ABSTRACT
AN ANALYSIS OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION IN ENGLISH CLASS
AT THE SEVENTH GRADE STUDENTS IN SMPN 4 BANDAR
LAMPUNG
By
ECI FEBRIANI
Classroom interaction is a practice that enhance the development of the two very
important language skill which are speaking and listening among the learners. This
device helps the learner to be competent enough to think critically and share their
views among their peers.
Talk is one of the major ways that teachers convey information to the students, and it
is also one of the primary means of controlling students’ behavior. On the other hand,
if the teacher talks too much, he will not give space to students to expose their target
language needed in language learning process.
Based on the FIAC, there are three
categories in the classroom interaction, they are: teacher talk, students talk, and
no/all talk. Teacher talk includes accept feeling, praises, accept/ uses ideas of
students, ask question, lecturing, giving direction and criticizing. Students talk
includes students talk response and students talk initiation. And no/all talk is the
situation which is in silence.
This classroom interaction analysis has been conducted to investigate
Teacher-Student verbal interaction pattern at the second grade of SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung.
The research was done started from April 17
thto April 19
th2012.
The primary data of this research are
the teacher’s and students’ conversation
gathered from video recording and observation sheet. Then, those data were
transcribed and analyzed in the form of interaction pattern that divided by Edge and
interaction categories proposed by Flanders.
ii
The Teacher-Students verbal interaction showed that percentage of the mean number
of talk toward mean number of interactions is 92.5%. It reflects that the mean number
of talk (in percentage) is more than two-thirds of classroom time is devoted to talking.
Then, the percentage of the mean number of teacher talk toward mean number of talk
is 53.2%. It reflects that the mean number of teacher talk (in percentage) is more than
two-thirds of talking time; the person talking is the teacher. The percentage of the
mean number of teacher talk toward mean number of teacher talk is 48.5%. It reflects
that the mean number of teacher indirect talk (in percentage) is more than two-thirds
of teacher talk.
It’s knowing that interaction
from male students is 38 or 33.9% from total interaction,
female students have 31 interactions or 27.8% and both of students have 43
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Praise just to Allah SWT for the mercy and the prosperity that enable the researcher to
accomplish the script. This script entitled “An Analysis of Classroom Interaction in English
Class at the Seventh Grade of SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung” is submitted as a part
ial fulfillment of
the requirements for S1 Degree in Teacher Training and Education Faculty.
The researcher would like to acknowledge her deep and sincere attitude to Drs. Hery Yufrizal,
M.A., Ph.D. and Dra. Hartati Hasan, M.Hum. for their valuable guidance in improving the form
and content for this paper. Thank you for being patient with me. The researcher would also
express her thanks to her examiner, Drs. Sudirman, M.Pd. who was willing to spent his time for
giving valuable supports, assistance, suggestions, comments and ideas to the researcher in
completing this script.
The researcher would like to thank to Dr. Bujang Rahman, M.Si. as the Dean of Teacher
Training and Education Faculty and for Drs. Imam Rejana, M.Si as the Head of Language and
Arts Education Department. The researcher also want to express her thanks to her academic
advisor Prof. Dr. Cucu Sutarsyah, M.A. for his kindness and help. The Researcher would like to
thank to the Headmaster of SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung Drs. Edy Supriyono and Martha
Nainggolan, S.Pd. as an English Teacher, who have allowed her to do the research.
vi
The researcher also like to express her thank to her best partner, best friend, brother or whatever
he wants to be called, M. Daru Wardana, S.Sos. Thank you for supporting her, listening all
complains about the script and staying with her for all these years. It means a lot to her.
Her thanks also addressed to her best friends Meri Noviani, S.Pd., Lidya Ayuni, S.Pd., Raynald
Agus Setiawan, S.Ked., Reza Putra Perdana, S.Ip., Roni Saputra, S.Kom., Briptu. Alan Fitri, Rio
Alamanda, SE., Syaifulah Noer, S.Ip., Ami Somala, SE., Rama Manggala, SH., and Citria
Anggraini, S.Pd. Thank you so much for making her laugh and coloring her world, life is good
mates!.
The last but not least her ppl’s group ( Dian Novita
, S.Pd., Diah Arum, Astuti Riyanti, S.Pd.,
Destri Aryani, S.Pd., Agus Munib S.Pd., Ewintri, S.Pd., Arif Atmunandar, Susi Sulistyawati,
Winanda, Galih Sumanjaya, and Anasrin). Also her English Department friends Lidya Shinta
Mutiara, Delia Elmanisya, Nanda Futia, Myra Desmayani, Dicky Kurniawan, Ayu Lestari,
Rizka, Ervina, Rudy, Hadhi, Kiky, Hesti,
and all of ED 06’s friends that she
can’t mention one
by one, Thank you very much.
Bandar Lampung, September 2012
The Researcher,
ADMITTED BY
1. Examination Committee
Chairperson :Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D. ………
Examiner : Drs. Sudirman, M.Pd. ………
Secretary :Dra. Hartati Hasan, M.Hum. ………
2. The Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty
Dr. H. Bujang Rahman, M.Si. NIP 19600315 198503 1 003
Research Title : AN ANALYSIS OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION IN ENGLISH CLASS ATHE SEVENTH GRADE OF SMPN 4 BANDAR LAMPUNG
Student’s Name : ECI FEBRIANI Student’s Number : 0613042021
Department : Language and Arts Education Study Program : English Education
Faculty : Teacher Training and Education Faculty
APPROVED BY Advisory Committee
Advisor Co-Advisor
Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D. Dra. Hartati Hasan, M.Hum. NIP 19600719 198511 1 001 NIP 19480928 197603 2 001
The Head of Language and Art Education Department
I. INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses certain points; introduction deals with background of the
problem, research problems, objectives of the research, uses of the research, scope of
the research and definitions of term.
1.1Background of the Problem
As one of international languages, English plays great role in all human activities.
Many people use this language in their daily life, work and many kinds of activities.
English is so widely used in international communication. That is important for us to
learn English in order to communicate and interact with other people in other part of the
world.
Realizing the importance of English as mention above, English becomes the first
foreign language taught at schools in Indonesia beginning from elementary school to
university. The aim of teaching English at school as stated in the KTSP curriculum is
enable the students to communicate in English both spoken and written form.
