Classroom Interaction and Second Language Acquisition
Classroom Interaction and Second Language Acquisition
Classroom Interaction and Second Language Acquisition
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.
1. Descriptive Research
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
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.
Ethnography of Communication
Ethnography of communication
Micro-ethnography
Discourse analysis, and
Critical ethnography
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
1. Lesson
2. Transaction
3. Exchange
4. Move
5. Act
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:
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:
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.
1. Teacher Talk
2. Teachers Questions
3. Use of L1
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.