, CS1, CS2, CS10 and lastly CS4. In a small group conversation, subjects tend to use different kind of communication strategies in getting their message across.

Differences in Communication Strategies between Pair and Small Group Discussion
Communication  There are differences in communication strategy between pair and small group conversation. For CS1, pair subjects tend to use more of this strategy in their conversation compared to small group subjects 1% more. This may be because interaction between 2 people could cause either feeling uncomforting or getting too excited to tell your side of the story to which leads to abandoning some messages during the conversation. Next, for CS2, CS3, CS4 and CS12 pair subjects use this communication strategy more compared to small group subjects. The differences are not a lot but small group subjects tend to use less of those communication strategies. However, for CS6, only pair subjects use this communication strategy. On the other hand, small group subjects lead in the use of CS8, CS10 and CS13 in their conversation more than pair subjects.
The use of each communication strategies was different between pair and small group in their conversations. Pair subjects tend to use more of a different type of communication strategies in their conversation compared to small group subjects. For example, CS8 were the third highest used communication strategy in small group conversations whereas it was the least used communication strategy in pair conversations.
It can be seen in Figure 3, CS3 shows the highest ranked of communication strategy among the other strategies used by both pair and small group subjects. It can be said that both pair and small group subjects will often feel the need to elaborate their feedback in order for the other person to understand them without missing anything out to which could lead to a misunderstanding later on. In certain situation, a person may feel it is necessary for them to elaborate on their answers and explanation in order the other person to really understand what they are trying to say without misunderstanding the situation or the actual intention of the speaker.

The Dominantly Used of Communication Strategies between Pair and Small Group Discussion
The first dominantly used of communication strategies for pair conversation is in C5 by P5 as they used communication strategies 26 times during their conversation. P5 uses CS3 10 times which is the highest used of communication strategies in their conversation. Followed by CS12 with 5 times and CS2 and CS13 with 4 times each as well. It seems like the P5 conversation is based on the use of circumlocution, topic avoidance and stalling or time-gaining strategies throughout their conversations which may relate to their needs to survive in communicating in English as a foreign language. The second dominantly used of communication strategies is in C10 by P10. Overall, P10 used 22 communication strategies in their conversation. The most commonly used communication strategies for P10 is also CS3 for 13 times followed by CS4 and CS12 for 3 times each. P10 mainly uses circumlocution, approximation and appeal for help as their communication strategies in their conversation. The third dominantly used of communication strategies is in C7 by P7 for pair conversation. Generally, P7 used 20 communication strategies in their conversation. The most commonly used communication strategies for P7 is also CS3 for 6 times followed by CS13 for 6 times and CS12 for 3 times. P7 mainly uses circumlocution, stalling or time-gaining strategies and appeal for help in their conversation. It can be seen between the top 3 dominantly used communication strategies by P5, P10 and P7 has its similarity as well as differences. The most commonly used communication strategies by all 3 pairs are circumlocution. However, it was used with different frequent for each pair. This is because sometimes there is a need to further elaborate your answer or respond in order to make sure the other person fully understand what you are trying to say without any mistake or misunderstanding taken into account. Furthermore, this is in line with a study by Ahmed &Pawar (2018) where only very few students (with a higher linguistic ability) uses some effective communication strategies mainly, paraphrasing o meaning, asking interlocutor's help, time fillers and nonverbal signals while the other majority of students (with lower linguistic ability) prefer to keep silent altogether and whenever they participate and encounter any linguistic difficulties, they usually tend to shift into their mother tongue language or abandon their message right away.
The dominantly used of communication strategies for small group conversation is in C12 by G2 as they used communication strategies 24 times during their conversation. G2 uses CS3 for 10 times followed by CS1 and CS13 for 5 times each. It seems like G2 conversation is based on circumlocution, message abandonment and stalling or time gaining strategies used of communication strategies throughout their conversation. The second dominantly used of communication strategies is in C11 by G1. Overall, G1 used 21 communication strategies in their conversation. The most commonly used communication strategies for G1 is also CS3 and CS13 for 7 times each followed by CS12. G1 uses circumlocution and stalling or time gaining strategies at the same rate as well as appeal for help as their communication strategies in their conversation. The third dominantly used of communication strategies is in C20 by G10 for small group conversation. Generally, G10 used 20 communication strategies in their conversation. The most commonly used communication strategies for G10 is also CS3 for 8 times followed by CS8 for 4 times and CS13 for 3 times. G10 mainly uses circumlocution, nonlinguistic signals and stalling or time-gaining strategies in their conversation. It can be seen between the top 3 dominantly used communication strategies by G2, G1 and G10 has its similarity as well as differences. The most commonly used communication strategies by all 3 pairs are circumlocution. However, it was used with different frequent for each pair. The other dominantly used communication strategies by all 3 small groups are different from each as the responds given by the subjects in each small group are not similar. Moreover, this is in line with a study by Rahim (2019) whereby the use of communication strategies when communicating as it helps providing a meaningful communication process.
Between both pair and small group subjects, the mainly used communication strategy is CS3. However, the other used of communication strategies are different between pair and small group conversation as their needs to use of each communication strategies are rather dissimilar based on their situation. It can be seen that pair subjects use more communication strategies compared to small group subjects. This is because subjects in pairs feels more enthusiastic, active and talkative during the first session of the discussion. The subject feel like it is something exciting to talk about a topic that they are familiar with and able to share it with another person who may experience the same thing. The subjects in pairs are also even more eager to communicate with someone new as for them this discussion is a new activity to participate. Another reason for pair subjects tends to elaborate more compared to small group subjects is because the subject assumed that the other person has no background knowledge on the topic hence the need to elaborate. However, small group subjects use less communication strategies in their conversation because they are familiar with each other, therefore the need to communicate with them in order to get to know or understand the other person is less. The subjects' feels that they do not need to have a longer conversation since there is more than two of them in the group and everyone is taking turn to talk so they feel the conversation is already packed with information even though the conversation stayed on the same particular topic.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the findings show that almost all subjects tend to use 5 main communication strategies which are message abandonment, topic avoidance, circumlocution, appeal for help and stalling or time-gaining strategies in their conversation. These 5 communication strategies from Dornyei & Scott (1997) communication strategy taxonomy are repeatedly used when communicating with the subjects which shows the communication strategies used have some sort of the same pattern for all the inbound mobility students. The findings are almost in line with a study by Ahmed and Pawar (2018) whereby it is common that the use of communication strategies are always avoided by students with lower linguistic ability since they are not exposed or aware of such communication strategies actually exist to help them to communicate better.

Differences in Communication Strategies between Pair and Small Group Discussion
Communication