UNIVERSITAS MULAWARMAN FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN PROGRAM PASCASARJANA PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS

*STUDENT ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

Instruction for submission of hard copy (print) assignments: 1. Staple this sheet to the front of your assignment. 2. Your assignment should be submitted collectively & directly to your lecturer. 3. It is your responsibility to retain copies of your assignment. Instruction for submission of electronic assignments: 1. Copy cover sheet and attach to electronic assignment. 2. Submit assignment (with attach cover sheet) electronically via your lecturers email: bitsuteaching@yahoo.com.au Complete Name : Abd. Rahman Students Reg. Number : 1005086156 Email Address : john_rahman85@yahoo.co.id Mobile Number : 081350824684 Unit Number & Title : (Critical Classroom Discourse Analysis) Lecturers Name : Dr. Bibit Suhatmady, S.Pd., M.Pd. Course : Discourse Analysis and Pragmatics* Assignment Number :1 *Strikethrough the unchosen course. Plagiarism and Collusion are methods of cheating!!! Plagiarism Plagiarism is the presentation of work which has been copied in the whole or in part from another person work, or from any other source such as the internet, published books or periodicals without due acknowledgement given in the text. Collusion Collusion is the presentation of work which is the result in the whole or in part of unauthorised collaboration with another person or persons.

Students Statement: I have read and understood the information provided on the assignment cover sheet relating to plagiarism and collusion and therefore declare that the attach work is entirely my own, except where work quoted is dully acknowledged in the text, and that this work has not be submitted for assessment in any other unit or course.

Signature: _______________________________________ Date:

July,8th,2011

*this student assignment cover sheet is adapted from Faculty of Education, Monash University

CRITICAL CLASSROOM DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

To fulfil critical review assignment for the course of Semantics lectured by: Dr. Bibit Suhatmady, S.Pd., M.Pd

by: (Abd. Rahman) Reg. No. 1005086156

UNIVERSITAS MULAWARMAN FAKULTAS KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN PROGRAM PASCASARJANA PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS 2011

Critical Classroom Discourse Analysis

A. Introduction Classroom discourse refers to the type of language use in parole or performance will be found in the classroom situation. The students and teacher is referred to as pedagogic discourse, and it is different in form and function from language used in other situation due to distinct social roles of students, teacher and the activities they are in. Analysis of classroom discourse is useful when examining the effectiveness of teaching methods and the types of students and teacher interaction. Textual features or pedagogic discourse contribute towards an understanding of the relationship between pedagogy and its practice. Classroom discourse seems to offer autonomy and opportunity to teaching and learning interaction between students to teacher and student to student, such as classroom discourse make possible situation in which learning becomes more fun, student participation is active and teaching-learning activities are effective. Moreover, such situations also allow teachers to fine tuning their speech. However, classroom discourse is usually analyzed and understood in transparent context, namely as the collective space where an individual interaction. The social process and practice taking place in classroom discourse become the focus of an analysis. Many speakers especially teacher are unaware many cases in teaching method. In other words, teachers by virtue of their teaching status dominate classroom discourse. Discourse analysis is a way of understanding social interactions. Discourse analysis is a qualitative method that has been adopted and developed by social constructionists. Although discourse analysis can and is used by a handful of cognitive psychologists, it is based on a view that is largely anti-scientific, though not anti-research. The resources in this journal emphasized that Ms. Debbie ( a pseudonym) has taught about improving reading and writing skill for Middle East and Southeast Asia Students. One day Debbie had put together a course pack of readings with the theme American Heroes one the day the resources observes Debbies class, Debbie choose to use a text called

