CLASSROOM INTERACTION AND SECOND

LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
According to Allwright (1984: 156), interaction is the fundamental fact of
classroom pedagogy because everything that happens in the classroom depends on
a process of live person-to-person interaction. This aim is to describe the
interactional events that take a place in a classroom in order to understand how the
learning process are created and also to examine the different kinds of classroom
interaction lead to learning.

Types of Classroom Research

This research is more focused on formal research and practitioner research.

The formal of the research is conducted by an external researcher drawing one or
more research. Practitioner research is the research conducted by teachers in their
own classrooms drawing on the principles of action research or exploratory
practice (Allwright 2003). There are two general approaches in L2 classroom
researchers:

1. Descriptive Research

Descriptive research focused on the form and function of classroom

interactions, explained how these interactions are become meaningful and the
implications for students learning (Zuengler and Mori 2002: 283). Descriptive
studies of L2 classrooms can be qualitative or quantitative and descriptive
research has drawn on number of tools. There are some analyses of conducting
descriptive research in l2 classroom:

Interactional Analysis
This analysis is involves the use of a schedule consisting of a set of categories
for coding specific classroom behaviors. Long (1980b) mention the three different
types of interaction analysis. First, in a category system, each event is coded each
time it occurs. Second, in a sign system, each event is recorded only once within a
fixed time span. Third, in a rating scale, how frequently a specific type of event
occurred is made after the period of observation. Each of the categories in a
schedule reflected the researchers assumptions about what behaviors were
important and were not theoretically motivated. Interaction analysis runs the risk
of producing and it depends on a number of assumptions.

Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis serves as a device for systematically describing the kinds of

interactions that occur in language classrooms. Discourse analysis focused on not
only the function of individual utterances, but also how these utterances combine
to form larger of discourses units. The aim is for contributions of the teacher and
the students and also to describe all the data. The researchers have used the
techniques of discourse analysis to develop comprehensive accounts of specific
areas of discourse.

Conversational analysis (CA)

Conversational analysis provides a tool for conducting micro-analyses of

classroom discourse and for examining the sequential development of classroom
talk. According to Seedhouse (2004), there are five principles of this method of
enquiry:

a. Indexicality
For example like the use that interactants make of shared background
knowledge and context.
b. The documentary method of interpretation
For example like each real-world action is treated as an exemplar of a
previously known pattern.
c. The reciprocity of perspective
For example like the interactants willingness to follow the same norms in
order to achieve intersubjectivity.
d. Normative accountability
For example like there are norms that are constitutive of action and enable
speakers to produce and interpret actions.
e. Reflexivity
For example like using the same methods and procedures apply to the
production and interpretation of actions.

Conversational analysis seeks to explain how talk in interaction takes place.

The aim is to characterize the organization of interaction by abstracting from
exemplars of specimens of interaction and to uncover the emic logic underlying
the organization (Seedhouse 2004: 13). Conversational analysis has been used to
contrast the interactions that occur in naturalistic setting in a classroom, the
organization of turn-taking, the structure of repair sequences, the basic structure of
classroom discourse, and how context is jointly constructed by the participants.

Ethnography of Communication

According to Johnson (1995), ethnographic approaches involve the kind of

detailed descriptive work. They emphasize the importance of obtaining multiple
perspectives through triangulation. Based on Watson-Gegeo (1997) there are four
approaches of classroom ethnography such as:

Ethnography of communication
Micro-ethnography
Discourse analysis, and
Critical ethnography

The purpose of ethnography of communication is to identify the working of

specific speech communities by obtaining multiple perspectives on what
participants in a particular social setting in their interactive behaviors. It is
requires both etic and emic analyses the way of speaking including non-verbal
signals such as silence and gaze.
 There are three advantages of conducting the ethnography research according
to Gaies (1983):

1. It can account for learners who do not participate actively in the class.
2. It can provide insights into the conscious thought processes of participants
3. It can helps to identify variables which havent previously been acknowledged

2. Confirmatory Research

Confirmatory in L2 classroom is seeking to compare different instructional

approach, to test specific hypotheses, or to identify relationships between pre-
determined variables. It involves either an experimental or correlational research
design. Comparative method studies are used to evaluate the different types of
immersion programmers and studies of different types of form-focused instruction
are examples of experimental research.

Confirmatory research is also evident in correlational studies that have

examined the relationship between specific classroom behavior, such as teachers
request and learning outcomes.

The Nature of Second Language Classroom Discourse

Classroom discourse mediates between pedagogic decision-making and the

outcomes of language instruction. Teachers plan their lessons by making
selections with regard to what to teach (syllabus), how to teach (method), and the
nature of the social relationships they want to encourage (atmosphere). It will
reflect the pedagogic decisions that have been taken, but also it will evolve as part
of the process of accomplishing the lesson.

