Applied Linguistics

Chapter 2

Teacher- Student Interaction and Classroom Discourse

2.1 A Preliminary Conception

     Participation in the classroom is a required behaviour because it helps students to understand the lecture’s material and decreases their reluctance to speak. But, students’ in-class participation may be impeded by such factors as the teachers’ behaviour or students’ personality traits. In a study conducted by Ganji and Dabbaghi (2014) on this issue at the tertiary level, the findings revealed that the students’ fear of making mistakes in front of their classmates and the tense classroom atmosphere were the most crucial obstacles. It was, therefore, suggested that teachers, especially those who stress classroom participation and consider it to be an activity on its own should implement more practical methods and strategies in order to motivate their students to interact with each and one another, creating an effective classroom discourse. This is only because

Every classroom is an institutional context, and language classrooms are not exceptions. The participants come together to achieve the desired goals of learning and teaching. Thus, classroom discourse is a form of institutional talk and therefore has some certain characteristics. The turn taking system in the classrooms is mostly teacher-fronted, highly constrained, and the relationship between teachers and learners is asymmetrical (ibid, p. 38)

     Rezaee and Farahian (2012) see that there are two types of interaction in the classroom: interaction between the teacher and students and interaction among students, but they emphasize the former “since there is a teacher who initiates by asking questions and there are students who answer” (p. 1237). According to Yanfen and Yuqin (2010, p. 76), in this type of interaction there is “The exchange of thoughts, feelings or ideas, between two or more people in a cooperative manner. Through interaction with the teacher, students can increase their language store and so, improve their knowledge of language as much as possible” (Cited in Rezaee and Farahian, 2012, pp. 1237-1238).

2.2 Fostering Interaction in EFL Classrooms

 

     Al-Zahrani and Al-Bargi (2017) claim that classroom interaction does not only involve far the students’ capacity to speak and express themselves, but it also  covers other types and instances of classroom participation such as teacher-student, student-student, and group discussions. Among other advantages, classroom interaction helps students to engage socially outside of the classroom and facilitates for teachers the task of measuring student progress (p. 136). To foster classroom interaction, Al-Zahrani and Al-Bargi (ibid, p. 138) proposed the following strategies:

* Encourage students to negotiate meaning when they do not understand what is required of them. Negotiation of meaning is a central aspect of classroom interaction, where learners actively involve themselves in interaction.  Negotiation of meaning is defined as the verbal exchanges that occur when speakers seek to prevent the breakdown of communication (Ellis & Barkhuizen, 2005).

* The use of scaffolding. Scaffolding is an instructional technique in which the teacher models the desired learning outcome or task, and then gradually shifts responsibility to the students. Teachers can use reformulation, extension or modeling to increase students’ interaction and encourage their output.

* Feedback can also be used to promote classroom interaction (Mackey, 2007). It can be written or verbal to indicate approval or disapproval of students’ responses. Feedback can be used to encourage or criticize student output performance. Feedback supports learning and allows students to produce additional language during the process.

     Taking into account the belief that there are various strategies to promote language teaching and, at the same time, consider effectively course or lesson objectives, Reyes-Chua and Lidawan (2019) state that “Teachers should conceptualize an instruction that can connect learners into their real world. It is believed that through the use of games, favorable outcomes on students’ language performances may be generated” (p.112). Reyes-Chua and Lidawan (ibid) argue that “Games are useful in language teaching when they are manipulated pedagogically. Nowadays, teachers need to change and adapt to the new learning environment. Students need new and different pedagogical immersions in order to learn and through the aid of games, students can understand the lessons easily and interestingly” (p. 114).

     In addition, in a classroom setting there are roles to be played by the teacher and students. Teachers ask questions (act) and students answer the questions (react); teachers’ questions are very important tools for classroom interaction. Ononye (2015) explains that “The context of classroom interaction requires that teachers introduce or present information in conventionally structured ways, while learners respond or react to the information, especially when invited to do so. This is largely achieved through one important aspect of classroom interaction, namely, teachers’ questions” (p. 370).

 

2.3 Classroom Discourse

 

     Based on both classroom interaction types, as it was mentioned earlier, alongside the classroom tasks and activities, the language used by teachers and students “refers to the oral and written discourse norms, expectations, and strategies that members establish …., the language of the classroom is a group of constructed phenomena, a negotiated system of meaning, and a set of conventions for interacting, participating and communicating information and knowledge within a particular classroom” (Behnam and Pouriran, 2009, p. 118). Differently stated,

Classroom Discourse is a special type of discourse that occurs in classrooms. Special features of classroom discourse include: unequal power relationships, turn-taking at speaking, patterns of interaction, etc. Classroom discourse is often different in form and function from language used in other situations because of particular social roles which learners and teachers have in classrooms and the kind of activities they usually carry out there.

     Knowledge of classroom discourse and its distinctive features, its functions and forms for the different pedagogic activities and situations, will certainly enable teachers and students to overcome several difficulties. It will urge and motivate learners to use the language and participate in conversations inside and outside the class. According to Mehan (1979), a pedagogic discourse includes three structural components: an opening phase which aims to prepare the students for learning a lesson, an instructional phase which consists in the exchange of information between the teacher and students, and a closing phase where the teacher reminds students of the major points of a lesson (Cited in Rezaie and Lashkarian, 2015, pp. 449-450). However, the type of students' and teachers' discourse, its patterns, its strategies, students' and teacher’s roles, and several other relevant elements are dependable on the setting in which they are developed and practiced. “ Therefore, the differences exist in various contexts; the important point is that teachers should make their students aware of these differences, and enhance their awareness of how discourse works to make teaching-learning experience more effective and involve the students in real life communication”(ibid, p. 455).

2.4 Fostering Discourse in EFL Classrooms

 

      Özer and Okran (2018) conducted a study which aimed at determining discourse markers used by Turkish and native teachers in EFL classrooms, especially in terms of their varieties and frequency. The researchers used corpora which were collected through audio-recordings from two Turkish and two native EFL teachers’ lectures. The research results indicated that there is a significant difference in number and type between Turkish teachers’ use (27 types) and native teachers’ use (37 types) of discourse markers. It was also noticed that Turkish teachers use only a small number of discourse markers compared to native teachers. Based on these findings, the authors suggested the following:

* Pre-service teachers can be informed about the implementation of corpus-based activities in their language classrooms since corpus-based activities introduce the language learners with the ways of analyzing real language data.

* The involvement of discourse markers (DMs) in the syllabuses of foreign language teaching curriculums

*The current study suggests implications for material development in the field of foreign language teaching. Discourse markers seem to be the neglected aspects of language in most language teaching materials. Since language teaching materials are expected to represent samples of authentic language, it is important that they include instances of DMs which are natural elements of language.

     As a response to the increasing demand for teaching communicative English in Bangladesh and an attempt to investigate the factors causing students’ failure to develop an acceptable level of English speaking proficiency, Choudhury (2006) carried out a study to examine the state of communicative language teaching in Bangladesh universities and spot light on the need for teachers' training. The study also reconsidered a survey conducted with students from Brac University to identify the problems hindering their ESL speaking abilities (p. 85). In the light of the findings and the theories of communicative competence explored beforehand, the researcher recommended the following:

* Oral communicative abilities can only be formed when students learn English in English, and this can be adopted to a great extent by Communicative Language Teaching with an emphasis on grammar.

* Teaching grammar can be considered to be one of the aspects of communication and teachers need to focus on the acquisition of structures and accuracy.

* Students should be provided with opportunities to develop both their fluency and accuracy.

* We must provide students with fluency building practice and make them realize that making mistakes is a part of learning the target language.

* We need to focus on the fact that doing error correction recurrently amplifies the anxiety level of students and discourages them from communication.

 

     Fisher and Frey (2014) believe that students not only need to talk, but they love to do so. However, what is required here; i.e. in classroom discourse, is some balance between the teacher’s and students’ responsibility for discussions. Namely, students’ discussions with their classmates and their exchange of ideas and questions about various issues are the best ways      to promote interaction. Equally important, they emphasize that only skilled teachers will make students attain deeper understanding, increased engagement, and significant satisfaction with schooling.