CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
In the classroom, a teachers’ role is like a movie director who knows how a
movie making should flow and how it ends. All crews and characters involved in the
movie making process cooperate at their best under the director’s direction to achieve
what is aimed. “A teacher opens up unknown or only half suspected areas of skill or
knowledge; he makes things clear; he makes things as simple as possible. He enables
pupils to do more things and to do them better, to understand more things and to
understand them better. “(Marland, 1993 in Capel et al., 1995: 79).
Similarly, a teacher action in the classroom and teacher-students’ interaction
are important to the life of the class. Teacher-students’ interaction and classroom
management are inseparable classroom practices. Both are crucial in determining the
lesson objectives attainment (Allwright & Bailey, 1991; Brown, 2001; Tsui, 2001).
Otherwise, the teacher’s roles in the classroom depend upon the function of the
language employed by the teacher (Christie & Unsworth, 2000). Therefore, the effect
of the language used in classroom settings is an important educational question
(Nunan, 1989; McCarthy, 1990; Arnold, 1999).
Cazden (1988) proposed that there are several features of educational
a. Spoken language in the classroom is used as an educational medium, in
which teachers transfer their educational objectives to students, and
students demonstrate what they have learned from the teacher (Christie,
2000).
b. Most interactions between teacher and students take place in the
classroom. In the classroom, the teacher, as the director of classroom
activities, is in charge of controlling all the talk that occurs while class in
the session, to raise the effectiveness of education.
c. Spoken language is an important part of the same initiation of all the
participants. Teachers and students come from different identities,
cultural backgrounds, and use the classroom as the first large institution
to integrate their expectations individually or overtly, which will cause
many problems of ineffective teaching and learning. For this reason, it is
critical to consider that classroom interaction should be improved in
order to enhance the effectiveness of the teaching and learning process.
To study what happens in the classroom, going inside what Ellis (1994)
called ’the black box’ of the classroom, is interesting, since classroom is a ‘place
where interactions of various kinds take place, affording learners opportunities to
acquire L2’ as well as foreign language (Ellis, 1994: 565). Allwright (1984:156)
assumes that interaction is ‘the fundamental fact of classroom pedagogy’ for the
linguistic features (van Lier, 1988:90) of the teacher and the learners are the central
concern of this study.
As the classroom is regarded as a communication system, structural
interactions will take place within it. There will be a “sharing of experience,
expression of social solidarity, decision making and planning, and if it is a
hierarchical institution, it will be likely forms of verbal control and transmission of
order” (Cazden, 1988, p.2; Christie, 2000), through communication. Thus,
communication between a teacher and students becomes a form of discourse in the
classroom (Kress, 1985).
Then, in relation to other research studies around discourse analysis as
well as teacher’s roles in the classroom, several related research studies have been
done by experts. Mehan (1985), for example, conducted a study on the organization
of classroom instruction. This study suggests that participation in the classroom
community involves a unification of social and academic matters. Hilsom and Cane
(1971) and Dalin et al. investigate the role of the teacher in Colombia under the EN
(Escuela Nueva) program, in which the teachers acxt as developers, organizers and
motivators for their students. Then, Stubbs (1996, cited in Maolida, 2005) analyzes
classroom talk using discourse analysis based on the matacognitive functions that
characterize teacher-talk. Using this analysis, he shows clearly some strategies
employed by teachers to keep in touch with their students.
The last, Eggins (2000) proposed one research about everyday talk
mostly the speaker used declarative clauses, suggesting that the speaker initiates and
prolong more exchanges. Overall, these findings are consistent with the general
trends identified in mixed-sex interaction: women ask more questions, talk less about
themselves than about others and respond rather than initiate.
