TEACHER TALK IN CLASSROOM INTERACTION ON GRADE XI IN SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL.

(1)

TEACHER TALK IN CLASSROOM INTERACTION ON

GRADE XI IN SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

A THESIS

Submitted as the Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Sarjana Pendidikan

ANGGREINI PURBA

Registration Number: 2123321006

ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

ABSTRACT

Purba, Anggreini. 2017. 2123321006. Teacher Talk in Classroom Interaction on Grade XI in Senior High School. A Thesis. English Department. Faculty of Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.

This study aims at analyzing and describing the teacher talk in classroom interaction. It was conducted by using qualitative descriptive design. In this study the categories of teacher talk identified and described based on FIACS. The instruments for collecting the data were observation, video tape recorder and tally sheet. From the data that had been taken it was obtained that the types of teacher talk by English Teacher in Eleventh grade of SMA YP. Parulian 1 Medan was direct and indirect talk. It was found that the Teacher applied all categories of Teacher Talk which consisted accepts feeling, praises or encourages, accepts or uses ideas of student, asks questions, lecturing, giving direction, and criticizing or justifying authority. The analysis showed that teacher spent 59.45% their time in talking where 20.45% they used indirect talk which took asking question as the highest category of this type and 39% they used direct talk and lecturing took as the highest category of this type. Meanwhile the realization of those categories of teacher talk could be seen when the teacher accepted the feeling of student, gave the student praises and encouragement so that they were active during teaching learning process, asked the student about question, gave the student the definition or example related to the topic lesson moreover gave them a direction that should be obeyed and the last was criticized or justified students’ behavior and opinion from unacceptable to be acceptable.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

For the first and foremost, the writer would like to express her deepest gratitude for Almighty God, Jesus Christ for his marvelous and amazing grace, for the countless blessings and love so the writer has finally completed this thesis. This thesis is aimed to fulfill one of requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan of English Department, Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Medan (UNIMED). The writer is also expressing her extremely 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.

 Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd, the Head of English and Literature Department. Dra. Meisuri, M.A, the Secretary of English and Literature. Syamsul Bahri, S.S, M.Hum. the Head of English Literature Study Program and Nora Ronita Dewi, S.Pd, S.S, M.Hum, the Head of English Education Program for their motivations and encouragements to complete the Thesis.  Prof. Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S, the writer’s Academic Counselor and

Thesis Supervisors that had given her a great guidance through her Academic years and had already motivated her to finish the Thesis by giving advices, comments, and corrections that has made her learn many new things in Academic.

 Dr. Siti Aisah Ginting, M.Pd, the writer’s Second Thesis Advisors that had given her the kindness, guidance, support, comments, and information to improve her writing.

 Dra. Masitowarni Siregar, M.Ed, and Drs. Johan Sinulingga, M.Pd, the writer’s Examiner who had given valuable advices, revision and suggestions to her for the Thesis.

 All the Lecturers of English and Literature Department during her Academic year at State University of Medan, who taught and given knowledges, encouragement, and invaluable advices for her to complete this Thesis.

 Eis Sri Wahyuni, M.Pd, the Administration Staff of English Department, who helped her in giving information to fulfill this Thesis.

(8)

 Jayanti Purba, Martopo Purba, Yusnana Purba, Yusnani Purba more than amazing sisters and brother who have been there in helping, supporting and giving motivation to finish her study.

 Chrishna Sianturi, Devi Novita Sari, Dewi Wati Nainggolan, Mega Marpaung, Rosy Samosir, Rondang Widya, Sonya Girsang, Lilis Nababan her weird but stunning best friends ever, that had accompanied her through years with the laughter, motivation, cheerful and joyful moments that will always be cherished and remembered.

 Teachers and Students in YP. Parulian 1 Medan for their welcome and permit the writer observed and the best cooperation while doing research to finish her Thesis.

 All friends in English Education 2012 B for worthy memories and togetherness until 8 semesters as classmates.

 All friends in PPLT 2015 SMP Siantar Narumonda for memorable time that had spent with laughter, love, happiness and motivation. The last but not least her special thanks for Everyone who cannot be counted and mentioned one by one for staying and coloring her life each day.