Structure and General Characteristic of Teacher-Centered Discourse

The aim is to identify the significant aspects of L2 classroom discourse and to

develop specific categories that would allow for quantification. A description of
classroom activity is designed for use in real-time coding. It consists of a set of
general categories into narrower sub-categories and the main analysis is activity
type. Each activity described in terms of participant organization (whole class,
group work, or individual work), content (the subject matter of the activities),
students modality (the various skills involved in the activity), and materials (type,
length, and source/ purpose). A communicative feature reflects a more discoursal
perspective on the classroom. Coding is based on audio recording of the classes
observed. There are seven of communicative features such as:

1. The use of the target language

2. There is an information gap
3. Sustained speech
4. The focus is on code or message
5. The way of preceding utterances takes place
6. Discourse initiation
7. The degree of linguistic form is restricted

Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) developed a hierarchical model by identifying the

following ranks in the structure of a lesson:

1. Lesson
2. Transaction
3. Exchange
4. Move
5. Act

Types of Language Use

Allwright (1980: 166) identifying three basic elements of macro-analysis of

language teaching and learning:

a. Samples: instances of the target language; in isolation or in use.

b. Guidance: instances of communication concerning the nature of the target
language.
c. Management activities: aimed at ensuring the profitable occurrence of samples
and guidance.
McTear (1975) identified four types of language use based on the general
distinction:

a. Mechanical: no exchange of meaning is involved.

b. Meaningful: meaning is contextualized but there is still no information
conveyed.
c. Pseudo-communicative: new information is conveyed but in a manner unlike in
naturalistic discourse.
d. Real communication: spontaneous speech resulting from the exchange of
opinions, jokes, classroom management.

Mechanical and meaningful language use is more focused on the code, while
the real communication by definition entails genuine information exchange with
pseudo-communicative in language use.

Based on Ellis (1984a), there are three kinds of distinguished goal and address:

1. Core goals: it is more focused on language itself (medium), some other content
(message), and some ongoing activity such as model-making (activity).
2. Framework goals: associated with organization and management of classroom
events
3. Social goals: to initiate discourse and to perform a wider range of language
functions.

Based on Van Liers (1988), there are four basics types of classroom
interaction (according to the teacher manage the topic and activity):

1. Type 1: when the teacher neither controls the topic nor the activity private
talk between the students.
2. Type 2: when the teacher controls the topic but not the activity giving the
instruction or teaching the materials.
3. Type 3: when the teacher controls both of the topic and activity giving
responses in language drill.
4. Type 4: when the teacher controls the activity but not the topic as in small
group work (students are free to choose the topic).
Based on Halliday (1973), there are three types of function in language serves:

1. Ideational telling people facts or experiences

2. Interpersonal working on relationships with people
3. Textual dealing with connections and boundaries, clarifying, and
summarizing

Turn-taking

The purpose is to identify a number of rules that underlie speaker selection and
change, only one speaker speaks at a time. A speaker can select the next speaker
by performing of the first pair. A speaker can alternatively allow the next speaker
to choose the next pair.

Van Lier (1988) identified the rules how turn-taking in L2 classroom differs
from ordinary conversation:

a. One speaker speaks at any one time

b. Many can speak at once if they say the same thing or at least if the
simultaneous talks remains intelligible
c. If there is no a and b repair work will be undertaken

According to Markee (2000) the general characteristics of turn-taking in

classroom talk are:

The pre-allocation of different kinds of turns to teachers and learners

The frequent production by learners of turns in chorus
The frequent production of long turns by the teacher and short turns by the
students
The requirement that the learners produce elaborated sentence-length turns in
order to display knowledge
A pre-determined topic

There are two related issues through the accounts of classroom turn-taking.
First, the tension between the felt need to identify a set of general characteristics
of classroom speech exchange systems and the recognition that there is no
considerable variety. Second, it is more concern about the differences between L2
classroom turn-taking mechanisms and those found in ordinary conversation.

The Teachers Contribution to Classroom Discourse

1. Teacher Talk

Teacher talk in L2 can be described as a special register, analogous to foreigner

talk (very fluent in speaking L2). Studies of teacher talk, like the foreigner talk
has to describe phonological, lexical, grammatical, and discoursal properties.

2. Teachers Questions

Barnes (1969, 1976) mentions five types of questions such as:

1. Factual questions (what)

2. Reasoning questions (how, why)
3. Open questions that do not require any reasoning and the questions which
have different acceptable answer
4. Social questions that influence students behavior by control or appeal
5. Close questions which the questions are framed with only one acceptable
answer

According to Hakansson and Lindberg (1988) describe questions in terms of

their form, cognitive level, communicative value, and orientation. Studies of
teachers questions in L2 classroom focused on the frequency of the different
types of questions, wait-time, the nature of the learners output when answering
the questions, the effect of the learners level proficiency on questioning, the
possibility of training teachers to give more communicative questions, and the
variation evident in teachers questioning strategies.

3. Use of L1

The teachers use of L1 in the L2 classroom remains a complex and

controversial issue. It is complex because the utility of using L1 will depend on
the instructional context. Studies of L1 focused on how much and in which
contexts teachers use L1 in classroom.
4. Use of Meta-language

When the teachers use meta-language they are treating a language as an object
rather than using it as a tool for communication. Thus, in meta-language explicit
meaning is more dominant rather than implicit meaning in teaching L2. Meta-
language occurred more frequently in teacher-initiated form-focused episode
rather than in reactive episodes.

5. Corrective Feedback

Chenoweth et al. (1983) found that the learners like to be corrected not only
during form-focused activities, but also when they were conversing with native
speakers. However, the learners likely differs in how much, when, and in what
way they want to be corrected in specific instructional activities. The study is also
investigating learners viewpoints about error correction to explore the variations.