Meanwhile, Riggenbach (1999, see also Painter, 2000) proposes that many
research results under classroom discourse analysis are not only about macro level
features of the discourse, such as explanation of social and cultural factors that
influence the learning environment, but also are related to micro-level features of
language. Such micro-level features might include audio taping of conversations,
taped telephone announcements or announcements by the lecturers, followed by
listening to the contrasts between rising and falling intonation, or for contrasts
between stressed and unstressed syllables. This research is in line with Riggenbach’s
research program, which aims to describe not only the macro-level features of
classroom discourse, but also the micro-level features of the classroom discourse
which focusing on the role and communicative functions of each participant in the
classroom.
Moreover, this study is conducted for the reason that the analysis of classroom
discourse is relevant to various important phenomena of language use, texts, and
conversational interactions or communicative events in the classroom (Van Dijk,
1985; Cazden, 1988; Suherdi, 1997). However, the study of classroom interaction
investigated intensively (Christie & Unsworth, 2000; Fairclough, 2003). Hence, it is
necessary to conduct this research which focuses on grammatical features of teachers
and students in their interaction in the classroom, in their EFL classroom.
This study is concerned with the analysis of classroom interaction, focusing on
the analysis of spoken language in the classroom utilizing systemic functional
grammar analysis of mood types of interpersonal metafunction, which is concerned
with the analysis of communicative function which are what Halliday refers to as
speech functions (Eggins, 1994). This analysis provides examples of teacher’s roles
and their communicative functions by investigating actual language used by teacher
and students (Eggins, 2000).
1.2 Purpose of the Study
The aim of the research, as mentioned above, is to identify the realization of
mood in teacher’s talk and the realization of mood in teacher’s roles and
communicative functions. The study also identifies linguistic features; micro-features
of interpersonal metafunction, i.e. Mood used by teacher in interaction with students
in EFL class by applying the systemic functional grammar as the framework of the
1.3 Research Question
In accordance to the aim of the research, the study is to answer the following
questions:
1. How is mood realized in the teacher’s talk in EFL classroom interaction?
2. Are different teacher’s roles related to the mood realization?
1.4 Significance of the Study
With its central focus on teacher-talk-in interaction with students, this study
has significance for a number of areas including theory, practice, and profession.
For Theory
This study has significance regarding theories concerning the relationship
between classroom interaction and student learning (Pinter, 2006; Brown, 2001; Tsui,
2001; Ellis, 1994; van Lier, 1988). The result of this study is expected to provide
beneficial information about the linguistic features of classroom life to provide
information about textual analysis, particularly analysis of classroom discourse, so
that this study will gain many insights into this relationship, which in turn will
contribute, even probably in the small scale, to theories of language education,
teaching and learning English as a foreign language (Huda, 1999; Allwright and
For Practice
This study may provide information about the use of functional grammar as a
tool for textual analysis in language studies. The insights gained from the
investigation will inform future decisions regarding effective and appropriate
classroom pedagogy for teaching English practice in EFL classroom. This study of
mood system is also hoped to enrich research on investigating classroom behavior
which is so central to improve effective teaching-learning practices that the findings
and conclusions of this study, practically, may stimulate teachers to improve their
teaching behavior in order to maximize students’ learning (Inamullah et al, 2008).
For Profession
The result of this study is probably attracting further research for those who
are interested in conducting classroom research. It is hoped that this study will
provide information about the role and communicative functions of teachers in
English classroom and also will provide information about the linguistic features of
classroom life for students and teachers. More studies on classroom interaction will of
course enrich insights of teachers, EFL teachers in particular, to have more awareness
1.4 The Structure of the Thesis
Chapter 1 of the thesis gives an overview of this study describing its central
focus. It provides the synopsis of the problem, a description of the research question,
and the significance of the study. Chapter 2 reviews the literature from which this
study draws. It includes a review of classroom interaction theories as well as an
exploration of theories relating to classroom interaction research and Systemic
Functional Grammar (SFG). Chapter 3 explains the research design and methodology,
which calls on two methodological perspectives, discourse analysis and functional
linguistics,. This chapter also explicates the research study’s sampling strategy, data
collection, data validity and ethical considerations. Chapter 4 presents the analyses of
the data, classroom talk. The description uses the Discourse Analysis approach with
Systemic Functional Linguistics as the framework of the analysis. Chapter 5 presents
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This Chapter is focused on the description of steps that have been taken to
conduct this study. The description below involves: (1) Method of Research, (2)
Research Sites, (3) Technique of Data Collection, and (4) Data Analysis. All of them
are briefly discussed, but the latest will be elaborated more in the next chapter.