Medan, April 2017

The writer

Anggreini Purba

(9)

LISTS OF TABLE

Table.2.1 Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories...……… 18

Table 2.2. Example of the Categories of Teacher Talk.…………... 25

Table. 2.3. Flanders matrix...……….. 29

Table 4.1. The Percentages of Classroom Interaction ... 40

Table 4.2. The Percentage of Indirect Talk ... 42

(12)

LISTS OF FIGURE

Figure. 2.1. Teacher-Learner Interaction ... 13

Figure. 2.2 Learner-Learner Interaction ... 17

Figure 2.3 Teacher Talk ... 19

(13)

LISTS OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 : Trancsript Conversation... 73

Appendix 2 : Pairing Categories ... 85

Appendix 3 : Observation Tally Sheet... 87

(14)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of The Study

Interaction is commonly defined as a kind of action that occurs

between two or more objects that have an effect upon one another. Moreover

Yanfen (2010, p.77) states that the interaction is the collaborative exchange of

thoughts, feeling or ideas between two or more people. It means that an

interaction does not occur from one side, it must be mutual influence both of

them through giving and receiving messages in order to achieve

communication. Interaction takes an important role in teaching learning

process because it functions to build a pleasant atmosphere in the classroom

interaction.

Brown (1996) says that classroom interaction refers to the exchange

between teacher and students that happen reciprocally and influence students’

achievement in communicative competence. It means that through the

classroom interaction, learners have opportunities to understand, explore their

ideas and get more information in learning.

The Teacher talk is one of important aspects of classroom interaction;

it is also the main resource of language input for the learners to interact in

teaching leaning process. Moreover Chauhan, S.S (1979) argues that Teacher

talk is an indispensable part of foreign language teaching in organizing

(15)

2

their lectures, but also guarantees how well students will learn. This is meant

that teacher talk is the important things that can organize classroom activities

become communicative and lead the students active in teaching learning

process.

In language classroom interaction, the teacher-learner interactive in

language classes is the most traditional pattern; moreover Lemke (1990) has

found that many teachers still use the traditional pattern of interaction such as

plays the role of an expert, provides learners with direction and does most of

the talking or commenting. This is meant that many teachers still talk too

much in classroom interaction rather than let the students active.

The ideal teacher talk in classroom interaction should have variations,

but the fact shows that most of teachers do not apply the variation of teacher

talk. Based on the writer experience in Integrated Teaching Practice Program

(PPLT) 2015 in SMPN 1 Siantar Narumonda, the teacher was too dominant

in talking than the students, in this case the student only had a little chance in

talking, as an example they talked just when teacher asked them the

questions, but overall, teacher hold almost the roles in the classroom through

lecturing and giving direction. Furthermore, in classroom interaction the

teacher only focused on the active and clever student otherwise the other

student who actually shy to deliver their thought or afraid that they would be

wrong didn’t get attention as much as the active and clever. It will make bad

impact for them if the teachers still don’t realize that they need a bravery and

(16)

3

As the preliminary data of an observation was carried out from SMA

YP Parulian 1, will be seen in the following:

Teacher : Okay. Good morning class Students : Good morning mam.

Teacher : Alright. Now we are going to learn about Tenses (giving direction). What is tenses? (asking question) Student1 : Tenses berbicara tentang waktu mam.

Teacher : yes, you are right (praise or encouragement). Tenses is the time of verb’s action (lecturing). There are 4 basic tenses (lecturing). But now we learn about simple present tense and simple past tense (Giving Direction). Simple Present tense adalah tenses yang menyatakan suatu perbuatan yang dilakukan secara berulang ulang (lecturing). Nah untuk tenses ini digunakan kata kerja bentuk pertama (lecturing). Now take a look your book on page 32 (giving direction).

From the preliminary data above, it proves that the teacher mostly

uses their talk with lecturing and giving direction. The teacher should pay

attention for their utterances that are affected to improve students’ motivation

to be more active in classroom interaction and have to find the appropriate

forms of their talk so that they can make a pleasant interaction in the

classroom, because teacher talk would enhance foreign language teaching and

learning. The language that teachers use in classrooms determines to a larger

degree whether a class will succeed or not. In this way, teachers can improve

their language quality consciously so that English language teaching and

learning can be facilitated by the variation of teacher talk that appropriate to

the indicator qualified in teaching learning process.