Despite of the fact that English has been taught for years, the capability of listening,
speaking, reading and writing English for Indonesian students are still unsatisfactory.
They often acutely embarrassed if they make mistakes and are corrected or laughed at.
hesitate to interact with their friends and their teacher by using target language. Based
on my experience in PPL programme, Students are afraid and feel not insecure to speak
English. Actually, they understand the meaning of the lesson but they are too shy to
interact with the teacher and they just tell their friends if they know something or find
some difficulties. These situations tend to happen because their teacher almost never
gives them various communicative activities that can trig them to speak and to interact
to each other (Tarigan, 1989:24).
In KTSP for junior high school, the EFL learning at SMP in Indonesia is aimed at
developing four major language skills, which are; listening, speaking, reading, and
writing. The KTSP also states that SMP students are expected to be able to
communicate to each other in target language fluently by the end of the course.
There are so many factors influencing the students’ achievement in English. One of
them is a technique used by the teacher in English class. Alexander (1998) in Subaikan
(1995) states that the teaching qualities, particularly the approach, method and
techniques used in teaching process are important. It is the teacher’s responsibility to
improve and determine techniques that may provoke the students to keep learning.
Based on the writer’s observation during her PPL program in SMPN 4 Bandar
Lampung, where the researcher taught in bilingual class and regular class, bilingual
class that have more facilities such as the number of students is smaller than other
classes, each subject consist of 2 teachers, Every student in the bilingual class has their
own laptops, unfortunately these facilities are not utilized properly. It was found that the
to use direct influence rather than indirect influence. However, In my opinion, bilingual
class has a good interaction than another regular class, because the students always
interest in learning English. The situation was quite different with regular class, the
students seemed not really get into the lesson . It is known that final result of teaching is
affected by some factors, they are: learners, the teacher, time allocation, the use of
visual aid, methodology, teaching material, interaction between the teacher and
students, and interaction between student-student in the classroom.
Pica, Kanagy and Falodun (1993:10) state that language is best learned and taught
through interaction. It is stated by Rivers (1987:3) that the interaction is the key to teach
language communication. Interaction here involves not just expressions of one’s idea,
but comprehension of those to other. Thus, these can be drawn as conclusion that in
interaction, one listens to other, one respond, other listens and responds.
From the statements above it can be inferred that classroom interaction includes all of
the classroom events, both verbal interaction and non-verbal interaction. The verbal
interaction takes place because of the teacher and learners talk, including the influence
of gender while non-verbal interaction covers gestures or facial expression and by the
teacher and learners and learners and learners when they communicate without using
words. These two kinds of talk are important; they dominate the classroom events and
influence students' foreign language acquisition. Learners learn not only through
comprehensible input but also their own output. But a good lesson is not one in which
students do all or even most of the talking. Some lessons may be good if they are
carefully structured in such away that students do a good deal of talking and at the same
One of the guidelines to analyze the interaction activities is by using Flanders'
Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC). FIAC is a concept which states that teaching
will be effective depending to a large degree on how directly and indirectly teachers
influence the learners' behaviours.
Based on the FIAC, there are three categories in the classroom interaction, they are:
teacher talk, students talk, and no/all talk. Teacher talk includes accept feeling,
praises, accept/ uses ideas of students, ask question, lecturing, giving direction and
criticizing. Student talk includes student talk response and student talk initiation.
And no/all talk is the situation which is in silence (Allwright and Bailey, 1991:
202).
It is clear that the active role of both the teacher and learners is absolutely needed to
create a good interaction because everyone will learn something better if he experiences
it by himself. The learners have to learn the knowledge about English from the teacher,
be active in responding the teacher's questions, and introducing their own ideas.
Besides, the teacher must be creative in using teaching methods and techniques to
support his talk in order to be interesting to be learned by the learners. Those are not
easy tasks for many teachers, because as Goodman said that language appears
sometimes to be so easy to learn and at other times so hard (Goodman, 1986:39). If the
teacher fails, he cannot achieve the teaching-learning objectives.
Classroom interaction itself always related with gender. The effect of gender in
interaction has a part which is influencing successful interaction between
teacher-students and student-student. Gender in here related to the teacher-students in the classroom, as
English. Everyone always think that female students is more interact than male students,
In fact, based on Dukmak’s research in UAE countries, female student were not really
“live” in the classroom. They don’t have a gut to express their feelings, maybe it’s
related with the custom on their country. But in Indonesia and Taiwan for example,
female students always dominated the situation.
By replicating of Dukmak’s classroom interaction in regular and special education in
the primary classroom in the UAE, The writer is going to do a research with the titled
An analysis of classroom interaction in English class at the 7th grade of SMPN 4
Bandar Lampung.
1.2Formulation of the Problem
Based on the limitation of the problem above, research problem is formulated bellow:
1) What is the pattern of classroom interaction in English class at the seventh grade
of SMP Negeri 4 Bandar Lampung?
2) How is the process of classroom interaction in English class at the seventh grade
of SMP Negeri 4 Bandarlampung, does it reflect the interactive classroom
interaction suggested by Flanders?
3) Is there any difference in classroom interaction between male and female
students in English class at the seventh grade of SMP Negeri 4 Bandar
1.3Objective of the research
Relating to the research problem, the objective of the research are:
1) To find out the pattern of classroom interaction in English class that taking place
in the seventh grade of SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung
2) To investigate the classroom interaction process in English class at the seventh
grade of SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung, whether or not it reflects the interactive
classroom interaction proposed by Flanders
3) To find out the differences in classroom interaction between male and female
students in English class at the seventh grade of SMP Negeri 4 Bandar Lampung
1.4Uses of the Research
In accordance with the objective, this research could have the following uses: 1) Practically
To give the school teacher an overview of classroom interaction in SMPN 4
Bandar Lampung to be taken into consideration to create and/or develop and
implement the method of teaching and learning process leading to the
2) Theoretically,
To give information to the reader the analysis of the process of classroom
interaction including pattern and teaching learning activity and the interaction
between student-student by using the theoretical principles of classroom
interaction proposed by Flanders.
1.5 Scope of The Research
The research will be conducted in the seventh grade of SMP Negeri 4 Bandar
Lampung. The focus of this research is to analyze the process of classroom
interaction between teacher-student and student-student. The writer will become an
observer who observes the classroom interaction in the process of teaching English.
