An Analysis of IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback) in Interaction between Teacher and Students in English Class at SMA Negeri 2 Padang Panjang

Annisa Rahmi(1), Zul Amri(2), Don Narius(3),
(1) UNP  Indonesia
(2) UNP  Indonesia
(3) UNP  Indonesia

Corresponding Author
Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of English Language Teaching

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24036/jelt.v7i3.100824

Full Text:    Language : en

Abstract


This research is conducted based on the phenomenon of an interaction of learning English based on curriculum 2013. This study aims to find and analyze the pattern of IRF interaction used by students and teachers in SMA Negeri 2 Padang Panjang. The types of questions teacher use, types of student responses to teacher questions, and the types of teacher feedback in responding to a student. Theories about the types of question used by a teacher in the classroom, theories about the types of student responses in the classroom and theories about the various feedbacks that teachers use in the classroom are used as the basis for answering those three questions. The results of the analysis show that, 1) there are five types of questions that teachers often use to ask students questions: referential question, display question, convergent question, and divergent question, 2) there are four types of responses used by students: open-ended or student-initiated, specific response, silence, and similar student responses, 3) there are five types of teacher feedback: repeating, acknowledging a correct answer, indicating an incorrect answer and summarizing. The type of this research is descriptive qualitative. Data is collected in two classes with two teachers and each class has 36 students. Based on IRF analysis it can be concluded that between teacher initiation and student response dominate each other but the response of students with the frequency of student initiation is still very low. The reason for this is because the teacher initiates a lot by asking students, the students automatically passive and only a few express their ideas. So that the goal of the learning process based on the 2013 curriculum is not achieved optimally.

Key words: Classroom discourse, interaction, IRF, curriculum 2013.


References


Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to LanguagePedagogy.Second Edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Cazden, C. B. (2001) Classroom Discourse: The language of Teaching and Learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Farrell Thomas S.C. 2009. Talking, Listening, and Teaching: United States of America: Corwin A SAGE Company.

Iskandar.2009. Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan dan Sosial. Jakarta: Gaung

Kramsch, C. J. (1985). Classroom interaction and discourse options. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(02), 169 – 183.

Lemke, J. L. 1985. Using language in the classroom. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin UniversityPress.(Republished by Oxford University Press, 1989).1990. Talking science: Language, learning, and values. N˜ orwood, NJ: Ablex.

Malamah-Thomas, A. (1987). Classroom Interaction. In: Mingzhi. (2005). Enhancing interaction in our EFL classroom. CELEA Journal Vol. 28

No. 2, pp. 56-62

McKay, S.L. (2006). Researching Second Language Classrooms. London: Lawrence.

Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Michael McCarthy. (2002). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language.

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

Sinclair, J. M. &Coulthard, M. (1992) Towards an analysis of discourse: In M, Coulthard (Ed), Advances in spoken discourse analysis (pp.1-34) London: Routledge.


Article Metrics

 Abstract Views : 2616 times
 PDF Downloaded : 500 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of English Language Teaching

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.