Login

Discourse analysis on teacher-students interaction pattern of English teaching learning process

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2020):

Bayu Jati Raharja (1), Imam Ghozali (2)

(1) Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa, Indonesia
(2) Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa, Indonesia
Fulltext View | Download

Abstract:

The objectives of this research are to: (1) describe patterns of teacher-students interaction of English Teaching Learning process in the Tenth Grade of SMK Negeri 1 Saptosari Gunungkidul, and (2) reveal the interactional features used by the teacher related to the pedagogic goals during teaching learning process. This research belongs to discourse analysis which aims at describing conversation and interaction of teacher-students during English teaching learning process in the tenth grade of SMK Negeri 1 Saptosari Gunungkidul. The data were collected through observation and backed up with reading and were analyzed using the theory of IRF exchange structure and the SETT Framework (Walsh, 2006). The result showed that there were 20 patterns of interaction of 21 exchange structures used in 7 types of transaction. The transactions were opening/greeting session, introduction, warm up/re-checking session, explaining session, instructioning session, practicing session, closing/note taking session. Some interactional features used by the teacher were found in the classroom interaction. There were 10 types of interactional features were used by the teacher with the total number 115. The using of display question 47, confirmation checks 17, predominant of IRF was 12, use of scaffolding 11, form focused feedback 9, clarification request 7, teacher turn by giving instructions 4, teacher turn by giving explanations 3, corrective repair 3, use of transactional marker 2. It revealed that the use of display questions was the most commonly used by the teacher in this classroom interaction. From the classroom interaction, it can be concluded that the teacher tended to pose display questions which prevented the students to express their elaborate ideas. The teacher also gave few scaffolding in her teaching and it hindered the students’ fluency. However, it might be effective for vocabulary learning through the exercise discussion.

References

Brown, H.D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy.2nd Edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Buxton, B. (1989). The “Natural†language of interaction: A perspective on non-verbal dialogues. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 27(2), 221-229.

Cho, G. (2000). The role of heritage language in social interactions and relationships: Reflections from a language minority group. Bilingual Research Journal, 24(4), 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2000.10162773

Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Toward an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London: Routledge

Walsh, S. (2006). Exploring classroom discourse language in action. London: Routledge

Walsh, S. (2006). “Talking the Talk of the TESOL, Classroom. “ETL. Journal