The theory made as the classification base by Flander. The subject of this research
will be the students at 7A (Bilingual class) students of SMP Negeri 4
Bandarlampung.
1.6 Definition of Terms
1. Interaction is an active process in which people try to get their meaning across
to each other by imparting thoughts, feelings or ideas. Interaction refers to any
sort of interaction, student-students or teacher-student discussion, group
discussions and any type of classroom participation (Long and Sato, 1983)
2. Classroom interaction is a practice that enhance the development of the two
learners. This device helps the learner to be competent enough to think critically
and share their views among their peers.
3. Teacher-student interaction is one of the patterns of classroom interaction, out
of two patterns, occurred between the teacher and the students which is initiated
and dominated by the teacher as the source of teaching learning process.
4. Student-student interaction is another pattern of classroom interaction occurred
among the students which is initiated and dominated by the students themselves
to seek on the knowledge they want to get with little help of the teacher as the
learners. This device helps the learner to be competent enough to think critically
and share their views among their peers.
3. Teacher-student interaction is one of the patterns of classroom interaction, out
of two patterns, occurred between the teacher and the students which is initiated
and dominated by the teacher as the source of teaching learning process.
4. Student-student interaction is another pattern of classroom interaction occurred
among the students which is initiated and dominated by the students themselves
to seek on the knowledge they want to get with little help of the teacher as the
II. FRAME OF THEORIES
In this chapter the researcher uses some concepts to this research. They are concept of
language learning, concept of classroom interaction, teacher talk,learner talk, classroom
interaction in language teaching, pattern of classroom interaction, classroom interaction
analysis, and supporting factors in classroom interaction including the effect of gender.
Classified like the following.
2.1 Concept of Language Learning
Language learning is a process. A child learns his first language step by step. Since he
does not go to school at his age, he does not learn his first language by studying the
rules formally, but through experience. Concept development of language goes along
with the experience.
Brown (1980:8) states that learning is acquiring or getting of knowledge of a subject or
skill by study, experience, or instruction. According to this definition, knowledge or
skill about language use can be gained by the learners through the study in the
classroom or through experience in his life. During the process of learning, there are
changes of learners' behavior. They will get the knowledge or skill that they have not
had before as the result of learning. Kimbley and Garmezy, as quoted by Brown
(1980:7), states that learning is a continually change in a behavioral tendency and is the
depend on the effort as of changing both the teacher and the learners. If the teacher uses
appropriate methods in teaching, it will be easier for the learners to study the materials.
In this case of learning, the learners study the material consciously and practice it in
order to get good results.
From the explanation above, it can be inferred that learning:
1. is acquiring or getting knowledge;
2. is getting information or skill;
3. involves active and conscious efforts, inside or outside of the classroom;
4. is relatively permanent, but subject to forgetting;
5. involves some form of practice, perhaps reinforced practice;
6. is a change in behavior.
2.2 Teacher Talk
Hornby has written that talk has some meanings, they are: a conversation or discussion,
a talking without action, a lecture or speech, formal discussions or negotiations and a
way of speaking (Hornby, 1995: 1220). In the classroom, teachers make adjustments to
both language form and language function in order to help communication in the
classroom. These adjustments are called 'teacher talk'
(www.fiiichpark.coi-n/courses/glossaty.litiii). From those meanings, it can be known that teacher talk is a
major way used by the teacher to convey information, have discussion and negotiations
and motivate his students, so he can give the students knowledge and control their
Observation of many different classes, both in content area subjects and in language
instruction, consistently shows that teachers typically do between one half and three
quarters of the talking done in classrooms. Talk is one of the major ways that teachers
convey information to learners, and it is also one of the primary means of it will be
useful to ask what our talk is like.
It has been said before that teacher and learner talks are the factors that establish
classroom interaction. Both of them must be in balance. Too much teacher talk will
make the students passive and static; they cannot improve their English acquisition. It
will be also bad if the teacher has too little talk, the students will not get enough
knowledge from him. But it is wrong to judge or assess teacher talk only by reference to
its quantity. It is just as important to assess its quality.
There are three major aspect of teacher talk, they are:
1. Physiological aspect
This aspect related to the voice produced by the teacher. The teacher has to be
able to control his voice during, he speaks in the classroom.
2. Interpersonal aspect
This aspect related to how the teacher speaks with utterances which is structured
appropriately with the situation to the students so it can make a classroom
climate.
3. Pedagogical aspect
This aspect related to how teacher organize the lesson, so it can create a good
From the statement above, it can be known that the teacher have to be able to make his
talk balance with students talk, situation and context because it can affect students'
language acquisition. As William Ayers says that the focus of teacher talk is curriculum,
instruction and evaluation-the content of conduct of teaching, so that the teacher's
ability to combine and apply the three aspects in his talk is really needed.
2.3 Learner Talk
According to Halliday, children have language development when they learn language
(Halliday, 1986:16). It is the same with when they learn foreign language in the
classroom. Firstly they imitate the teacher talk and they need more time to record every
teacher's talk that it's called 'silent period', then start to express their own idea, having
discussion, and finally can get their communicative competence.
Student talk can be said as student's speech when he imitates his teacher's examples,
expresses his idea or gives comments and criticism about something in the classroom,
because Prabhu said that learners have effort in the language classroom (Prabhu, 1991:
49), but teacher's role cannot be separated from their effort. A good classroom climate
will support the students' effort.
Student talk can be said as student’s speech when he imitates his teacher’s examples,
expresses his idea or gives comments and criticism about something in the classroom.
Student talk involves the following categories:
Talk by students in response to teacher. Teacher initiates the contact or solicits
student statement.
2. Student talk-initiation
Talk by students which they initiate. If 'calling on' student is only to indicate
who may talk next, observer must decide whether student wanted to talk. If he
did, use this category.
3. Silence or confusion
Pauses, short periods of silence and periods of confusion in which
communication cannot be understood by the observer.
Iffah (2010) had done the research about the classroom interaction in speaking class.
The findings of the study in general can be stated that the teacher and the students
interacted in the classroom interactively and communicatively. The teacher employed
most aspects of existing theories proposed by Flanders in the teaching learning process.