3.1 Method of Research
This study is a descriptive-qualitative design (Silverman, 2002; McMillan &
Schumacher, 2001; Alwasilah, 2002), specifically, in the form of a case study
(Freebody, 2003; McMillan & Schumacher, 2001; Nunan, 1992). Case study is
considered to be the appropriate method as case studiesexamine a facet or particular
aspect of the culture or subculture under investigation (Denny, 1978 as cited in
Nunan, 1992:77), particularly, this research will study one particular instant of
educational experience (Freebody, 2003: 81). A case study has been chosen because
this study was carried out in “intensive descriptions and analysis of a single unit or
bounded system” (Merriam, 1998, p.19; Stake, 1985, p.278 cited in Emilia, 2005a),
which is “employed to gain an in depth understanding of the situation and meaning
for those involved” (Merriam, 1998, p.19).
This study also employed a naturalistic qualitative research design, which
activities, but work with the case specifically as the design point of a qualitative
research (Silverman, 2005).
Moreover, the study utilizes discourse analysis, a spoken discourse of
teacher-students talk in particular. Discourse analysis is a research tradition that focuses on
analyzing issues of classroom discourse in linguistic terms with the method that aims
to study classroom transcripts and assign utterances to predetermined categories
(Nunan, 1989, p.5; Alwright & Bailey, 1991:61).
The use of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) as the tool for analysis is also
supporting the definition of case study stated above. This kind of research has been
quite popular in educational research, especially in English education, including
English as a Foreign Language (EFL), as the context of the research.
3.2 Research Sites 3.2.1 Settings
The research is conducted in a public junior high school Garut regency. The
selected class is one class in grade seven. The site has been chosen purposively for
several reasons. The first reason is that the school is one of the best junior high
schools in the district. The second reason is that the researcher is familiar with the
situation and context of this school as he often comes to the school and sharing ideas
with his fellow English teachers there. Regarding this, Malinowski argued that for
the researchers need to understand the situational and cultural context in which the
language being used (cited in Eggins, 1994, p. 50; see also Emilia et al., 2005a).
3.2.2 Participants
The participants of this research were the English teacher and the students of
grade seven in a junior high school in Garut regency. The participants have been
chosen purposively based on the research topic. In this research the participants are
the English teacher and the students of grade seven in the second semester academic
year of 2008/2009. The numbers of students were 35 students and one teacher.
According to Maxwell (1996), qualitative paradigm ‘ignores the fact that most
sampling in qualitative research is neither probability sampling nor convenience
sampling but falls into the third category: purposeful sampling’.
Based on the statement above, it was concluded that in order to get closer to the
process of learning activities in the classroom, it was better to choose a respondent
based on the conditions involved and the local values in its process.
3.3 Technique of Data Collection
The data collection technique is in non-participant observation study (McMillan & Schumacher, 2001; Cresswell, 1994;Travers, 2001), . Besides being a complete observer in which the researcher observes without participating, the
researcher also documents the teacher-students’ talk in EFL class ,on the basis of IRF
video-recording (Cresswell, 1994). These are aimed at capturing the discourse as
complete as possible so that the observation can capture the information needed to
transcribe. The observation was conducted seven times with the duration of ninety
minutes long. The class observed was in an EFL class which utilizes English and
Indonesian in the course, but English took more portion of the language used by the
teacher in the class.
3.3.1 Observation
To capture what the teacher and student talk to constitute in classroom
interactions, this study requires observation as a research tool. The observation type
used is the non-participant observer that belongs to what Allwright & Bailey (1991)
calls as direct observation in which the observer sits in the classroom and takes notes.
Observation was conducted in 5 meetings, based on the information needed for the
analysis, which were conducted in EFL class in grade seven (VII D) of SMPN 1
Garut.
The researcher was sitting behind the students without manipulating the
teaching and learning process. The class was observed around the English teaching
and learning process. These activities were intended to identify the teacher’s role and
communicative functions in teaching and learning activities between teacher and
students in the classroom. The researcher observed the class activities by taking notes
immediately after each session, in order to keep ”the memory of the observation is
still fresh” (van Lier, 1988: 241).
3.3.2 The Audio-videotape Recording
Nunan (1992) supports the use of recorded data that allows for the
preservation of the primary data, for example in the form of audio, video, or
audio-video recordings. This study used audio-audio-videotaping as a technique for capturing
natural interaction used in detail. The observer recorded the English teaching-learning
activity to gather information about what teacher’s talk with students in the
classroom. “For more complicated enquiries,….., you may prefer to audio record or
even video-record…., so that you can go back in detail to what was said, by whom, in
what tone of voice, and so on.” Allwright and Bailey (1991, p.3). There are three
records chosen to be analyzed for the reason that those records represent the
naturalness of the data needed for the study.
3.4 Data Analysis
In this research, the researcher applied inductive analytical approach
(Alwasilah, 2002). It means that the data analysis began while data were being
gathered. As the characteristic of qualitative research, the analyses were tentative and
provisional throughout the study and only become comprehensive once when the data
were completely collected (Travers, 2002). Ongoing data analysis and interpretation
observation: the result from field note and spoken language transcript. The spoken
transcript from the observation results only into three meetings because the transcripts
from the first and the fourth observation were failed and it could not be transcribed at
all.
Data from observation of spoken language transcript were analyzed using the
mood type analysis (statement, question, offer, and command) under SFL system
from Halliday (Halliday, 1994; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Eggins, 1994; Butt et
al., 2000). It is utilized to find out the teacher’s roles that were proposed mainly by
Harmer (2001) and Brown (2001) and speech functions of the teacher and the
students’ responses in EFL Classroom, particularly how the teacher and the students
use the language in interacting among them during the classroom interaction.
Therefore, in this research, the researcher begins by presenting the facts or
general statements from the obtained data to the conclusion. The steps in analyzing
the data were analyzing the clauses of the discourses based on the systemic functional
grammar (SFG) under the “systemic functional linguistics” by Halliday (Eggins,
1994, p, 149, 156: Gerot & Wignell, 1994, p.25). The Analysis was categorized into
mood type’s analysis, as what have been discussed briefly in theoretical framework of
this study.
Categorization:
Category 1: Teacher’s role in EFL classroom
Sub-categories: - Controller
- Prompter/ Director - Tutor/ Manager - Facilitator/Participant - Resource
Category 2: Teacher’s communicative/speech functions in EFL classroom
Sub-categories:
Statement
Question
Command
Offer
3.7 Concluding Remark
The purpose of this study was to portray the role and communicative functions
of the teacher in EFL classroom. It is a qualitative research under characteristic of
case study which employed a naturalistic paradigm and used an analytic induction
method, which also based on systemic functional linguistic analysis. To compile the
data, the researcher utilized multiple techniques and tools such as video camera,
tape-recording, and field note. The data obtained from instruments were presented and
Chapter 5
Conclusion and Suggestion
5.1 Conclusion
This study seeks to find the realization of mood in teacher’s talk in EFL
classroom interaction and also to identify different mood realization in different
teacher’s roles. From the results and findings in previous chapter, several conclusions
can be drawn.
First, mood is realized through the use of declaratives, interrogatives and
imperatives. Looking at the realization of mood in the teacher talk in EFL classroom
interaction based on the data from the classroom discourse analysis, the teacher
tended to use more declarative and interrogative mood types. It shows that the teacher
liked to explain and to assess the students’ comprehension of the lesson discussed.
Concerning the speech functions in the classroom, based on the discourse, actually
the teacher mostly used questions and commands during the interaction process in the
classroom, then statements and the last is offers. She produced 174 questions with
different typical mood clause, 95 commands, 56 statements and 15 offerings. Each
initiation was expressed in different typical moods.
Second, relating to the mood realization in different teacher’s roles in the
classroom, based on the data from observation, most roles were performed by the
roles performed in the classroom were supported by the data from the classroom
discourse.
Based on the findings above, two important points can be raised. First,
although one may assume that the teacher’s role in a lower secondary education is
different from other educational institutions, the result shows that the role of the
teacher in lower secondary education depends on the approach of the teacher and
his/her teaching and learning experiences on handling the class. Regarding this, there
were several points to remember that the teacher in lower secondary tends to act more
as a controller, a traffic keeper or gate keeper that selects to reject or permit anything
to be applied to the class. Second, speech functions that determine the realizations of
the mood of the teacher were independent, even though in the different situation it
will depend on the responses of the students whether they are supporting or
confronting response.
It can be concluded that the teacher in the class observed tended to exert
power that it is typical to the culture of education in Indonesia in which teachers have
most authority in the classroom. On the other side, it is evidenced that Systemic
Functional Grammar (SFG) was able to describe one of the issues from classroom
interaction, particularly in describing teacher’s talk and teacher’s roles in the
5.2 Suggestions
From the conclusion above, there are some suggestions that are noted. First,
for the next study, it will be better if the study is conducted in longer time in order to
give contribution in other contexts. Utilizing other research instruments such as
questionnaires and interviews will provide more detailed data since this study only
utilized observation to get the data. This study only took five classroom observations.
Other phenomenon could be found if the classroom observation were done more
than five meetings. In relation to the number of students and classes involved in this
study, it would be good if the class used as the samples more than one teacher and 30
students in one class. Therefore, the finding could be more various.
Second, related to the teacher’s role in lower secondary education, it will be
better if the next researcher compare it with another teacher based on gender,
educational background, or different cultural background. By conducting this, it can
be found that whether it is found different result from one another because it is
Bibliography
_______. (2006) ‘Teacher Talk: The Secret of Comprehensible Speech for Non- native Speakers of English’ http://www.longman.com
Alamanra, I., (2004). Generic Structure and Lexico-Grammatical Characteristics of Application Letters in English: A Discourse Analysis. English Department Faculty of Language and Art, State University of Jakarta. Thesis.
Allwright, Dick, and Bailey, Kathleen M,.(1991). ‘Focus on The Language Classroom’. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alwasilah, C. A. (2002). ‘Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif’. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Alwasilah. (2006). “Redefinisi Profesi Dosen” in Pikiran Rakyat. 5-1-2006.
Alwasilah. 2007. Quality Teaching at a Leading and Outstanding University: A Conceptual Framework for Action and Development. Indonesia University of Education. UPI Press: Bandung-Indonesia.
Anderson, L. W., (1989). The Effective Teacher; Study Guide and Readings. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. United States of America.
Arnold, J. (1999). Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge University Press. United Kingdom.
Arvani, M. (2006). ‘A Discourse Analysis of Business Letters written by Iranian and Native Speakers’ http://www.asian esp journal.com
Beaugrande, R. (2005) ‘Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Ideology, Methodology’ http://www.beaugrande.com
Berry, M. (1977). An Introduction to Systemic Linguistics, Two Levels and Links. Batsford; London.
Bloom, B. S. (1982). Human Characteristics and School Learning. McGraw Book Company: America.
Bower, G. H. & Cirilo, R. K. (1985). “Cognitive Psychology and Text Processing”
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. 2nd Edition. Longman.
Burns, R. (1994). Introduction to Research Method. Second Edition. Longman.
Burns, Joyce & Gollin. (1996). I See What You Mean: Using Spoken Discourse in the Classroom; a handbook for Teacher. National Center for English Teaching and Research: Australia.
Butler, C. S. (1985). Systemic Linguistics: Theory and Applications. Batsford; London.
Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., and Yallop, C. (2000). ‘Using Functional Grammar’. Sydney: Macquarie.
Cazden, B. C. (1988). Classroom Discourse; The Language of Teaching and Learning. Heinmann, Portsmouth, NH.
Chapelle, Carol A. (1998). ‘Some Notes on Systemic-Functional Linguistics’
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~carolc/LING511/sfl.html/
Chaudron, Craig. (1988). 'Second Language Classroom'. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Christie, F. (2000). “The Language of Classroom Interaction and Learning” in Research Language in Schools and Communities; Functional Linguistic Perspectives. Unsworth, L. (Ed.) Cassel. London.
Christie, F. & Unsworth, L. (2000). :Developing Socially Responsible Language Research”, in Research Language in Schools and Communities; Functional Linguistic Perspectives. Unsworth, L. (Ed.). Cassel. London.
Cloran, C. (2000). ‘Socio-semantic Variation: Different Wordings, Different Meanings” in Research Language in School and Communities; Functional Linguistic Linguistic Perspectives. Unsworth, L. (Ed.). Cassel. London.
Collerson, J. (1994). English Grammar; A Functional Approach. Primary English Teaching Association. Victoria.
Creswell, John W. (1994). ‘Research Design: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches’. London: SAGE Publication.
Cruickshank, K. (2006). Teenagers, literacy and schools; Researching in Multilingual Context. Routledge. New York.
Dalin, P., Ayono, T., Biazen, A, B.,Mumtaz, J., Miles, M. B. (1994). How Schools Improve: An International Reports. Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Great Britain.
Darlin, H., Linda & John Bransford (Eds.). (2005) Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teacher Should Learn and be Able to Do. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. San Fransisco.
Douglas. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. [online] available at:
http://www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/0107demo.html. Accessed on June 24, 2006.
Duranti, A. (1985). “Sociocultural of Discourse”, in Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Van Dijk (Ed.) Volume 1, Disciplines of Discourse. Academic Press: Amsterdam.
Eggins, Suzanne. (2000). “Researching Everyday Talk” in Research Language in Schools and Communities; Functional Linguistic Perspectives. Unsworth, L. (Ed.) Cassel. London.
Eggins, Suzzane. & Diana Slade. (1997). ‘Analysing Casual Conversation’: London: Casell.
Ellis, Rod. (1986). ‘Understanding Second Language Acquisition’. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing Discourse. Routledge; London.
Freebody, Peter. (2003). ‘Qualitative Research in Education’ London: SAGE
Publications.
Gee, James Paul. (1999). ‘An Introduction to Discourse Analysis’ London:
Routledge.
Gerning, B. (2005). The Use of English in Natural and Social Science Textbook; A Comparative Study Based on Systemic Functional Linguistics. Graduate School of Education, State University of Jakarta. Dissertation.
Gerot, Linda, and Wignell, P. (1994). ‘Making sense of functional Grammar’. Sydney: Antipodean Educational Enterprises.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). ‘An Introduction to Functional Grammar’. 2nd Edition. London: Edward Arnold Publishers, Ltd.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). “Dimension of Discourse Analysis: Grammar”. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Van Dijk (Ed.). Volume 2, Dimension of Discourse. Academic Press: Amsterdam.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2003). ‘On Language and Linguistics’ London: Continuum.
Halliday & Hassan. (1985). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Deakin University Press, Victoria.
Halliday, M. A. K. Mathiessen, C. (1997). Systemic Functional Grammar: A first Grammar. 3rd Edition. Arnold Publisher.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd Edition. Longman.
Hughes, Rebecca. (2002). ‘Teaching and Researching Speaking’ London:
Longman.
Jensen, M.T. (2003). ‘Frameworks for Transcribing and Analyzing Discourse in the Classroom’ http://www. Nola-ed.com.
Kasher, A. (1985). “Philosophy and Discourse Analysis”, in Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Van Dijk (Ed.). Volume 1, Disciplines of Discourse. Academic Press: Amsterdam.
Kress, G. (1985). Linguistic Processes in Socilcultural Practice. Deakin University Press. Victoria.
Lier, L. V. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. Longman. London and New York.
Lipson, M. (2004). Exploring Functional Grammar: Functional Grammar Studies for Non-Native Speakers of English. Miller (Ed.). Bologna.
Lock, Graham. (1996). ‘Functional English Grammar’ New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lukmana, I. (2006). “Kajian Bahasa dan Pemberdayaan Sosial”. Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, Vol. 6 No. 2, Oktober 2006.
Ma, Xiao Yan. (2006). ‘Teacher Talk and EFL in University Classrooms’
Maolida. (2005). The Influences of Teacher’s Instructional Objectives on Variation of Exchange Pattern in Teacher-Students Interaction: A Classroom Discourse Analysis. Paper. Unpublished.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text; system and structure. John Benjamins Publishing, Netherlands.
Martin, J.R., Matthiessen, M., Painter, C. (1997). ‘ Working with Functional Grammar’. London: ARNOLD.
McCarthy, Michael. (1990). ‘Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers’ USA: Cambridge University Press.
McMillan,J.H., and Schumacher,S. (2001). ‘Research in Education: A Conceptual Introduction’ New York: Longman, Inc. Education. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass Publisher.
Nunan, David. (1992). ‘Research Methods in Language Learning’ USA: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, David. (1989). ‘Understanding Language Classrooms’ UK: Prentice Hall International.
Painter, C. (2000). “Researching First Language Development” in Research Language in Schools and Communities; Functional Linguistic Perspectives. Unsworth, L. (Ed.). Cassel. London.
Paltridge, B. (2000). Making Sense of Discourse Analysis. Book 3. Gerd Stabler. Australia.
Qi, Fang.(2007) ‘Classroom Research and Action Research: Principles and Practice in EFL Classroom’ http://www. RELC.com
Ravelli, L. (2000). “Getting Started with Functional Analysis of Text” in Research Language in Schools and Communities; Functional Linguistic Perspectives. Unsworth, L. (Ed.) Cassel. London.
Riggenbach, H. (1999). Discourse Analysis in the Language Classroom.: Volume 2 the Spoken Language. Ann Arbor; The University of Michigan Press.
Robinson, W. P. (1985). “Social Psychology and Discourse” in Handbook of
Schiffrin, D. (2003). “Discourse Markers: Language, Meaning, and Context” in the Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Schiffrin, D., Deborah Tannen and Heidi E. Hamilton (Eds.). USA: Blackwell Publishing.
Silverman, David. (2005). ‘Doing Qualitative Research’ London: SAGE Publications.
Sinclair, J.M., and Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an Analysis of Discourse’ London: Oxford University Press.
Skelton, A. (2005). Understanding Teaching Excellence in Higher Education; An Introduction. United States of America: Merrill Publishing Company.
Suherdi, D. (2006). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Systemiotic Approach. Bandung: UPI Press.
Suherdi, D. (1997). “Focusing on the Teaching-Learning Process: A Case Study of the Use of Classroom Discourse Analysis in Understanding the Language of EFL/ESL Classroom” in Sadtono, E. (Ed.). 1997. The development of TEFL in Indonesia. The English Department of IKIP Malang in Collaboration with Bina Budaya Foundation. Malang. (p. 142-157).
Thorne, Steve. (2001). ‘A brief introduction to the work of M.A.K. Halliday and Systemic-Functional Linguistics’ http://www.asian-efl journal.com
Travers. (2001). Qualitative Research through Case Study. London: Sage Publications.
Van Dijk. (1985). Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Volume 3, Discourse and Dialogue. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
Van Lier, Leo (1988). ‘The Classroom and the Language Learner, UK: Longman.
