silabus classroom discourse analysis.docx

(1)

PROGRAM STUDI PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS JURUSAN STUDI PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS FAKULTAS PENDIDIKAN BAHASA DAN SENI UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA

Course : Discourse Analysis (Focusing on Classroom Discourse)

Code : IG

Chs : 2

Semester : 7

Prerequisite : Linguistics Courses (IG ). Lecturer : Prof. Dr. Didi Suherdi, M. Ed.

1. Objectives : This subject is designed to provide the students with two main parts: (1) opportunities to acquire knowledge and experiemces in understanding concepts of

discourse, discourse analysis, and classroom

discourse analysis. In addition, some relevant topics will also be the foci of this part, including structure of classroom discourse, systems of analsysis, and

systemiotic approach to classroom discourse analysis. This part will also covers some current issues in the use of discourse analysis in understanding and

ascertaining the quality of teaching-learning processes, and (2) opportunities to apply the knowledge and understanding of classroom discourse analysis on revealing the intricacy of the whole business of teaching including classroom interaction, teacher’s language, students’ contribution quality and their language development and its effectiveness in developing students learning.

2. Course Description : This subject covers the knowledge of basic concepts of discourse, discourse analysis, and classroom discourse analysis. In addition, some relevant topics will also be the foci of this subject, including structure of classroom discourse, systems of analsysis, and

(2)

ascertaining the quality of teaching-learning processes, and revealing the intricacy of the whole business of teaching including classroom interaction, teacher’s language, students’ contribution quality and their language development and its effectiveness in developing students learning.

3. Learning Activities : Independent Reading Lecturing

Students Presentation Discussion

4. Media : Internet Search Engine LCD Projector Laptop Computer Projector Screen

5. Evaluation : Written and Oral Presentation Grading Policy

a. Eighty percent (80%) of attendance is compulsory for the accomplishment of this subject.

b. Grades will be based on the final scores:

Final Score Interval Grade Mark

85 ≥ A 4.0

75 ≥ -  84 B 3.0

60 ≥ -  74 C 2.0

50 ≥ -  59 D 1.0

... -  50 E 0

SCORING RUBRICS FOR STUDENTS’ PRESENTATION

Approaching Expectations

(60-74 marks) Meeting Expectations(75-85 mark) Exceeding Expectations(85 - marks)

1. Presentation is not well organized and developed

1. Content knowledge is not well articulated 2. Theories and concepts are not discussed in

depth

3. Presentation is not clear and fluent 4. Shows no confidence in delivery, reading

from notes judiciously 5. Voice is not well-projected

6. Does not engage the attention of the audience

7. Does not respond well to questions, showing superficial understanding of the project

8. No sense of cohesion in the flow of the presentation

9. Presentation exceeds time limit and not able to complete presentation

1. Presentation is somewhat organized and developed

2. Content knowledge is good

3. Theories and concepts are discussed in relatively depth

4. Presentation is somewhat clear and fluent

5. Shows relatively good confidence in delivery, reading from notes judiciously

6. Voice is relatively well-projected

7. Engages the attention of the audience

8. Responds well to questions, showing excellent understanding of the project

9. Relatively clear sense of cohesion in the flow of the presentation

10. Presentation exceeds time limit though able to complete presentation

1. Presentation is very well organized and creatively developed

2. Content knowledge is excellent

3. Theories and concepts are discussed in depth

4. Presentation is very clear and fluent

5. Shows confidence in delivery, reading from notes judiciously

6. Voice is very well-projected

7. Engages the attention of the audience well

8. Responds very well to questions, showing excellent understanding of the project

9. Clear sense of cohesion in the flow of the presentation

(3)

(4)

Sessions Topics Sources

1-2 1. Introduction to discourse, discourse analysis and classroom discourse analysis

2. The basic concepts and terms in classroom discourse analysis

Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom

Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic

approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. Sinclair, J. McH., Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an analysis of

discourse. The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press. 3-6 1. Analyzing classroom discourse

2. Interpreting the result of classroom discourse analysis

approach. Bandung: Celtics Press.

7-12 Analyzing patterns of teacher-students interaction, teacher’s language use variation, students’ contribution, and cultural congruence

13-14 Using the analysis result for the

betterment of teaching-learning processes

Suherdi, D. (2009). Mikroskop

Pedagogik Alat Aanalisis Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Celtics Press.

(5)

Main references:

1. Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press.

2. Sinclair, J. McH., Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.

3. Suherdi, D. (2009). Mikroskop Pedagogik Alat Aanalisis Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Celtics Press.

Recommended references:

1. Allen, J. P. B., Frohlich, M., Spada, N. (1983), The communicative orientation of language teaching: an observation scheme. In ERIC.

2. Bellack, A., et. al. (1966). The Language of the classroom. New York: Teacher College Press.

3. Berry, M. (1981a). Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: a multi-approach to exchange structure. In M. Coulthard, R. M. & M. Montgomery (Eds.), Studies in discourse analysis. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

4. Berry, M. (1981b). Towards layers of exchange structures for directive exchanges. Network, 2.

5. Burton, D., 1981, Analysing Spoken Discourse. In Coulthard, M. & Montgomery, M. (eds.), Structures in Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

6. Edmondson, W. (1981). Spoken Discourse a Model for Analysis. London: Longman.

7. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.

8. Flanders, N. (1970). Analysis teacher behaviour. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

9. Halliday, M. A. K. (1961). Categories of the theory of grammar, Word, 17, 241-292.

10.Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). A short introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

(6)

Pennsylvania Press.

12.Larsen-Freeman, D. E. (1980). Discourse analysis in second language research. Mass: Newbury House.

13.Love, K. (1991). Towards a further analysis of teacher talk. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 14, 30-72.

14.Martin, J. R. (1985). Process and Text: Two Aspects Human Semiosis. In Benson, James D., and Greaves, William S. (eds). 1985. Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Volume 1. New Jersey: Alex Publishing Corporation.

15.Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

16.Sinclair, J. McH., Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.

17.Suherdi, D. (2006). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Systemiotic Perspective. Bandung: UPI Press.

18.Ventola, E. (1987). The structure of social interaction. London: Frances Pinter. 19.Ventola, E. (1988a). The logical relations in exchanges. In J. Benson & W. S.

Greaves (Eds.), Systemic perspectives on discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 20.Ventola, E. (1988b). Text analysis in operation: a multi-level approach. In R. P.

Fawcett & D. Young (Eds.), New Developments in Systemic Linguistics. London: Pinter.

21.Ventola, E. (1992). Writing Scientific English: overcoming cultural problems. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 2 (2). 191-220.

COURSE UNITS

Session

s Topics

Specific

Objectives _{Activities Evaluation}Learning Sources

(7)

to

discourse, discourse analysis and

classroom discourse analysis

understand the nature of

discourse, discourse analysis and

hours) Class elicitation

(2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 1) Sinclair, J. McH., Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an

analysis of discourse. The

English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press. 2 Basic Concepts

and Terms  The

structure of classroom discourse  Types of understand basic concepts of discourse, discourse analysis and

Lecture (2 hours)

Quiz Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 1) Sinclair, J. McH., Coulthard, R.M. (1975). Towards an

(8)

discourse. The

English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press. 3 1. Analyzing

classroom discourse using systemiotic approach (1)

Be able to understand basic procedures of

analyzing classroom discourse analysis

Workshop (2 hours)

Quiz Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 2) 4 1. Analyzing

classroom discourse using systemiotic approach (2)

Be able to analyze segments of

Workshop (2 Hours)

Texts analyses

Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 3).

5 1. Analyzing classroom discourse using systemiotic approach (3)

Be able to analyze segments of

Workshop (2 hours)

Texts analyses

Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 4).

(9)

patterns of teacher-students interaction, teacher’s language use variation, students’ contribution, and cultural congruence

analyze segments of

(2 hours) analyses (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 5-10)

7 Analyzing patterns of teacher-students interaction

Be able to analyze patterns of teacher-students interaction as

represente d in

classroom discourse

Workshop

(2 hours) Data analysis report

Suherdi, D. (2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. (Chapter 5-10)

8 MID-TERM TEST

9 Analyzing patterns of teacher’s language use variation

represente d in

classroom discourse

Workshop (2 hours)

Data analysis report

10 Analyzing students’ contribution

represente d in

classroom

Workshop

(2 hours) Data analysis report

(10)

discourse (Chapter 5-10)

11 Analyzing cultural congruence

represente d in

classroom discourse

Workshop (2 hours)

12 Analyzing patterns of teacher-students interaction, teacher’s language use variation, students’ contribution, and cultural congruence

represente d in

classroom discourse

Workshop (2 hours)

13 Revealing the intricacy of teaching learning processes (1)

represente d in

classroom discourse

Workshop (2 hours)

Presentatio n

14 Revealing the intricacy of teaching learning processes (2)

represente

Workshop (2 hours)

Presentatio n

(11)

d in

classroom discourse

Celtics Press. (Chapter 11) 15 Judging

teaching quality Judging

learning quality Making

productive decisions for the betterment of the teaching-learning

processes

represente d in

classroom discourse

Workshop

(2 hours) Essay writing Suherdi, D.(2009). Classroom Discourse Analysis: A systemiotic approach. Bandung: Celtics Press. Suherdi, D. (2009). Mikroskop Pedagogik Alat