Furthermore there were two researches that have done in classroom

(17)

4

entitled A Study of Classroom Interaction Characteristics in a Geography

Class Conducted in English: The Case At Ten Year of an Immersion Class In

SMA N 2 Semarang, found that 1) The most dominant characteristics was

content cross. It reflected that that most of the teaching learning time was

devoted to questions and lectures by the teacher.2) The teacher spent57,43%

and students spent 22,20% in teaching learning time.3)The teaching

effectiveness elements used in the classroom were in the form of; academic

learning time, use of reinforcement, cues and feedback, co-operative learning,

classroom atmosphere, higher order questions, advance organizers, direct

instruction, indirect teaching, and the democratic classroom. The second one

was from Astiti (2010), entitled An Analysis of Teacher Talk in English

Classes in SMK PGRI 4 Denpasar. The interaction in these English classes

was in three ways communication; there were interaction between

teacher-student, student-teacher, and students-students. She found that the teacher talk

reflected that most of the teaching-learning time was devoted to questions and

answers by the students. But, without the Teacher Talk the students could not

devote their participation. The teacher spent 59.52% of the teaching-learning

time, while the students spent 69.05% of the teaching-learning time.

From the explanation above this research will be conducted dealing

with teacher talk in classroom interaction to know the Categories of teacher

(18)

5

B. The Problem of The Study

Based on the background of the study, the research problems can be

formulated as follows:

1. What categories of teacher talk are used by teacher in classroom

interaction?

2. How categories of teacher talk are realized in the teaching-learning

process?

C. The Objectives of the Study

In relation to the problems of the study, the objectives of the study are

formulated as follows:

1. To find out the categories of teacher talk which are used by teacher in

classroom interaction.

2. To describe how those categories of teacher talk are realized by teacher

in teaching-learning process.

D. The Scope of the Study

This study attempts to investigate the talks are used by teacher in

English classroom interaction. This study focus on one of the English teacher

of SMA YP. Parulian 1 Medan especially as a teacher who taught in grade

eleven. Flander’s Interaction Analysis Categories System will be used as the

theory of categorization of teacher talk in classroom interaction. In FIACS

(19)

6

and the last category is silence. This research is only focused on the teacher

Talk that contains 2 aspects, namely; indirect talk and direct talk. Indirect talk

divided into 4 categories, they are accept feelings, praise or encouragement,

accepts or uses ideas of pupils, and asking question. Meanwhile direct talk

divided into 3 categories such as lecturing, giving direction and criticizing or

justifying authority.

E. The Significance of the Study

The findings are expected to be significant

1) Theoretically

The research findings of this study are useful for enrichment of

some new information or theories about teacher talk. So the

information would be a reference for the researchers who interest in

conducting the further similar research of classroom interaction

analysis particularly in analyzing teacher talk.

2) Practically

The findings are useful for the English teacher to improve or

develop her teaching ways to make the classroom interaction

(20)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. The Conclusion

After analyzing the categories of teacher talk based on the research finding and

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

which was designed to suit the objective study; to find out the categories of teacher talk

used by teacher in classroom interaction in SMA YP. Parulian 1 Medan and to describe

the realization of teacher talk categories used in teaching learning process. The

conclusion of the present study can be drawn as follows:

1. Dealing with the categories of teacher talk in classroom interaction of English class

at SMA YP. Parulian 1 Medan, it revealed that the teacher used all categories of

teacher talk such as accept feelings, praises or encourages, accepts or uses the ideas

of student, and asks question which included to the Indirect Talk and lecturing,

giving direction and criticizing or justifying authority which included to the Direct

Talk. Those categories used by teacher while teaching. The amount of indirect talk

in classroom interaction dominated by the ask question category with the total

number of utterances were 126 and percentage was 68.48% meanwhile in the direct

talk the category giving direction dominant used by teacher with 176 utterances and

the percentage was 50.14%. The classroom interaction dominated by the teacher

with the total number of the teacher talk was 59.45% where the direct talk took the

highest portion with percentage 39% and followed by indirect talk with the

(21)

69

2. Dealing with the realization of teacher talk, firstly, the teacher realized the accepts

feeling category when the teacher clarified the feeling of the student through her

utterances to make sure that the student okay during teaching learning process.

Secondly, the teacher realized the praises or encourages category while she praised

the student who answered the question correctly or encouraged the student while

they were afraid in answering question. Encouragement given by teacher made the

student motivated to speak in slassroom interaction. Thirdly, the teacher realized

the accepts or uses ideas of student category while she clarified, built, or developed

the ideas suggested by the teacher. Fourthly, the teacher realized the category of

asks question while the teacher gave the student a question about the content or

procedure related to the topic lesson. the questions given by teacher mostly could

be answered by student and sometimes the questions answered by teacher. Fifthly,

the teacher realized the category of lecturing when he gave the fact, definition,

example, or opinion about content the topic lesson while teaching. Mostly the

teacher realized this category by giving explanation whom students caught up the

meaning in Bahasa Indonesia rather than English. Sixthly, the teacher realized the

category of giving directions when she gave the direction, command, or orders

which expected the student to obey it and mostly student followed what teacher

ordered for them. And the last, the teacher realized the category of criticizing or

justifiying when the she gave the statement from unacceptable to acceptable such as

(22)

70

B. Suggestion

Based on the data findings and what the research intended to, it is suggested that:

1. The teacher should pay attention to both of indirect talk and direct talk because

it can determine the way student learn and motivate the student to be active and

involve to participate in teaching learning process. The teacher should decrease

their talk time so that the students have a chance to speak up more in classroom

activities. Besides the teacher should still use the variation of teacher talk but

most of all the teacher should increase the amount of indirect talk rather than

direct talk because from the categories of indirect talk the teacher can increase

the talk time of the student by accepting the feeling of the student, giving praise

and encouragement to the student so that they can have bravery to talk,

accepting or using the ideas of the student so that they feel that they get attention

from their teacher and ask them question so that they can increase their ability in

thinking and speaking in classroom interaction.

2. Further research of classroom interaction, the teacher talk should be considered

as the important part of the strategies of teaching or teaching other skill to know

the number and types of teacher talk, student talk, and silence which holds every

activities so that they are not paying attention too much in material only but also

(23)

71

konstruksi REFERENCES

Allwright, D and K. M. Bailey. (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom: An Introduction to Classroom Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Arockiasamy. (2010). Flanders Interaction Analysis. Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from http://www.slideshare.net/selvabarady/flanders-interaction-analysis.

Astiti, N.W.W. (2010). An analysis of Teacher Talk in English Classes in SMK PGRI 4 Denpasar. Thesis of Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris.

Barker, Larry L. 1982. Communication in The Classroom: Original Essays. USA: Prentice-Hall.

Best. J. W and Kahn. J. V. 2002. Research Education. New Delhi: Prentice -Hall

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

Brown, H. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Chauhan, S. S. (2008). Innovation in Teaching - Learning Process. Delhi: Vikas.

Clark, Barbara. 1988. Growing Up Gifted. Columbus: Merrill.

Dagarin, M. (2004). Classroom Interaction and Communication Strategies in Learning English as a Foreign. Ljubljana: ELOPE

Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. London: Oxford University Press.

Flander, (1960). Flander’s Interaction Analysis Category System (FIACS). U.S.A: University of Minnesota.

Harmer, Jeremy. 1998. How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman

Harmer, Jeremy. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Third Edition. New York: Pearson Education.

(24)

72

Kumpul, I Nengah. 2012. Classroom Interaction Analysis in Bilingual Science Classes in SMAN 4 Denpasar. Thesis of Pasca Sarjana Universitas Ganesha Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

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

Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking Science: Language, Learning and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Nurmasitah, Sita. (2010). A study of Classroom Interaction Characteristic in Geography Class Conducted in English: The Case at year Ten of an Immersion Class in SMA 2 Semarang. Thesis of Pasca Sarjana Universitas Diponegoro Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Rath, James. (1971). Studying Teaching. U.S: Prentice-Hall.

Scrivener, Jim. 2005. Questioning Strategies for Teaching the Gifted. Texas: Prufrock.

Wagner, E. D. (1994). In Support of A Functional Definition of Interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education.

TEACHER TALK IN CLASSROOM INTERACTION ON GRADE XI IN SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL.