TEACHER QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH CLASSROOM INTERACTION IN GRADE TWELVE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL.

(1)

TEACHER QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH CLASSROOM

INTERACTION IN GRADE TWELVE

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

A THESIS

Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

By :

DEVI NOVITA SARI

Registration Number: 2123321018

ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

i

ABSTRACT

Sari, Devi Novita. 2123321018. Teacher Questions in English Classroom Interaction in Grade Twelve Senior High School. A Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts. State University of Medan. 2017.

This study aims to find out the types of questions used by teachers and describe the use of teacher’s questions in the teaching-learning process. This study was conducted by using descriptive qualitative research design. The data source of research was the English teacher of SMA Swasta RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam. The data was the utterances of teacher that delivered questions. Techniques of collecting data were observation, recording and interviewing (the teacher). The result of this study showed that there were four types of questions used by the teacher during teaching-learning process with the total of questions were 130. Teacher spent factual questions totally 55,4% (72 questions), empirical questions were totally 21,5% (28 questions), productive questions were 3,1% (4 questions), and evaluative questions were 20% (26 questions). From those types, factual questions were dominantly used by the teacher. This study also found that the relation between teacher’s questions and teaching-learning process is teacher’s questions brought the process of classroom interaction from begin at last. Teacher’s questions built interaction between teacher and students from pre -activity, main--activity, and post-activity. The use of questions by the teacher was in order to get attract the students to be more active and to see how far the students had mastered the lesson given. It can be concluded that the teacher’s questions are as the technique of teaching.

(7)

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, the writer would like to thanks to the Almighty God, Jesus Christ for the blessings during her academic year at English and Literature Department Faculty of Languages and Arts (FBS) State University of Medan in completing the thesis. The writer is also very grateful to the following people:

 Prof. Dr. Syawal Gultom, M.Pd., Rector of State University of Medan.  Dr. Isda Pramuniati, M.Hum., the Dean of Faculty of Languages and

Arts (FBS) State University of Medan for her advice and encouragement to complete the study.

 Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd., the Head of English and Literature Department as well as Dra. Meisuri, M.A., the Secretary of English and Literature Department for their encouragement and motivation during the writing of the thesis. Syamsul Bahri, S.S., M.Hum. the Head of English Literature Study Program and Nora Ronita, S.Pd., S.S., M.Hum., the Head of English Education Program for their encouragement to complete the thesis.

 Eis Sri Wahyuni, M.Pd., the administration staff of English Department, who helped her to fulfill this thesis.

 Dr. Siti Aisah Ginting, M.Pd. and Rita Suswati, S.Pd., M.Hum., the writer’s Thesis Supervisors who had already motivated her to finish her thesis by giving advices, comments, and corrections that has made her learn many new things in academic.

 Safrida Lubis, S.Pd., M.Hum., the writer’s Academic Counselor that had given her a great guidance through her academic years.

 Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd., and Rafika Dewi Nasution, S.Pd., M.Hum., the writer’s Examiners who had given valuable advices and suggestions to her for the thesis.

 All the Lecturers of English and Literature Department during her academic year at State University of Medan

 J. Manullang and E. R. br. Pakpahan, S.Pd., her extra ordinary parents who have given her more than she could ask. They are her role models who have given her an unconditional love, prayers, advices, and support. They are the top persons on list who have built the writer to be what she has to be in a good way.

(8)

iii

 Anggreini Purba, Dewi Wati Nainggolan, Mega Christina Marpaung, Lintas Eben Ezer S as her awesome person Rosy Samosir, Rondang Sihotang, Togar Sihite, and Andikha Forman Silitonga (Bojak Family), and Andyka Sitanggang, her stunning friends, sister and brothers that had accompanied her through years with their laughter, motivation, supports, togetherness and love, and every happy moment that she will always remember and the another friend of the writer who cannot mention here one by one.

 Drs. Masner Simarmata as the headmaster and all the teachers especially Aguslani Siregar, S.Pd., M.Hum. and all the students of SMA Swasta RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam, for their welcome, permit and the best cooperation for her while doing research to finish her thesis.  All friends in English Education Extension 2012 B for the worthy

memories as the college years.

Medan, April 2017 The writer,

(9)

iv

LISTS OF TABLE

Table.2.1 Words Found in Factual Questions ... 22

Table.2.2 Words Found in Empirical Questions ... 22

Table.2.3 Words Found in Productive Questions ... 22

Table.2.4 Words Found in Evaluative Questions ... 23

Table.2.5. Description of Question Types ... 23

Table 2.6 Example of Teaching-Learning Process in a Lesson Plan ... 28

Table 4.1 Distribution of Types of Teacher’s Question ... 39

Table 4.2 Percentages of Factual Questions ... 40

Table 4.3 Percentages of Empirical Questions ... 42

Table 4.4 Percentages of Productive Questions ... 44

(13)

viii

LISTS OF FIGURE

Figure.2.1. Teacher-Learner Interaction ... 12

Figure. 2.2 Learner-Learner Interaction ... 13

(14)

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: OBSERVATION TRANSCRIPT ... 64

APPENDIX B: TEACHER’S QUESTIONING ... 87

(15)

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. The Background of the Study

In a teaching learning process, it is absolute that there should be

interaction in the classroom as called classroom interaction, which refers

to the interaction of the participants in that class (teacher and students)

during the teaching-learning process. Here, the teacher has a right to give

questions for the students in order to see how far the students can

comprehend the study (through the responses of the students).

Teacher’s questioning is very important in starting and maintaining

interaction within the classroom. As Richard and Lockhart (1996:185)

state that questioning is one of the most common techniques used by

teacher and served as the principal way in which teacher’s control of the

classroom interaction. When the teacher asks question (s), it is available

for the students to answer the question (s) even it is just simple answer

given. The interaction in questioning and answering is one part of a

communication process. According Al-Darwish (2012:80) Questioning

and answering is important for student success in the classroom, and even

experienced teachers do not perform well if they do not employ questions

in appropriate ways. Types of questions which are given by the teacher

actually should get the feedback from the students during the whole

(16)

2

teacher should be able to know which questions that can attract students’

participation in giving the answers by their outcomes, their desire to giving

opinions or like critical thinking. Furthermore, teacher should pay

attention to the types of questions in questioning and use it as a question

strategy in function of increasing their outcomes and making a good

classroom interaction be productive, not just like give them knowledge

without exploring their knowledge itself.

A common problem that EFL (English as a foreign language)

teachers are in facing is to deal with a passive class, where students are not

responsive and avoid the interaction with their teacher. Because of this

problem, the teacher has a right to stimulate the students through

appropriate questions and good reaction also. Shaunessy (2005:10) argues

that the reaction of the teacher should be important and appropriate to the

purpose of the questions given to the students.

Based on the writer experience in Integrated Teaching Practice

Program (PPLT) 2015, it had been observed that many students could not

understand what their teacher asked about. Firstly, when teaching ran, the

teacher just had a sit; taught and explained the lessons in simply ways,

moreover, when teaching, the teacher’s articulation was bad and in

delivering some questions, the questions given were ungrammatical and

very simple, so it could not increase the students’ participation. To clarify

this simply observation, the students had been asked and they told that

(17)

3

question that given to them exactly. So, they just listened without

accepting something. Furthermore, they were not brave to explore their

ideas because of lacking knowledge and also they were very passive

during the teaching-learning process itself.

T : Morning S : Morning sir

T : Have you worked your homework? Udah kalian kerjakan PR kalian itu?

S : Yes sir.

T : Ok, ayo kita periksa. What the answer number 1? (his voice was too smooth). Hmmm, ok, write on the blackboard. (and one by one the students wrote the answer and the teacher checked the answer by himself only) ok, look at in page 24, and do the exercise.

Because of this experience, the main point which can be taken is

that a good teaching is when among the teacher and students have

interaction well during teaching-learning process itself. The teacher should

give questions to stimulate the students’ participation and creative

thinking.

As a preliminary data, an observation was carried out before in

SMA RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam. The preliminary data can be seen

in the following dialogue:

T : Good morning everybody? Ss : Good morning ma’am!

T : Any absent? Ada yang tidak hadir? Ss : no ma’am. Semua hadir ma’am.

(18)

4

(the teacher wrote the expressions) kemudian you must translate at all. After that, make the dialogue with your friend which consists of two.

From the preliminary data above, it can be seen that there is no

questions to attract the students’ critical thinking. Because of this action,

the classroom interaction will be passive. They cannot develop their

critical thinking and participations.

Questioning here is typically implemented by teachers in their

teaching process. It is basically implemented in order to build and increase

interaction in the classroom, and also to stimulate the language production

of students. It is unfortunate that the teacher does not realize the

importance of using appropriate questions types and strategy in order to

help them through producing the language. Because of that, they will get

boring and they will be unmotivated to speak or develop their speaking

skill.

For concerning explanation above, the researcher is interested to

conduct a study about the type of questions used by the teacher and

describe why the teacher’s questions are realized in teaching learning

process in SMA RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam in order to find out the

(19)

5

B. The problems of the Study

In accordance with the previous background of the study, the

problems of the study are formulated as following:

1. What types of teacher’s question are used during the English teaching

-learning process in SMA RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam?

2. Why are the types of teacher’s question used in teaching-learning

process as the way they are?

C. The Objectives of the Study

In supporting of the research problem of the study, the objectives

of the study are formulated as following:

1. To find out the types of teacher’s question used during the English

teaching-leaning process in SMA RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam.

2. To describe the reason why the teacher’s questions are used in

teaching-learning process as the way they are.

D. The Scope of the Study

The study is limited to analyze the types of questions used by the

English teacher during teaching-learning process in classroom interaction

through one meeting in reading comprehension session where the types of

questions are factual questions, empirical questions, productive questions

and evaluative questions. This study will be applied in XII IPA 2 of SMA

(20)

6

E. The Significances of the Study

The findings of this study are expected to provide information

which may have theoretical as well as practical value for teachers.

1) Theoretically significance,

The research findings of this study later are expected to be useful for

the enrichment for the addition of some new theories and information

in the area of how the teachers should provide their questions to

stimulate the students’ curiosities and participations during the

classroom interaction itself.

2) Meanwhile practically, the findings are useful for the teachers in

teaching-learning process, which types of question can affect and

(21)

59

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A.

Conclusion

After analyzing the types of question based on the research findings and

discussion in the previous chapter, it could be drown the conclusion of the

present study which was designed to suit the objectives of the study: to find out

the types of teacher’s questions used during teaching-learning process in SMA

Swasta RK Serdang Murni Lubuk Pakam and to describe the reason why the

questions are used in teaching-learning process. The conclusion of the present

study can be drawn as follows:

1. Dealing with the types of teacher’s questions, it was revealed that the

teacher used Factual questions totally 55,4%. On the other hand, the

Empirical questions were raised totally 21,5%, meanwhile the

Productive questions were comprised 3,1%, and the Evaluative

questions were 20%. And the most dominantly used was Factual

Questions. Although most of the questions posed by the teacher to be

factual questions, the teacher seemed to be of those types of teacher

who tried to promote negotiation of meaning in the classroom.

2. Dealing with reason of using the teacher’s questions, firstly, the factual

questions were used by the teacher because the teacher wanted to ask

the students to simply recall of their knowledge and comprehension

(22)

60

because the students were demanded to be able while integrating and

analyzing given as the application. Thirdly, productive questions used

by the teacher because the teacher would like the students to be more

creative while thinking and producing something unique as the answers.

And the last, evaluative questions used by the teacher because the

teacher wanted the students to make judgment about something given

such in this present study the topic was discussion text, so here the

students were asked to give opinion and then judge, but not only giving

and judging, but also expressing the value. It can attract students’

attention and participation in the teaching learning process. It can be

started from the pre-activity until main-activity. In teaching learning

process teacher will know how understand students by posing

questions.

B. Suggestion

1. The teacher should be aware while posing the question during the

teaching-learning process. The questions which are used should be

appropriate with the lesson. The teacher also may provide

immediate feedback which will motivate students to participate. In

this way, rather than directly saying that the students’ response is

unrelated to the questions, the teacher can reconstruct the questions

and raise it to the class for them to think about, so that the target

(23)

61

students. These types of questions in this present study can be used

by the teacher in order to be reference for improving the students

learning and developing teaching skill.

2. The findings of this research can be used as a reference to give

better understanding for the future researcher; the next researcher

may provide additional information and comparison that might be

(24)

62

REFERENCES

Al-Darwish, S. 2012.The Role of Teacher Questions and The Socratic Method in EFL Classroom in Kuwait. Kuwait: Public Authority for Applied Education & Training, College of Basic Education Al Shamiya. Vol.2 No.4

Ambrosio, Y M U. 2013. Question in Teacher Talk: What Questions are Frequent and How It Affects Critical Thinking. Vol. 68.13

Auerbach, C F &Silverstein, L B. 2003. Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis. New York & London: New York University Press.

Bloom, B S. 1956. Taxanomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay

Bogdan, R & Biklen, S K. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon

Brown, H D. 1996. Teaching by Principles an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy.New York: Prentice Hall Regents.

Brown, H D. 2001. Teaching by Practice: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. London: Longman

Cashdan, A. 1979. Language, Reading, and Learning. Oxford: Basi Blackwell

Clark, L & Starr, I. 1981. Secondary and Middle School Teaching Methods. USA: Macmillan

Cooper, James at all. 2011. Classroom Teaching Skills. USA: Wadsworth

Course, S. 2014. ELT Students’ Use of Teacher Questions in Peer Teaching. Social and Behavior Science 158

Dagarin, M. 2004. Classroom Interaction and Communication Strategies in Learning English as A Foreign Studies in The English Language and Literature in Slovenia. ELOPE. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Dewey, John. 1993. How We Think. Boston: D.C.Heath

Drawbaugh, C& Hull. 1971. Agricultural Education: Approaches to Learning and Teaching. Columbus: Charles E Merrill

Faruji, L F. 2011. Discourse Analysis of Questioning in Teacher Talk. Vol. 1 No. 12. Academic

Harmer, J. 1998. How to Teach English. London: Longman

(25)

63

Hong-Xi, Y. 2007. Lesson Depend on Questioning-Questioning Skills of Junior English Class. Cina English Teaching and Research of Middle School and Primary School

Hussin, Habsah. 2006. Dimension of Questioning: A Qualitative Study of Current Classroom Practice in Malaysia. V.10. TESL-EJ

Kerry, T. 2002. Explaining and Questioning. Cheltanham. UK: Nelson Thornes

Kumpulainen, K & Wray, D. 2002. Classroom Interaction & Social Learning from Theory to Practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer

Ma, X. 2008. The Skill of Teacher’s Questioning in English Classes. V. 1 No. 4 CCSE Journal

Mauigoa, L & Tekene. 2006. Enhancing Teachers’ Questioning Skills to Improve

Children’ Learning and Thinking in Pacific Early Childhood Centers. V. 3 Journal

Qashoa, S H. 2013. Effects Teacher Questions and Syntactic Structure on EFL Classroom Interaction. Vol. 7. No.1 TIJOSS Journal

Ribbas, M S. 2010. The Effects of Teacher Talk on Students’ Oral Productions. (Final Master Dissertation)

Richards, J& Lockhart, C. 1996. Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University

Scrivener, J. 2005. Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English Language Teachers. USA: Macmillan

Shaunessy, E. 2005. Questioning Strategies for Teaching the Gifted. Texas: Prufrock

Shomoossi, N. 2004. The Effect of Teacher’s Questioning Behavior on EFL Classroom Interaction: A Classroom Research Study. The Reading Matrix

Tuan, T L & Nhu, K T N. 2010. Theoretical Review on Oral Interaction in EFL Classrooms: Studies in Literature and Language. Vol.1, No.4, pp.29-48.

Reviewed from https://www.learner.org.>pdf>session6. Cotton, Kathleen (Classroom Questioning)

TEACHER QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH CLASSROOM INTERACTION IN GRADE TWELVE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL.