EXAMINING EFL CLASSROOM INTERACTION BASED ON SINCLAIR AND COULTHARD MODEL.

EXAMINING EFL CLASSROOM INTERACTION

BASED ON SINCLAIR AND COULTHARD MODEL

A THESIS

Submitted to Fulfill the Partial Requirement for

the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan

By

NURUL WULANDA

Registration Number: 2122121052

ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

i

ABSTRACT

Wulanda, Nurul. Registration Number: 2122121052. Examining EFL Classroom Interaction Based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model. A Thesis. English Educational Program, Faculty of Language and Arts, State University of Medan, 2016

The aim of this study were: (a) to identify classroom discourse patternings of EFL classroom interaction based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model, and (b) to describe how EFL classroom interaction affects the students’ learning process based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model. The subject of this study were an English Teacher, and 40 students of XI MIA 1, SMA Swasta Nurul Iman. The research was qualitative research. To answer the problem of the study, the methodology used in the research was discourse analysis in the form of descriptive. The data collected through the following instrument: observation, and recording. Then the data were analyzed by using Sinclair and Coulthard model of classroom discourse. The result of this research were the following, (a) it was found that in the classroom discourse, there were seven patterns initiated by the teacher and four patterns initiated by the student as the IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback) was used more often by the teacher, (b) the interaction affects the teaching learning process in a way how the lesson passed on to the student affects the goal of learning English itself to be able to use English both inside and outside the classroom. It can be concluded that the students were not getting used to interact with English, and the goal of communicative skill in English was not achieved. Thus, the teachers should reorganize the activities which can foster more interaction by using English in the classroom.

ii

ABSTRAK

Wulanda, Nurul. Nomor Identitas Mahasiswa: 2122121052. Examining EFL Classroom Interaction Based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model. Skripsi, Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Bahasa dan Seni, Universitas Negeri Medan, 2016

v

E. The Significance of the Study ... 7

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 8

A. Theoretical Framework ... 8

1. English as Foreign Language ... 8

2. Classroom Interaction ... 12

3. Classroom Discourse Analysis ... 14

4. Sinclair and Coulthard Model ... 16

B. Relevant Studies ... 27

C. Conceptual Framework ... 30

CHAPTER III. METHOD OF RESEARCH ... 33

A. The Research Design ... 33

vi

C. Instrument of Data Collection ... 35

D. Technique of Data Collection ... 35

E. Technique of Data Analysis ... 36

CHAPTER IV. DATA ANALYSIS, RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... 38

A. Data Analysis ... 38

1. Classroom Discourse Patterning of EFL Classroom based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model (1975) ... 38

2. The Students’ Learning Process based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model (1975) ... 45

B. The Research Findings ... 49

1. Classroom Discourse Patterning of EFL Classroom based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model (1975) ... 49

2. The Students’ Learning Process based on Sinclair and Coulthard Model (1975) ... 52

C. Discussions ... 54

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 57

A. Conclusions ... 57

B. Suggestions ... 58

REFERENCES ... 60

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Pages

Table 2.1 The Realization of Grammatical, Situational with Discourse ... 21

Table 2.2 Classes of Act ... 22

Table 2.3 Classes of Moves ... 25

Table 2.4 Classes of Exchange ... 26

Table 4.1 The IRF Pattern Initiated by the Teacher ... 39

Table 4.2 The IRF Pattern Initiated by the Student ... 40

Table 4.3 The Frequency and Percentage of the Classroom Discourse Patterning Initiated by the Teacher ... 50

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Pages Figure 2.1 Teacher’s Initiation System ... 22

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES

Pages

Appendix A. Symbol Sheet ... 63

Appendix B. Lesson Material Sheet ... 66

Appendix C. Dialogue Transcript of Conversation at the First Meeting ... 67

Appendix D. Dialogue Transcript of Conversation at the Second Meeting ... 79

Appendix E. Analysis Conversation of the First Meeting ... 92

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. The Background of the Study

Students’ learning takes place through communication system with others as cognitive process of constructing knowledge and developing competency to understand, reason, and solve problem (Markee, 2015, p.96).

The communication system in the classroom itself is hold by the interaction among teacher and students. Therefore, the interaction in the classroom is quite different with ordinary interaction. The study of that communication system is the study of classroom discourse. This study of classroom discourse is thus a kind of applied linguistics— the study of situated language use in one social setting.

In the classroom it is usually the teacher who decides who will speak, and for how long. When the teacher decides to ask a question, the teacher tend to know the answer. The aim of asking the question is to evaluate the student’s competency. Among Indonesian people, normally people ask when they do not know the answer or seek an information. For the example when someone asks about time. She/he asks about time whether because she/he really does not know what time is it and does not have watch with her/him. In casual conversation it is strange and rude not only to ask something that the answer is already known by the speaker, but also to evaluate the answer. For example:

2

A: You are right. Good job.

In real life people normally ask question to find out something they do not know, and respond in different way. Given the example above, when the question is already answered by B, the proper answer might be, “Oh… I see. Thanks for your

help, sir.”

Therefore, what actually happen in the classroom will determine the outcome of the learning that is realized in real life. The students in the classroom is subject to the norms of classroom context, language and discourse whereas in the same trying to acquire a different set of conventions, language and discourse patterns that will be acceptable outside the classroom. Briefly speaking, for the students of English as a foreign language like in Indonesia where English plays no major role in the community and is primarily learnt only in the classroom, the students still need to learn English in order to use it in social context. The distinctions of linguistic structure of discourse have been shown by Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) that classroom has by nature a tripartite structure: the teacher initiates, the pupil responds, the teacher then evaluate the response.

3

Studies which focused on pattern of interaction in Indonesian school settings were very rare. One journal that has been found out was published by TEFLIN, this study found that the dominant type of interaction was teacher-student interaction. Teacher-student interaction occupied 93% of the time while the Student-Student interaction occupied only 7% of the time. (Suryati, 2015, p.253). The other national journal also found that verbal classroom interaction was dominated by the teacher. These results confirmed in interview that teacher acknowledged that the interaction was dominated by him and it was hard to make the students talk more (Mulyati, 2013, p. 3-5)

The analysis of the interaction taking place between the teachers and the students in EFL classrooms in Iran has shown that the teachers/students interaction was rather dominated by the teachers (Shiraz and Rafieerad, 2010, p. 93-120)

The basic purpose of school is achieved through communication. Teaching is achieved through talking, and the quality of talk and the interaction must affect the learning that takes place in the classroom where the subject is language. Interaction itself is the collaborative exchange of thoughts, feelings or ideas, between two or more people. In the language classroom, English is used as the topic and the medium of instruction. As the topic, it constitutes the subject matter of the lesson. While as the medium of instruction, English provides a means of communication for the organization of the learning process. Whereas in EFL classroom the medium of instruction may be natural language (mother tongue).

4

School student based on Materi Pelatihan Guru Implentasi Kurikulum 2013 Tahun 2015: Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris is,

“Tujuan mata pelajaran Bahasa Inggris di sekolah menengah adalah untuk mengembangkan potensi peserta didik agar memiliki kompetensi komunikatif dalam wacana interpersonal, transaksional, dan fungsional, dengan menggunakan berbagai teks berbahasa Inggris lisan dan tulis, secara runtut dengan menggunakan unsur kebahasaan yang akurat dan berterima, tentang berbagai pengetahuan faktual dan prosedural, serta menanamkan nilai-nilai luhur karakter bangsa, dalam konteks kehidupan di lingkungan rumah, sekolah, dan masyarakat.”

(Rohim, 2015, p.16) Unfortunaltely, based on author’s teaching experience when doing Teaching Practice in SMA Negeri 1 Babalan, the students often became reluctant to participate in a classroom interaction due to their lack of convention of turn-taking as the signals of their interactions with each other and with the teacher. Firstly, because they either did not know how to respond or say something in English. Secondly, as the author’s finding, the students felt less confident to say something

in English. The EFL students barely participated in their verbal interactions. Turns were rarely more than several clauses, and there were frequently extended periods of silence as the teacher wrote notes on the whiteboard. In addition, students mostly used natural language with each other and the teacher which causing no practice in constructing their own question and response. Supported by Huraerah’s findings in her research at in one of Senior High School in Bandung, it was revealed that the percentage of teacher talk was more than 54% (2013).

5

In Indonesia, the research of classroom interaction is comparatively few and the materials that the researcher get were very limited. But yet the classroom discourse is so important to analyze. Regardless any method the teacher used, whether it is student-centered or teacher-centered, the students barely talk. Since in Indonesia, English is used in EFL classroom, the English itself becomes problem because in EFL classroom, natural language (mother tongue) can occur.

By analyzing classroom discourse enables the teacher to understand the special nature of classroom interaction; to understand why teacher talk so much more than the students. To understand the special nature of classroom discourse, Sinclair and Coulthard, borrowing from Halliday's theory of scale and category grammar by developing ranks at the discourse level which is in descending order: Lesson, Transaction, Exchange, Move and Act. Also it has by nature a tripartite structure: the teacher initiates, the pupil responds, the teacher then evaluate the response (Sinclair and Couthard, 1992, p. 2)

Lesson is the highest unit of classroom discourse that consist one or more transactions. Transaction then is combined by exchange. Exchange as two or more utterances are combined by move. Move and acts are very similar to words and morphemes in grammar. Move is the smallest free unit although it has a structure in terms of acts. Acts are the units at the lowest rank of discourse that corresponds the grammatical unit clause.

6

This three-part structure was first put forward by Sinclair and Coulthard in 1975 and is known as the IRF exchange structure. The work of Sinclair and Coulthard had a huge impact on the understanding of the ways in which teacher and students communicate.

Classroom discourse analysis is useful for a teacher to understand the form of discourse classroom pattern, the teacher get understanding of the ways story can be told, questions can be responded to, and problem can be solved. This study aids their teaching patterns in a way that will encourage interactions among students and improved classroom performance especially for teaching and learning English as Foreign Language.

B. The Problems of the Study

Based on the background of the study above, the writer makes the identifications of study as:

1. What are the classroom discourse patterning of EFL classroom interaction based on Sinclair and Coulthard model?

2. How do the EFL classroom interaction affect the students’ learning process based on Sinclair and Coutlhard model?

C. The Objectives of the Study

The objectives of the study are:

7

2. To describe how EFL classroom interaction affects the students’ learning process based on Sinclair and Coutlhard model.

D. The Scope of the Study

The scope of the study is describing classroom discourse in EFL classroom based on Indonesia, especially in North Sumatera. It will be analyzed in eleventh grade senior high school, XI MIA 1 of SMA Swasta Nurul Iman.

E. The Significances of the Study

57

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

In this chapter, the researcher presents conclusions and suggestions related to the research finding and discussion.

A. Conclusion

This section presents the conclusions of the study conducted based on the objectives of the study. The objective of the study is (a) to identify classroom discourse patterning of EFL classroom interaction based on Sinclair and Coulthard model (1975), and (b) to describe how EFL classroom interaction affect

the students’ learning process based on Sinclair and Coutlhard model (1975).

1. The classroom discourse patterning of EFL classroom at XI MIA 1 SMA Nurul Iman, based on Sinclair and Coulthard model (1975) was dominated by IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback) patterning initiated by the teacher (30.62%) in the sense of teacher-dominated the classroom interaction. It was found that there were seven patterns initiated by the teacher, meanwhile there were only four patterns initiated by the student.

58

the student. In this study, it was found that the teacher mostly used Bahasa as the medium of interaction along with the students. The goal of learning English is to be able use English inside and outside the classroom. So, if the teacher did not make the students get used to speak in English by using it himself/herself both as medium and the subject in the classroom interaction, it will affect the goal of learning English itself is not accomplished. If the teacher is to prepare the students for real-world communication, the teacher need to develop awareness of the language produced inside the classroom and the types of roles that the teacher might possibly be limiting the students.

An application of the Sinclair & Coulthard model allows teachers to objectively understand the choices they make and how those choices impact the communication that is likely to take place in the classroom. Practically and theoretically, the results of the present study will be useful to language teachers teaching English as a foreign language, in helping them investigate what actually is going on in their own classes, trying to move away from a teacher-dominated mode of teaching by adopting a more student-dominated mode of teaching.

B. SUGGESTIONS

The writer would like to propose some considerable suggestions as follows: 1. Teacher

59

classroom, teachers will be able to motivate students to learn in a more involving way. These kinds of activities can provoke a very positive attitude towards language learning since they resemble real life events. Moreover, students must be persuaded to interact positively and effectively in the language classroom. Teachers should incorporate more real life like activities into their teaching practice.

2. Institution

The institution should provide the English textbooks by trying to incorporate activities and tasks in the books which would provoke more

‘genuine communication’ between teachers and students.

3. Students

The students should be daring to speak in English, because in the classroom they are allowed to do mistake, and less outside the classroom. In other word, interaction in the classroom will provide them the chance to participate in English communication in society.

4. The next researcher

60

REFERENCES

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

Benham, B., and Pouriran, Y. (2008). Classroom Discourse: Analyzing Teacher/Learner Interactions in Iranian EFL Task-Based Classrooms. Journal: Porta Linguarium, (12), 117132.

Broughton, B., Brumfit, C., Flavell, R., Hill, P., & Pincas, A. (1980). Teaching English as a Foreign Language. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, Ltd.

Brown, H. (2011). Exchange Structure in The Modern Classroom: ‘Jamie’s

Dream School’. Journal: Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3, 3156.

Brown, H.D (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. USA: Pearson Education.

Brown, H.D (2000). Teaching by principles (2nd Ed.). London: Longman.

Candlin, C., and Mercer, N. (2001). English in Its Social Context. A Reader. London: Routledge.

Christie, Frances. (2002). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Functional Perspective. London: Continuum.

Collins, L., and Munoz, C. (2016). The Foreign Language Classroom: Current Perspective and Future Considerations. The Modern Language Journal. 100 (16), 133-147.

Coulthard, M. (1977). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London.

Coulthard, M. (1992). Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.

Coulthard, M. and Brazil, D. (1992). Exchange Structure. In Coulthard. M, Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.

Duff, P. A. (2008). Case Study Research in Applied Linguistics. USA: Taylor & Francis Group.

61

Gündüz, M. (2014). Analyzing Language Classroom through Classroom Interaction. International Journal of Human Science. 11 (2), 1149-1166. Huraerah, N.R. (2013). The Analysis of Verbal Interaction between Teacher and

Students in The Classroom. Thesis, Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Jenks, J.C. and Seedhouse, P. (2015). International Perspective on ELT Classroom Interaction. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods & Techniques. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd., Publisher.

Hadhi, P. (2012). An Analysis of Classroom Interaction Using Sinclair and Coulthard Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) Model in English Speaking Class at Class XI Science 8 of SMAN 2 Bandar Lampung. Thesis, Bandar Lampung: The University of Bandar Lampung.

Halliday, M.A.K. (2007). Language and Education. London: Continuum.

Hanum, F. (2014). Classroom Discourse Analysis in Language Interaction in the

“To Sir with Love” Movie. Thesis, Surabaya: State Islamic University

Sunan Ampel.

Huraerah, N. 2013. The Analysis of Verbal Interaction between Teacher and Students in the Classroom. Thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Jiang, X. (2012). A Study of College English Classroom Discourse. Journal: Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(10), 21462152. Finland: Academy Publisher.

Kron, W. R. and Remedios, L. (2007). Classroom Discourse in Problem-Based Learning Classrooms in the Health Sciences. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 1-18. Australia: Monash University Express.

Kumpulainen, K. and Wray, D. (2002). Classroom Interaction and Social Learning from Theory to Practice. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Liu, J. and Le, T. (2012). A Case Study on College English Classroom Discourse. International Journal of Innovative Interdisciplinary Research, (2), 2-11.

62

McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse Analysis for Language Teacher. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Mitchell, R., and Myles, F. (2004). Second Language Learning Theories (2nd Ed). Britain: Hodder Arnold.

Mulyati, F. A. (2013). A Study of Teacher Talk and Student Talk in Verbal Classroom Interaction to Develop Speaking Skill for Young Learners. Journal of English and Education, 1(1), 110.

Nashroh, S. K. (2015). The Effect of Community Language Learning On Students’ Achievement in Speaking Skill. Thesis, Medan: UNIMED

Nunan, D. (1992). Research Method in Language Learning. Cambridge: Press Syndicate.

Rashidi, N., and Rafueerad, M. (2010). Analyzing Patterns of Classroom Interaction in EFL Classroom in Iran. The Journal of ASIA TEFL, 7(3), 93120.

Rohim, F. (2015). Materi Pelatihan Guru Implementasi Kurikulum 2013 Jenjang SMA/SMK Tahun 2015: Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

Rymes, B. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Tool for Critical Reflection. New York : Hampton Press.

Saragih, A. (2015). Discourse Analysis: A Systemic Functional Linguistic Approach to the Analysis of Discourse and Text. Medan.

Sinclair, J. and Coulthard, M. (1992). Towards an analysis of discourse. In Coulthard. M, Advance in Spoken Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. Suryati, N. (2015). Classroom Interaction Strategies Employed by English

Teachers at Lower Secondary Schools. TEFLIN Journals, 26(2), 247264. Walsh, S. (2011). Exploring Classroom Discourse Language in Action. London:

Routledge.

Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating Classroom Discourse. London: Routledge.

Willis, J. (1981). Spoken Discourse in the E.L.T Classroom: A System of a Description. Thesis. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.