By applying the various interactions, the teacher can stimulate and encourage the
students to interact in the speaking class. It also created a good atmosphere in the
classroom in order that the students were not bored and finally they did not hesitate to
deliver their idea. Meanwhile, the patterns that occurred during the classroom
interaction are 1) the teacher to whole class, 2) the individual student to the individual
student, and 3) the teacher to the individual student. The first pattern always happened
in the beginning as an opening and as the giving feedback in the teaching learning
process. The second pattern mostly occurred whenever the students were in a small
group discussion. The last pattern was employed by the teacher when she gave further
2.4 Concept of Classroom Interaction
Classroom interaction is the action performed by the teacher and the students during
instruction interrelated. They interact with one another for a number of different reason
and on a continued basis throughout the school day. Classroom interaction covers
classroom behaviours such as turn-taking, questioning and answering, negotiation of
meaning and feedback (Chaudron, 1988: 10)
“Interaction between students and teacher is fundamental to the learning process”.
(Willson, http:// www.aare.edu.au/ ggpap/ will99741. htm)
Interaction in language classroom will lead the learners to better learning, and will
activate their competence (Malamah-Thomas,1987:45). As the students’ interest is
aroused, their anxiety, fear or even fatigue in the classroom will gradually diminish; if
not completely disappear, and as a result they will actively involve in the classroom
interaction.
Psychologically, students cannot be well motivated when they are involved in a less
interesting language activities or materials, which will consequently decrease their
understanding toward the learning material being learnt. Likewise, when they have
intrinsic, motivation increasingly driven, it will be easier for them to comprehend the
material gradually.
Interaction is a two-way communication between two people or more. Brown proposed
(2001:165) that interaction is the collaborative exchange of thoughts, feelings, or ideas
between two or more people, resulting in a reciprocal effect on each other. Thus,
other by imparting thoughts, feelings, or ideas. The interaction should be a
communication should be meaningful enough for the concerned people, if it is not, there
could be a communication barrier. In a classroom interaction, therefore, it is important
that meaningful communication be created and fostered.
River (1970:4-5) states through interaction students can increase their language store as
they listen to or read authentic linguistic material. In interaction, students can use all of
their possession of the language-all they have learned or casually absorbed-in real life
exchanges. Interaction involves not only expression of one’s own ideas but also
comprehensions. One listens to other, one responds (either directly or indirectly), other
listen and respond.
2.5 Classroom Interaction in Language Teaching
Bishop (2000) stated that students will not get enough practice just by talking to the
instructor, and very little by just listening to the instructor. Furthermore he said that
students develop competency and become critical thinkers in classroom that provides
opportunities for intensive, structured interaction among students.
Malamah in Rowiyah (2007) stated that the teacher must engage in the sort of
interaction with the learner, in which the communication is able to take place. She also
adds that communication is achieved by mean of variety of resources. In the classroom
interaction communication among the students and teacher-students take place.
Interaction in the classroom take place when the students interest in presented. To
promote interaction on other language, the teacher therefore must maintain a lively
1987) it means that the teacher can use non verbal cues to encourage students speaking
interaction, for example, smile expectantly and nod as students talk.
When we talk about different interaction in class, we mean the issue of who is speaking
to whom. Edge (2001:69) divided classroom interaction into 6 types of interaction:
1. Teacher – students interaction where teacher gives obstruction to the whole class
(T-Ss)
2. Teacher-students interaction where there is an exchange between the teacher and
the whole class such as question and answer (Ss-T)
3. Teacher-student interaction where teacher initiates the interaction with an
individual of students. The teacher asks a student to answer question, repetition,
confirmation and so on (T-S)
4. Student-teacher interaction where the communication with the teacher stated by
student. The student initiated himself to question the teacher, giving opinion,
complaining, eliciting in form of information and many others (S-T).
5. Teacher-student-student interaction where the teacher tells one student to say
something to another (T-S-S).
6. Student-student interaction where students communicate directly with each other
in form of discussion, asking for the correct term, confirmation of an
2.6 Pattern of Classroom Interaction
Interaction refers to any sort of interaction, student-students or teacher student
discussion, group discussion, and any type of classroom participation (Long and Sato,
1983). The proportion of student-student interaction in classroom ideally should be
larger than teacher-student interaction that is student-centeredness’. The longer students
interact with each other, the better they understand what they experience and learn
something in the classroom.
In order to gain meaningful learning activity, there should be classroom interaction.
According Sardiman (1987:204-205), there are two pattern of interaction in the teaching
and learning process, namely an interaction between teacher and students, and
interaction among students. He further points out four advantages of the classroom
interaction as described below:
1. Classroom interaction makes the teaching learning process more alive
2. The teacher would able to know his students’ wants, interest, attention,
behaviors, weakness, and faults.
3. The teacher would be able to recognize his own weakness and fault based on the
teaching and learning process that has taken place.
4. The teacher would be able to develop the students’ ability by making contact
with his students.
It can be concluded that a teacher should put an effort to lead the students into an
interesting and conducive classroom interaction for themselves, most importantly, not
teaching. The method or technique can be applied in a more or less flexible way. If any
inappropriateness caused by the method or technique being applied may distort the
classroom interaction, the teacher obliged to modify or change it abruptly. Since a
teacher’s major duty is how to make the students learn, not merely to teach them. And
this idea is often, commonly, neglected by most of the teachers at the moment.
The current theories of communicative competence are essentially interactive nature of
communication. Most meaning, in semantic sense, is a product of negotiation, of give
and take, as interlocutor attempt to communicate. Thus, the communicative purpose of
language compels us to create opportunities for genuine interaction in the classroom.
Interactive classes will most likely be found:
1. Doing a significant amount of pair work or group work.
2. Receiving authentic language input in real-world contexts.
3. Producing language for genuine, meaningful communication.
4. Performing classroom tasks that prepare them for actual communication.
5. Practicing oral communication through the give and take and spontaneity of
actual conversation
6. Writing to and for real audiences, not contrived ones.
It can be inferred that interaction is the key in the teaching learning process in the
classroom. It suggests that teachers maintain a lively attention and active participation
among our students so that the interactive occurs. Teachers are supposed to create such
Brown (2001:165), that from the very beginning of the language study, classroom
should be interactive.