Mission to the Moon. She explained the heroic contribution made by Apollo 11 astronauts to advance the frontiers of knowledge. In this class Debbie dominate in this course and student had not read the text and the students cannot participate in the class discussion in spite of their advanced level of proficiency in English. It means that the students was a dismal lack of preparation and Debbie must do differently to make the class more proactive but the students started complaining about Debbies method. They said that Debbie was not helping to improving their reading and writing skill because she just talk about American culture and American heroes and nothing else. They felt their identities were not being recognized and their voices were not being respected. It is reasonable to assume that the teacher give a playing out in many ESL classroom. It emphasizes how classroom are decontextualised from the learners feeling, their beliefs about what important, their reasoning and their experience are not assumed context of the teachers communication. B. Summary 1. Classroom Interaction Analysis Interaction schemes all share four crucial limitations: (a) They focus exclusively on the product of verbal behaviors of teachers and learners and give little or no consideration to classroom processes or to learning outcomes, (b) they depend on quantitative measurements, (c) They are unidirectional and (d) they are unidimensional. An important thing in development in classroom interaction analysis when Allen, Frhlich, and Spada (1984) proposed what they called Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching (COLT) observation scheme. The primary thing objective of the scheme are to capture differences in the communicative orientation of classroom interaction (form-focused vs meaning-focused) and to examine their effects on learning outcomes. The scheme contains 73 categories representing binary distinction (student-centered vs teachercentered participation, reaction to form vs message and genuine vs pseudo request). The studies of COLT shows that a significant achievement, compared with its predecessors, has been its capacity to help its users differentiate between more and less communicatively oriented instruction. According to Spada and Frhlich (1995) if one is interested in undertaking a detailed discourse analysis of the conversational interaction between teacher

and students, another method of coding and analyzing classroom data would be more appropriate. So, COLT remains basically Flandersian in the sense that the basis of observation largely confined to observable, condifiable and countable behavior of learners and teachers. The interaction approach to classroom observation can produce only a fragmented picture of classroom reality. 2. Classroom Discourse Analysis Menhans posited a three-way analysis in his observational scheme: (a) a turn-taking analysis which refers to several aspects of turn getting and turn giving practices, (b) a topic analysis which relates to the use of language as instances of linguistic samples mostly meant for student imitation and of communicative expressions about the target language itself, and (c) a task analysis which relates to the managerial as well as the cognitive aspect of classroom task. The important ways of Allwrights observational scheme lies that (a) it made no priori distinction between teachers and learners roles but instead allowed patterns of participation to emerge from data. (b) it consisted of high inference categories that are subject to interpretational variations, and (c) it treated classroom participants as individual rather than as a collective mass by attempting to describe and account for their individual behavior. 3. The context of Discourse and the discourse of Context The emphasis on social context has helped classroom discourse analysts look at the classroom event as a social event and the classroom with its minisociety with its own rules and regulation, routines and rituals. Breen has written that experience has two dimensional: 1. The individual subjective experience of teacher and learners in classroom is woven with personal puposes, attitudes and preferred ways of doing things. 2. The collective-intersubjective experience drives from and maintains teacher and leaner- shared definition, convention and procedure which enable a working together in a crowd.

4. Discourse and Postsructuralism The French thinker (Focault) offers a three dimensional definition of discourse: 1. treating it sometimes as the general domain of all statement, it is refers to all actual utterence 2. sometimes as an individualizable group of statement, it is relates to specific formation or fields 3. sometimes as a regulated practice that accounts for a number of statements, it is refers to sociopolitical structure which create the condition of governing particular utterances or text. And the other side Focault said that every individual and every utterance is embedded and controlled by discursive fields of power or knowledge. Power/ knowledge is expressed in terms of regimes of truth which are sets of rules, statements and understandings that define what is true or real at any given time. Discursive formations make difficult for individuals to think outside of them hence they are also exercise in power and control. Luke (1996) explain that economic capital in the form of material goods and resources can be transformed into cultural capital in the form of academic knowledge or cultural thought, and into social capital in the form of access to organizational facilities or political parties. The capital has three fields there are economic, social and cultural, they are recognized as capital if and only if they are granted legitimacy, that is, symbolic capital by the society at large. Bourdieu assert that there is a whole dimension of authorized language, its rhetoric, syntax, vocabulary and even pronunciation which exist purely to underline the authority. 5. Discourse and Postcolonialism Cultural theorist Said Orientalism was the firstaccount to offer acomprhensive theoretical framework for postcolonial discourse analysis. Said used the term Orientalism to refer to discursive field constituted by western representation of other. Orientalism is systematically constructed discourse by which the west was able to manage and even produce the orient politically, sociologically, militarily, ideologically, scientifically, and

imaginatively. Said show that the discourse of orientalism is built on a binary opposition between the west and the east that produces an essentialized and static other. Saids analysis of orientalism is founded on foucaults notion that knowledge and power are inseparably tied

together, that is knowledge is constructed according to a discursive field that creates a representation of the object of knowledge, its constitution, and its limits. The play of desire and fantasy, according to Bhabha renders colonial discourse hybrid or ambivalent. Hybridity is the sign of the productivity of colonial power, its shifting forces and fixities, it is the name for strategic reversal of the process of domination. Colonial authority is never able to produce a perfect copy of the original but can produce only something that is transmuted. Spivak suggest that the colonial construction of knowledge has become the only reality that now constitutes both colonizer and the colonized and the only currency that is usable both in the west and in the East. 6. Educational Application of Poststructuralism The foucauldian concept of discourse has enormously influenced thought and action in several academic circles, three of which bear direct relevance to applied linguistic and TESOL; critical linguistic, critical pedagogy, and feminist pedagogy. Critical linguists argue that all representation is mediated, moulded by the valuesystem that are inginained in the medium used for representation, it challenges common sense by pointing out that sometimes could have been represented in some other way with a very different significance. 7. Education Applications of postcolonialism Postcolonial theorists offer refreshingly challenging perspective on education in general and on English language education in particular. They say that education was a massive canon in the artillery of empire effecting. They tells that language is fundamental site of struggle postcolonial discourse because the colonial process itself begins in language. 8. Classroom Discourse analysis revisited The postscultuaral and postcolonial perspectives presented above, discourse can be seen as a three dimensional consists of sociolinguistic dimension, sociocultural dimension and sociopolitical dimension. Then classroom discourse analysts may be considered to be involved with the first, interested in the second and indifferent to the third.

Van Dijk (1997) has suggested that merely analyze its internal structures, the action being accomplished or the cognitive operation involved in language use. We need to account for the fact that discourse as social action is being engaged in within a framework of understanding, communication and interaction which is in turn part of broader sociocultural structures and process. Sociocultural has focus has been mostly confined to two strands of inquiry, the first focuses on cultural aspects of speech act performance. Typically, such studies seek to identify the basic linguistic structure of say, politeness formulas in English as contrasted with politeness formulas in the learners L1 or their interlanguage. Furthermore, a true and meaningful understanding of sociocultural aspects of classroom discourse can be achieved not by realizing the surface level features of communicative performance or conversational style but only by recognizing the complex and competing world of discouses that exist in the classroom. 9. Critical classroom discourse The poststructural and postcolonial discourse perspective outlined above offer immense possibilities for formulating the nature, scope, and the method of CCDA. he critique of classroom discourse analysis presented in the previous section also contains some of fundamental characteristics of CCDA. CCDA is based on the following premises and principles: Classroom discourse, like all other discourse is socially constructed, politically motivated, and historically determine. The racialized, stratified and gendered experiences that discourse participants bring to the classroom setting are motivated and molded not just by learning and teaching episodes they encounter in the classroom but also by the broader linguistic, social, economic, political, and historical milieu in which they all grow up. The L2 classroom is not a secluded, self contained minisociety L2 classroom also manifests at surface and deep levels, many forms of resistance, articulated or unarticulturalated. Therefore, an analysis of classroom discourse must necessailly include an analysis of various form of resistance and how they affect the business of learning and teaching. Language teachers can I afford to ignore the sociocultural reality that influences identity formation in and outside the classroom, nor can they afford to separate learners linguistic needs and wants from their sociocultural needs and wants

 Classroom discourse lends itself to multiple perspectives depending on the discourse participants preconceived notions of what constitutes learning, teaching and learning outcomes. The objective of language education should be not merely to facilitate effective language use on the part of language learners but also to promote critical engagement among discourse participants, therefore CCDA should be concerned with an assessment of extent to which critical engagement is facilitated in the classroom Teacher needs to develop the necessary knowledge and skill to observe, analyze, and evaluate their own classroom discourse so that they can without depending too much upon external agencies, theorize what they practice and practice what they theorize, thus contributing to the dismantling of the debilitating dichotomy between theorists and teachers between producers and consumers of pedagofic knowledge. If the function of interaction analysis is seen as normative and that of discourse analysis as informative and then the function of CCDA can be seen as transformative. Classroom interaction analysis with its normative function seek to play a directive role, in effect telling practicing teachers what kind of classroom climate would be considered optimal to achieve their instructional purpose and what they need to do in order to create such a climate in their classroom. Classroom discourse analysis with its informative function seek to play a descriptive role, giving practicing teacher a profile of instructional strategies and interactional patterns and possible relationships between the two.