2.7 Classroom Interaction Analysis
Flanders' Interaction Analysis is a system of classroom interaction analysis. The
Flanders' Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC) consists of ten categories of
communication which are said to be inclusive of all communication possibilities. There
are seven categories used when the teacher is talking and two categories when the
learner is talking. In his pioneering work, Flanders used the term Interaction Analysis
for his ten-category observation schedule that he had designed for general educational
purposes, to be relevant to a variety of lessons rather than for any subject in particular.
In his work, he combined a politically powerful idea with a very practical simplicity.
The powerful idea was that the teaching was more or less effective depending on how
“directly” or “indirectly” teachers influence learner behaviour.
TEACHER TALK
INDIRECT INFLUENCE
1. ACCEPTS FEELING: accepts and clarifies the feeling tone of the students in a non-threatening manner. Feelings may be positive or negative. Predicting or recalling feelings are included.
2. PRAISES OR ENCOURAGES: praises or encourages
students’ action or behaviour. Jokes that release tension, not at the expense of another individual, nodding head or saying, “um hm?” or “go on” are included.
3. ACCEPTS OR USES IDEAS OF STUDENT: clarifying,
building, or developing ideas suggested by a student. As a teacher brings more of his own ideas into a play, shift a category five.
4. ASKS QUESTIONS: asking a question about content or procedure with the intent that a student answers.
INFLUENE questions.
6. GIVING DIRECTIONS: directions, commands, or orders to which a student is expected to comply.
7. CRITICIZING OR JUSTIFYING AUTHORITY: statements
intended to change student behaviour from non-acceptable to acceptable pattern; bawling someone out; stating why is the teacher doing what he is doing; extremely self-reference.
8. STUDENTS TALK-RESPONSE: a student makes a
predictable response to teacher. Teacher initiates the contact or solicits student statement and sets limits to what the student says.
9. STUDENT TAK-INITIATION: talk by students which they
initiate. Unpredictable statements in response to teacher. Shift from 8 to 9 as students introduces own ideas. 10. SILENCE OR CONFUSION: pauses, short periods of
silence, and periods of confusion in which communication cannot be understood by observer.
To obtain a complete descriptive picture of what behaviours are used during a lesson, a
trained observer tallies every time a different category is used and when the same
category is repeated for a consecutive period of time, he records this category every
three seconds. The tallies are entered into a ten by ten matrix, resulting in a graphic
picture of the lesson. The matrix preserves the general time sequence of interaction by
illustrating which behaviours immediately preceded or followed others. By studying the
matrix, teaching patterns can be discovered and analyzed.
The following is an example of how an observation is tallied and entered into a matrix:
The teacher begins by saying, “Open your books to page 160 and answer the first
question, Bill” (category 6). Three seconds pass while the students get out their books
Portugal is from Iberian Peninsula” (category 2). “Who has the answer to the next
question?” (category 4). A pupil raises his hand and says, “I don’t where we are”
(category 9). The teacher remarks, “We are on page 160, the second question under
exercise I (category 5), and if you had been paying attention, you would have known
where we are” (category 7). ‘Martha, continue by reading your answer to the second
question and be very careful to watch your pronunciation as you read” (The observer
records two 6’s in a row because the length of the statement is longer then 3 seconds).
But Martha asks the teacher a question instead: “They don’t pronounce the ‘h’ in
Spanish or in French, do they?” (category 9), and the teacher responses, “That’s right,
Marta (category 2), ‘h’ is a silent letter in both of those languages” (category 3).
Observations automatically begin and end with category 10. An observer, therefore,
would have tallied the above interaction in a column in the following way:
10-6-10-8-2-4-9-5-7-6-6-9-2-3-10.
Every number except the first and last 10 is then entered into the matrix twice, which is
how the sequence of even is preserved. Each of the 100 cells in the matrix contains an
event and what happen directly afterwards. If the behaviours just described are entered
into a matrix, they would be paired in this way first:
1st pair (10
6) 2nd pair
3rd pair (10
8) 4th pair
5th pair (2
7th pair (9
5) etc.
7
The rows in the matrix designate the first event; the columns are the second event. A
tally is placed for each pair of numbers in the corresponding cell at the intersection of
the appropriate column and row. The first pair above to be entered will go in the 10-6
(read “ten-six”) cell. The second will be placed in the 6-10 cell; the third, in the 10-8
cell; the fourth in the 8-2 cell; and so on. When all of the tallies for an observation are
entered into the matrix the columns and the rows are each totalled. The totals for the
columns and the rows are identical, i.e., the total for column 1 will be the same as the
total for row 1. Figure 2 illustrates where the above tallies will be placed on a matrix;
the totals for the columns and the rows are also indicated.
When the matrix is complete, percentages for each category are calculated as well as the
percentages of teacher talk, student talk and silence or confusion. Ratios of the amount
of indirect to direct behaviours the teachers used are also determined. There are 9 of
these ratios, which are referred to as I.D. ratios, each focusing on a different
Figure 2
Sample Matrix for Recording Interaction Analysis Second event
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
1 0
2 1 1 2
3 1 1
4 1 1
First 5 1 1
Event 6 1 1 1 3
7 1 1
8 1 1
9 1 1 2
10 1 1 2
Total 0 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 14
(Moskowitz 1968: 219-22, quoting Flanders 1960)
From the matrix a teacher may find out many specific things about his teaching. A few
of these are:
1. What percentage of the class time does the teacher talk?
2. What percentage of the class time do the pupils talk?
3. Does the teacher use more indirect or direct influence during a lesson?
4. Is the teacher more indirect or direct in the way he motivates or controls the
5. What kind of immediate feedback does the teacher give to pupils after they
respond?
6. To what extend do pupils participate for extended periods of time?
7. What behaviours does the teacher use to elicit pupil response in the class?
8. To what extend are pupil responses which are called for by the teacher narrow,
predictable ones and to what extent are pupils given the opportunity to bring in
their own ideas?
9. What behaviours does the teacher use more extensively in communicating?
2.8 Supporting Factors In Classroom Interaction
Teacher–student interaction is very important in the teaching and learning process
because students benefit from this interaction at both the social and academic level
(Beyazkurk & Kesner, 2005). Such interaction will be referred to in this research as
‘classroom interaction’ and is defined as ‘the process of face-to-face action’ (Robinson,
1994). This research investigates the types and frequency of interactions initiated by
students and students in the seventh grade in SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung. The reasons
for initiating classroom interactions are also examined in this research.
2.8.1 Importance of Interaction
A fundamental problem in classroom interaction is that teachers try every day to
encourage students to participate effectively in classroom discussions but unfortunately
these efforts may fall flat (Moguel, 2004). Previous research on classroom interaction
has focused mostly on pedagogical methodology, on teachers' actions during the lesson
behaviour in the classroom (Sahlstrom, 2001). Although teachers engage in a great deal
of interaction with their students while in the classroom, most teachers have difficulty
remembering these interactions (Good & Brophy, 1994). However, teachers could make
‘mental notes’ to record which students interact more, interact less or do not interact at
all. Such mental notes will help teachers to encourage students to interact appropriately
and improve learning (Willson, 1999).
2.8.2 Classroom Interaction and Achievement
Willson's (1999) and Younger and Warrington's (1996) findings regarding the
relationship between interaction and achievement revealed that high-achieving students
initiated more interactions than low-achieving ones. The study also found that the nature
of interactions among high achievers differed from those of low achievers. High
achievers initiated interactions to volunteer answers, whereas low achievers interacted
primarily to seek help.
Professionals in the field of education consider teacher–student interaction fundamental
to the learning process. Student involvement in classroom discussions can be a major
element in effective instruction. Verbally active students are more likely to be high
achievers, and student–teacher interaction can help students develop their cognitive
skills (Jones & Gerig, 1994). Various studies on classroom interaction revealed that
these students control interaction because they are more active in the learning process
and participate more willingly than others (Willson, 1999). Therefore, it is important to
investigate classroom interaction in junior high school’s classroom, and students'
2.8.3 Classroom Interaction and Gender
When examining interaction by gender, previous research results have been
inconsistent. The questions that arise here and remain an issue in the classroom
interaction process are: Who gets the teacher's attention? Who dominates classroom
interactions? While Younger, Warrington and Williams (1999) found that more girls
than boys take the opportunity to initiate questions, seek clarification on work-related
matters, make best use of the support of the teacher, Pavlidou (2003) and Shomoossi,
Amouzadeh and Ketabi (2008) indicated that girls participated less in class than boys
and took less verbal initiative in their interaction with the teacher. They are more
‘passive’ than boys in the classroom and less persistent than them in their
non-compliance with the teacher. Kramer (1985) indicated that high-achieving girls avoided
answering teachers' questions in class and offered comments less frequently than boys.
Others have found that boys do not dominate classroom talk and teacher time (Swann &
Graddol, 1988; Myhill, 2002).
A number of studies have shown gender bias in teacher-initiated interaction in the
classroom (Kerr, 1991; Sadker & Sadker, 1985; Tsouroufli, 2002; Younger &
Warrington, 2002). While some researchers (Sadker & Sadker, 1985) found that
teachers responded differently to boys and girls in the class, with boys tending to
dominate classroom interactions and teachers accepting their dominance, others
(Comfort, 1996) indicated that girls received more positive feedback from their
teachers. Although Comfort (1996) found that teachers initiated more contact with, and
directed more questions to boys than girls, they criticised and disciplined boys more. In
seemed important to investigate the relationship between gender and classroom
interaction in Indonesia, particularly in Bandar Lampung.
This study investigated the frequency and types of classroom interaction initiated by
students with high and low academic achievement in bilingual classes and by students
in regular classes. It also investigated gender in relation to the frequency and types of
initiated interaction. The reasons for initiating classroom interaction were also
examined. The frequency and types of teachers' initiated interaction with all students in
both regular and special education classrooms were also investigated.
The results of this study will show that students interacted more often than evidenced in
other studies. The differences may be due to cultural factors, learning experience or
gender and teaching style (Willson, 1999). In Indonesian culture, students usually
become enthusiastic about interacting with the teacher in the classroom, raising their
hands and shouting, begging the teacher to call upon them. Some students do this even
if they do not know the answer to the question asked; a common interpretation of this
behaviour is that they want to act like the other students.
Basic Theoretical Assumptions of Interaction Analysis:
1. Predominance of verbal communication.
2. Higher reliability of verbal behaviour.
3. Consistency of verbal statements.
4. Teacher’s influence.
6. Relation between social climate and productivity.
7. Relation between class-room climate and learning.
8. Use of observational technique.
9. Role of feedback.
III. RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter discusses about the method of research used in this study, they are:
research design, subject of the research, type of data, techniques of data collection,
research procedure and data analysis.
3.1 Research Design
This research is classroom interaction and non experiment research, so the researcher
used qualitative method, in which focused on the process of teaching and learning not
on the product. As Nunan stated (1989:76) there is no substitute for direct observation
as a way of finding out about language classrooms. Certainly if we want to enrich our
understanding of language learning and teaching, we need to spend time looking in
classroom. The classroom is ‘where the action is’, and we shall look at ways of
recording and investigating that action. To describe the data that she got, the researcher
used descriptive qualitative method.
To analyzed the process of teacher-student and student-student classroom interaction in
English class, the researcher observed the activity in the class through videotaped
3.2 Subject of the Research
The subject was the seventh grade students of SMPN 4 Bandar Lampung in the year of
2011/2012. The researcher took one bilingual class which consist of 10 males and 22
females. During the reasearch, it showed how many interactions of male and female
students. Since this research focus on the interaction in the classroom, the teacher and
the students as well as the students’ respond toward any teaching learning stage has
become the source of data.
3.3 Data Collecting Technique
The researcher used two techniques to gather the data: recording and classroom
observation
1. Recording
The main data was the record of classroom interaction. The researcher recorded the
activities and interactions that occurred during English class. Then, the researcher
transcribed the data that she got from recording technique. The recording tools used
were video recorder. The video recorder was used in front of the class so the students
and the teacher were shot. After that the researcher made the transcription, categorized
the data into pattern of interaction based on Edge pattern of interaction and Flanders’
Interaction Analysis Categories, and analyzed the data.
2. Classroom Observation
Observation is the act of collecting data about the performance of a subject through the
observer directly observed the classroom, and took notes of the relevant events while
the teaching-learning process was going on. In the meantime, audio visual recording of
the whole activity was also made to acquire more complete data about the classroom
process. The classroom observation took 3 times to observe.
3.4 Data Collecting Procedure
The data of this research is the result of the interaction between teacher-students,
student-teacher, and student-student. The researcher used several procedures in
collecting the data. There were seven steps:
1. Formulating the research question and determining the focus of the research.
The formulation of the research question was really needed as the basic or first
step of the research. It meant that the process could be used by the researcher in
finding the necessity of the research.
2. Preparing the instrument of collecting the data. The instrument of collecting the
data was very important in this research. Therefore, the researcher was able to
select the instrument which was appropriate to gather the data needed.
3. Determining the class which became the subject of this research. This process
was also important since it really influenced the appropriate finding of research.
4. Observing and recording the activities and conversation of teacher and students
during the teaching learning process. The researcher found out the necessary of
this research using the appropriate instrument.
5. Making transcription of all the activities and conversation that had been
6. Analyzing and coding the data, then categorizing them.
7. Reporting the result of the data analysis to induce the research findings.
The data in this research were in the form of words, phrases, sentences that were taken
from the data resources (field notes and transcript). The data resources were taken by
using observation. The observation was done by observing, recording & noting down
the events happening in the classroom interaction. The researcher sat in the classroom
for eighty minutes in the best position to hear and see the participants and decided the
category that best represent the communication of events. The researcher wrote down
the categories numbers while simultaneously assessing communication in the next
period.
3.5 Instrument of the Research
The researcher used the instrument proposed by Flanders (1970). This instrument has
been used extensively in various studies regarding classroom interaction. The items in
Observation Sheet (Interaction Matrix)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Class :
Date :
Time :
The following is an example of how an observation is tallied and entered into a matrix:
Bill : Spain and Portugal is from Iberian Peninsula [category 8]. Teacher : Very good, Bill [category 2].
Teacher: Who has the answer to the next question? [category 4] Students : I don’t know where we are [category 9].
Teacher : We are on page 160, the second question under exercise I [category 5]. If you had been paying attention, you would have known where we are [category 7]
Teacher : Martha, continue by reading your answer to the second question and be very careful to watch your pronunciation as you read [category 6]
Martha : They don’t pronounce the ‘h’ in Spanish or in French, do they? [category 9] Teacher : That’s right, Marta [category 2]
‘h’ is a silent letter in both of those languages [category 3]
Observations automatically begin and end with category 10. An observer, therefore,
would have tallied the above interaction in a column in the following way:
10-6-10-8-2-4-9-5-7-6-6-9-2-3-10.
Every number except the first and last 10 is then entered into the matrix twice, which is
how the sequence of event is preserved. Each of the 100 cells in the matrix contains an
event and what happen directly afterwards. If the behaviours just described are entered
into a matrix, they would be paired in this way first:
1st pair (10
6) 2nd pair 3rd pair (10
8) 4th pair
4) 6th pair 7th pair (9
5) etc. 7
The rows in the matrix designate the first event; the columns are the second event. A
tally is placed for each pair of numbers in the corresponding cell at the intersection of
the appropriate column and row. The first pair above to be entered will go in the 10-6
(read “ten-six”) cell. The second will be placed in the 6-10 cell; the third, in the 10-8
cell; the fourth in the 8-2 cell; and so on. When all of the tallies for an observation are
entered into the matrix the columns and the rows are each totaled. The totals for the
columns and the rows are identical, i.e., the total for column 1 will be the same as the
total for row 1. Figure 2 illustrates where the above tallies will be placed on a matrix;
the totals for the columns and the rows are also indicated.
The researcher will classify the data in terms of the quantity of the students interaction
into six types of interaction patterns, they are:
a. T-Ss (teacher-students)
b. Ss-T (students-teacher)
c. T-S (teacher-student)
d. S-T (student-teacher)
e. T-S-S (teacher-student-student)
f. S-S (student-student) interaction
And classify students’ speech in terms of the quantity of the students’ utterances in the
Suggesting, Agreeing, Disagreeing, Seeking Clarification, Clarifying Responses,
Interrupting, and Miscellaneous. The coding system that will be used is based on the
scheme devised by Bowers (Nunan: 1989:80)
3.6. Data Analysis
The data analyzed in this study were the data of the teacher-learners interaction in the
classroom. In this study, the writer analyzed the observed data by using Flanders'
Interaction Analysis System suggested by Allwright and Bailey (1991:10, 202-203).
According to Flanders, the interaction is classified into several components as follows:
1. Teacher talk, which was sub-categorized into direct and indirect influence
The direct influence involved:
a. Lecturing, i.e. giving facts or opinions about content or procedure,
expressing his own ideas, and asking rhetorical questions;
b. Giving direction, i.e. giving directions, commands, or orders to which a
student is expected to comply;
c. Criticizing or justifying authority, i.e. making statements intended to
change student behavior from non-acceptable to acceptable pattern,
bawling someone out, stating why the teacher is doing what he was
doing; extreme self-reference.
The indirect influence:
a non-threatening manner. Feeling may be positive or negative. Predicting
and recalling feelings are included;
b. Praises or encourages i.e. praises or encourages students' action or
behaviour. Jokes that release tension, not at the expense of another
individual, nodding head or saying, "um hm?" or "go on" are included;
c. Accepts or uses ideas of student, i.e. clarifies, builds and develops ideas
suggested by students;
d. Asks questions, i.e. asking a question about content or procedure with the
intent that a student answers.
2. Learner talk, which is subdivided into student-talk response, student-talk
initiation, and silence or confusion.
a. Student-talk response, i.e. a student makes a predictable response to
teacher. Teacher initiates the context or solicits student's statements
and sets limits on to what the student says;
b. Students-talk initiation, i.e. talk by the students which they initiate,
unpredictable statements in response to teacher;
c. Silence or confusion i.e. pauses, short periods of silence, and periods
of confusion in which communication cannot be understood by the
observer (Allwright ad Bailey, 1991:202-2003).
3. Giving a title or name to each categories.
4. Making a category table.
research.
In this table below, number 1 up to 7 are teacher talk which are categorized
into indirect and direct influence and number 1 up to 3 are learner talk.
No Speaking Strategies Observation %
TEACHER TALK I Accepts feeling
2 Praises or encourages
3 Accepts or uses students’ idea 4 Asks questions
5 Lecturing 6 Giving directions 7 Criticizing
LEARNER TALK I Pupil talk- response
2 Pupil talk- initiation 3 Silence or confusion
Total
5. Determining additional data of in-depth interviews & underlining
words, phrases, or sentences concerning to the topic.
6. Formulating Flanders Theory.
Procedure of Flanders Interaction Analysis:
There are two steps that will be conducted in analyzing data using Flanders Interaction
Analysis. Which are:
• Code number
• Place of sitting
• Recording the category number
• Instant recording
• Recording in uncertainty
• Not to shift into opposite classification
• No biases
2. Decoding process
Construction of an interaction matrix
After analyzing the data researcher classifies students’ speech in terms of the quantity of
the students’ utterances in the classroom into the kinds of contribution categories, they
are: accept feeling, praises or encourages, accept ideas asks questions, lectures, gives
directions, criticizes, students’ response, student talk initiation, silence or The coding
system that will be used is based on the scheme devised by Flanders (Flanders:
1967:103-116). The data that already categorized can show us which interaction
phenomena that mostly facilitate the teaching learning activity.
V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
After conducting the research, doing the analysis, and presenting the results, the
conclusion and suggestions are presented in this last chapter.
Conclusion
Interaction Patterns
1. After analyzing the data, it can be seen that in terms of the total number of
interactions in the patterns, there were 185 patterns of interactions. Interactions were
produced by the teacher and the students during the implementation of the topic
lesson.
2. In terms of total number of interactions, Teacher-Students (T-Ss) dominated the
interaction by having 29.1% of interactions (in percentage), followed by
Student-Teacher (S-T) 21.7%. The third position was Students-Student-Teacher (Ss-T) for having
19% of interactions, followed by Teacher-Students (T-S) 13.5%, Student-Student
(S-S) 9.2% and Teacher-Student-Student (T-S-S) 7.6% of interactions.
3. The percentage of Teacher-Students (T-Ss) dominated the whole patterns, but
Student-Teacher (S-T) was not far enough from the percentage of Teacher-Students
(T-Ss), it means students can balancing the teacher in the classroom interaction, but
Interaction Process
The Teacher-Students verbal interaction showed that percentage of the mean number of
talk toward mean number of interactions is 92.5%. It reflects that the mean number of
talk (in percentage) is more than two-thirds of classroom time is devoted to talking.
Then, the percentage of the mean number of teacher talk toward mean number of talk is
53.2%. It reflects that the mean number of teacher talk (in percentage) is more than
two-thirds of talking time; the person talking is the teacher. The percentage of the mean
number of teacher talk toward mean number of teacher talk is 48.5%. It reflects that the
mean number of teacher indirect talk (in percentage) is more than two-thirds of teacher
talk.
The Differences between Male and Female Students
It knows that interaction from male students is 38 or 33.9% from total interaction,
female students have 31 interactions or 27.8% and both male and female students have
43 interactions or 38.3%. Total interaction of the students is 112 interactions. Even
though there were not far enough but there was a difference between male and female
students, it concludes that male students are more interact than female students.
Suggestions
Considering the results of the research, suggestions might be given as follows:
1. The teachers are expected to give more space for the students to get involved in
learning process because the students also need language exposure to improve
2. The teachers are expected to use more direct influence rather than indirect
influence to encourage, support and elicit student’s participation during the
lesson because it can make the students feel free in giving their opinion without
afraid of making mistake.
3. The teacher should be creative in designing the tasks in order to make the
students more enthusiastic in managing the class or creating fun activities to
ECI FEBRIANI
A Script
Submitted in a Partial Fulfillment of
The Requirement for S-1 Degree
In
The Language and Art Department of
Teacher Training and Education Faculty
LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY
BANDAR LAMPUNG
DEDICATION
This script is fully dedicated to
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Table of Specification of Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories. ... 19
2.
Number and Percentage of Interaction Patterns ... 42
3. Number of interaction categories ... 45
4.
Descriptive state of interaction between teacher and students during the
teaching learning process ... 47
5.
Proportion of Talk in Classroom ... 49
6.
Proportion of Teacher Talk in Classroom ... 49
MOTTO
REFERENCES
Allwright, D. and Kathleen M. Bailey. 1991. Focus on the Language Classroom: An
Introduction to Classroom Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H. Douglas. 1980. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.Inc.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy. Wesley: Longman, Inc.
Chaudron, Craig. 1988. Second Language Classroom-Research on Teaching and
Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clifford, H. 1998. A Comparison of Gender-Related Attitudes Towards Mathematics
between Girls in Single-Sex and Co-Educational Schools. Cornwall:
University of Exeter.
Dukmak, S. 2010. Research Section: Classroom Interaction in Regular and Special
Education Middle Primary Classrooms in the United Arab Emirates. British Journal of Special Education, 37: 39–48. NASEN.
Edge, J. 2001. Essentials of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Flander, N. 1967 Teacher Influence in the Classroom. Interaction analysis: theory,
research, and application. London:Addison-Wesley.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1986. Language Across the Culture. In Makhan L. Tickoo (ED).
Language in Learning (pp 14-28). Singapore: SEAMEO Rsegional Language Centre.
Hornby, A. S. 1995. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Malamah-Thomas, A. 1987. Classroom Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Moleong, L. J. 1994. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
Bandung.
Musthafa, Bachrudin . 2003. EFL for Young Learners: Course Materials. Unpublished
Nunan, D. 1989. Understanding Language Classroom: A guide for Teacher-Initiated Action. London: Prentice Hall International Ltd. United Kingdom.
Prabhu, N. S. 1991. The Learner’s Effort in the Language Classroom. In Eugenius
Sadtono (Ed). Language Acquisition and the Second Foreigner Language
classroom (pp 49-58). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional language Centre.
Rivers, W. M. 1987. Teaching Language Teaching. Cambride: Cambridge University
Press.
Rowiyah, S. 2008. Classroom Interaction in Speaking Class Using CTL
Implementation at The First Year of MTS Negeri 2 Bandar lampung.
Lampung University, Bandar lampung. (Unpublished Script).
Setiadi, B. Ag. 2006. Metodologi Penelitian Untuk Pengajaran Bahasa Asing,
Pendekatan Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Yufrizal, H. 2008. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition (A Text Book for
viii
TABLE OF CONTENT
COVER ... i
ABSTRACT ... ii
APPROVAL ... iii
CURRICULUM VITAE ... iv
DEDICATION ..
