TEACHER’S SCAFFOLDING TALK IN ENGLISH CLASS AT SENIOUR HIGH SCHOOL

i

TEACHER’S SCAFFOLDING TALK IN ENGLISH

CLASS AT SENIOUR HIGH SCHOOL

THESIS

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Master Degree of English Education

BY :

SURTIATI

NIM :

2201504008

ENGLISH DEPARTEMENT

STATE UNIVERSITY OF SEMARANG

POST GRADUATE PROGRAM

ii

APPROVAL A THESIS ON

TEACHER’S SCAFFOLDING TALK IN ENGLISH CLASS

AT SENIOUR HIGH SCHOOL

BY :

SURTIATI

NIM :

2201504008

has been approved by the supervisors in order to be presented

and defended in front of the Board of Examiners

Semarang, February 5

th

, 2008

Supervisor I Supervisor II

Helena I. R. Agustien, Ph. D. Prof.A. Maryanto, Ph. D.

iii

THESIS APPROVAL

This thesis has been examined and defended before the Board of Examiners of the Graduate Program of the Semarang State University on:

Day : Tuesday

Date : February 19th, 2008

Board of Examiners

Chairman Secretary

Dr. Ahmad Sopyan, M.Pd. Dra. C. Murni Wahyanti, M.A.

NIP. 131404300 NIP. 130809077

First Examiner Second Examiner

Prof. Mursid Saleh, M.A, Ph.D. Prof. A. Maryanto, M.A., Ph.D.

NIP. 130354512 NIP. 130529509

Third Examiner

Helena I. R. Agustien, Ph. D. NIP. 130812911

iv

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of the university or other institute of higher learning, except where due to acknowledgement has been made in the text.

Semarang, February 2008

v

MOTTO AND DEDICATION

W it h f ull perseverance, great works will be accomplished W ork M ore Talk L ess

Pract ice M akes Perf ect

Dedicated to: The late my mum and dad My beloved brother and sister

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Praise to God the Almighty who has blessed me with enlightenment, perseverance, strength and encouragement at last I have been able to finish my thesis.

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to all my lecturers at English Education Department of the Graduate Program of Semarang State University, especially to Ibu Helena I.R. Agustien, Ph.D. as my first supervisor and Bapak Prof. A. Maryanto, Ph.D. as my second supervisor for their most precious support, guidance, and suggestions so that I succeeded in completing my thesis

My special thank is also for all my classmates at Pps for their wonderful friendship and encouragement, English teachers in SMA Losari Brebes Bapak Sahuri, Ibu Yosi, Ibu Rina for helping me obtain the data for this study, and all my fellow friends that I cannot mention one by one for their support.

On this good opportunity I would like to address for my beloved brother and sister and nephews and nieces for their support and prayer. You mean everything for me.

Hopefully that the thesis could give some values to the English Education Department of the Graduate Program of Semarang State University , the English teachers in Brebes, and those who are interested in this field of study. In the end, I would also welcome any suggestions and criticisms which encourage me to do further study.

vii ABSTRACT

Surtiati. 2008. Teacher’s Scaffolding Talks in English Class at Senior High School. English Studies of Graduate Program, Sate University of Semarang. Supervisor I: Helena I.R.Agustien, Ph.D.and Supervisor II: Prof. A. Maryanto, Ph.D.

Key word: Literacy, teachers’ scaffolding talks ( classroom discourse), zone of proximal development (second language acquisition).

From literacy perspective for foreign language learning in classroom context, the teacher should facilitate the students with more learning experiences involving meaningful communication through classroom interaction. Teachers as the most capable persons in the teaching learning process should be able to provide the students’ learning by using scaffolding talks in Zone of Proximal Development or ZPD for short. In the ZPD it is hoped very much that the students will get their potential level of development.

This study is a discourse study on teachers’ scaffolding talks in classroom interaction. It is qualitative study with three English teachers at SMA Negeri 01 Losari-Brebes who teach the eleventh grade up to the twelfth grade. The data of this study were taken from spoken interaction in classroom context between teachers and students. I recorded twice for each teacher so there are six recordings of teachers’ talks.

The data were analyzed qualitatively through several stages, that is (1) data transcription, (2) data classification, (3) data analysis to find types of scaffolding talks performed, the linguistic features characterizing the scaffolding talks and speech functions used by the teacher, and (4) data interpretations.

Types of scaffolding talks were analyzed based on Afda Walqui, Wood, Bruner, Turney et al. etc. for instance stating the goal, giving attention, prompting, modeling, giving clear direction, explaining, inviting students’ participation, questioning, clarifying students’ understanding, developing students’ understanding, reinforcing, making emphasis, making links, reviewing, evaluating, and showing desired solution. The linguistic features characterizing the teacher’s scaffolding talks were analyzed following the classification suggested by Gerot and Wignel(1995). While the speech functions performed by the teachers were analyzed by using the categories adopted from Halliday(1995) and Slade and Eggins (1997).

The first result shows that the teacher applies scaffolding talks in the teaching learning process with IRE pattern of interaction needing short responses.. The three English teachers perform similar types of scaffolding talks in the classroom discourse suggested by the linguists above. Teacher A in the first and the second data analysis does not perform “stating, gaining attention, prompting, making emphasis, making links, reviewing and evaluating”. The teachers tend to speak Indonesian and local language than English because their English communicative competences are poor. Those poor competences trigger the use of certain speech functions in their scaffolding talks. The explanation is the biggest

viii

amount of frequency of the teacher’s scaffolding talks. It means that the teachers dominate the classroom and just little opportunity given to the students. The class is silent. Except one class in which teacher C teaches in the first turn is rather responsive. They are not considered as good model as they are not capable to speak English well and they can not construe the teaching material well. The second finding shows that the linguistic features characterizing teachers’ scaffolding talks mostly are identifying process and the least is attributive as mentioned by Gerot and Wignel (1995). Mood types are dominated by declaratives and the least is Yes/No questions for the first until the fifth data. While for the sixth data the least is imperative. The third finding shows that the speech functions used by the teachers are statement, question, command and offer. Statement has the biggest amount of speech functions and offer is the least.

Dealing with the result above I want to give some suggestions as follows: The English teachers, teachers’ trainers and students’ of English education make an effort not to dominate the class because the teachers are considered as the most capable persons in the class. They should try hard to speak English while they are teaching in order that the students listen English utterances every time their teachers teach them. They should be able to encourage the students to be able to take part in the classroom discourse actively. They should not make the students scared. They should be able to provide more variation of questions from the easiest one to the most difficult ones. They should be patient to wait for the students response and avoid answering their own questions by using various techniques such as giving enough waiting-time to think of the possible answer, prompting, giving clues, or redirecting to give equal opportunities for the students’ participation. Teachers in front of the class are models as good models they should have good ability to speak English by practicing speaking continuously, willing to read more, to write and to master the basic skills of teaching. In an attempt to improve their performance and also professionalism, they are able to join various kinds of teacher training programs, seminars, symposiums, upgradings, workshops dealing with English teaching. Relating to the linguistic features characterizing scaffolding talks they had better give more variation in using process types not only identifying process and there are some mood types they can use. For speech functions they are able to vary questions with full interrogative instead of the elliptical ones and with command of polar interrogative, declarative or wh-interrogative to give the example to the students.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENT

TITLE ………. i

PAGE of APPROVAL………..……….. ii

PAGE of DECLARATION……… iv

PAGE of MOTTO and DEDICATION………..…..………. v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT …………. ………. vi

ABSTRACT ………. vii

TABLE of CONTENTS …..………. ix

LIST of TABLES ……….. ……… xii

LIST of FIGURES …….………....xiii

TABLE of APPENDICES ………..……….………xiv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ……….……….………. 1

1.1. Background of the Study……….……… 1

1.2. Statement of Problem ……….. 11

1.3. The Reason for Choosing Topic ………….……….... 11

1.4. The Objectives of the Study……… 13

1.5. Research Significance……….……… 14

1.6. Limitation of the Study……… 15

1.7. Outlines of the Study ………..……….. 16

1.8. The Definition of Terms………..…..……… 16

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES …….…… 19

2.1 Communicative Competence…………...………. 23

2.2 Literacy and Language Teaching ………..……….. 26

2.3 Discourse……… 32

2.3.1 The Basic Concepts of Discourse…..……….. 32

2.3.2 Discourse Analysis………..………. 33

2.3.3 Discourse Markers ……… ………..…………....34

2.3.4 Gambits ………..….34

2.4 Language Learning and Language Acquisition, and ZPD………….. 35

2.4.1 Language Learning and Language Acquisition…………... 35

2.4.2 Zone Proximal Development (ZPD) ………... 39

2.5 Types of Talks…………. ………..………... 40

2.5.1 Mothers’ Talk/Motherese……….……… 41

2.5.2 Foreigners’ Talk……….………….. 42

2.5.3 Teachers’ Talk………..…….……….…. 43

2.5.4 Main Talks and Scaffolding Talks……….………... 44

2.5.5 Teachers’ Scaffolding Talks ……….………… 46

2.6 The Characteristics of Scaffolding Talks in Language Teaching….… 49 2.7 Types of Scaffolding Talks………...….. 50

x

2.8 Teacher’s Scaffolding Talks in Classroom………...………….….54

2.8.1 Reinforcement ………...…….…….... .59

2.8.2 Basic Questioning……….60

2.8.3 Advanced Questioning………....……….….62

2.8.4 Explaining ………63

2.8.5 Introductory Procedure and Closure……….68

2.8.5.1 Gaining Attention………...……...…….…...………69

2.8.5.2 Encouraging Motivation…….……….……… 70

2.8.5.3 Structuring………..…………... 71

1. Establishing the Goal………71

2. Giving Direction………. 72

3. Outlying Content……… 72

2.8.5.4 Making Link………...72

2.8.5.5 Reviewing……….. 73

2.8.5.6 Evaluating………...…………74

2.9 Speech Functions, Register, and Code Switching ………. 75

2.9.1 The Concept of Speech Functions …..………..…….…... 75

1. Elicitation ………..………….……...……78

2. Directive ……….…...……… 78

3. Informative………...……..78

2.9.2 Speech Function in Teacher’s Scaffolding Talks ……..….... 80

2.9.3 Classroom Interaction and Teacher’s Role in Teaching Learning Process………. 95

2.9.3.1 Classroom Interaction………. 95

2.9.3.2 Teachers Role in Teaching Learning Process……. 97

2.10 Genre………….……….…………...101

CHAPTER III METHOD OF INVESTIGATION ….…….…………..103

3.1 Subject of the Study………..………..……..104

3.2 Time for Obtaining the Data ………....………..……….105

3.3 Technique of Data Collection ………..………..……..105

3.4 Method of The Study ………...………..….…………106

3.4.1 Method of Data Collection ………...……….…….. 106

3.4.2 Method of Data Analysis ……….………. 109

3.5 Data Interpretation ……….………… .……….111

3.6 Unit of Analysis………..…………...,………..111

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ………… …....113

4.1 Data Analysis ………...…113

4.2 Teachers’ Scaffolding Talks during Teaching Learning Process ………115

4.3 The Linguistic Features Characterizing the Scaffolding Talks …….. … 195

xi

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND PEDAGOGICAL

IMPLICATIONS.……….…...240

5.1 Conclusions………... 240

5.1.1 Types of Scaffolding Talks Carried out by the Teachers…...240

5.1.2 The Linguistic Features Characterizing the Scaffolding Talks ……….………..…...….…243

5.1.3 The Use of Certain Speech Functions in the Teachers’ Scaffolding Talks ……….…..………….. 244

5.2 Pedagogical Implications…..……….…….…………..……. 246

REFERENCES………..……. 249

xii

LIST of TABLES

Table 2.1 ……….48

Table 2.2 ………51

Table 2.3 ………76

Table 2.4 ………77

Table 2.5 ………....84

Table 2.6 ……….…...90

xiii

LIST of FIGURES

Figure 2.1 ………25 Figure 2.2 ………..…..88 Figure 2.3 ………....95

xiv

TABLE OF APPENDICES

A Data Transcription……….. 255

B Teacher’s Scaffolding Talks………... 294

C Types of Scaffolding Talks……… .374

D Mood Analysis………... 443

E Speech Functions Performed in Teachers’ Scaffolding Talks…... 523

F Profiles of Scaffolding Talks/Mood/Speech Functions………… 587

G Percentage of Type of Scaffolding Talks/Linguistic Features/Speech Functions/ The Language Used by the Teachers in the Scaffolding Talks……….. 597

H The Graph of the Language Used by the Teachers in the Scaffolding Talks/Type of Scaffolding Talks/Linguistic Features/Speech Functions Performed by the Teachers in Teachers’ Scaffolding Talks………... 602

1 1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

English is an international language that has been used almost all over the world as a means of communication. It is used either in formal meeting or in informal one. Indonesia is one of the countries in the world that has used English as first foreign language. It has been taught as first foreign language and has become compulsory either in junior or senior high school. Because of that, there is only a little experience for the students in using language throughout several periods of English class in school week.

Related to the statements above, English teachers should work hard how to make the students able to accomplish the goal stated by the teachers. In this case, the teachers can give more learning experience in teaching and learning process and expose the students a lot in using English so that it will make the students easy to pass through the bridge without any difficulties.

Talking about giving more learning experience and exposure to English, we can find them a lot in teaching learning process based on the English curriculum 2006 whose embryo is from English curriculum 2004. In this curriculum the teachers are given more freedom to design the syllabus according to the condition of the school and the class. Applying this curriculum the teachers should give more learning experience and exposure to English as English in Indonesia considered as the first foreign language where the students cannot speak

language in naturally. By doing so, it will help a lot to the student to accomplish the target language well. Besides, this curriculum is based on the communicative competence model from Celce Murcia et al. (1995). It also suggests level of literacy after the students graduate from their school, and the difference between oral language and written language.

As we know that, English Curriculum 2006 whose embryo is from curriculum 2004 states that the goal of English teaching leaarning process in senior high school is: by the end of the study the students are expected to be able to communicate in English with the level of literacy not only performative and functional level but also informational level.

In the performative level the students are expected to be able to read and write. In the functional level they are expected to have ability to use the language for communication or for survival. While in the informational level they are expected to be able to access knowledge with their language as they are prepared to continue to the university.

Talking about communicative above, Celce Murcia, et al. (1995) developed competency models (see figure 2.1). They say that competency to communicate is the ability to create and understand the discourse. A discourse is a text, either spoken or written having context of situation or context of culture. This competence is supported by linguistic competence, actional competence, sociocultural competence, and strategic competence.

Besides the statements above, literacy also involves the creation of discourse. To make clear the meaning of literacy, here is the basic concept of

literacy. Literacy is the ability to read and write (Holme, 2004). In a broad sense the definition of literacy is the ability to communicate orally, to write, and to be actively involved in the discussion. Not just that, literate people mean that they are not only able to read and write but to listen and speak as well and to do what they read, write, listen, and speak.

Related to the statement above, Wilkinson (1965, in Corden 2000) suggests that speaking and listening to be much more prominence and to be included in the conception of literacy. Based on the definition of literacy above, I can say that literacy is not only the ability to read and write but also the ability to listen and speak and how to apply them. To achieve the level of literacy like what the curriculum expects, the role of teachers here are very important. Their roles are to mediate the students to be able to achieve the target language well with various ways, such as applying suitable approach and methods; giving a good model; selecting a suitable strategy; giving more learning experience; etc.

Dealing with scaffolding talks, Vygotsky in Gibbon (2002:10) claims that the only good learning is learning that ahead of actual development. It has the meaning that the tasks given to the students should be at their potential level. The area in which the students need scaffolding talks from teachers to complete their talks is called ZPD. ZPD stands for Zone of Proximal Development. Further, he also suggests that the ZPD is the difference between the child’s capacity to solve problems by itself, and his capacity to overcome them with the help of other persons. Other persons here could be adults, such as: parents, teachers, caretakers,

language instructors or other peers who have already mastered that particular function.

In line with the ZPD in teaching learning process, Vygosky and Bruner in Corden (2000) propose that ZPD is the zone in which the learning acquisition is accomplished through teachers’ guidance and collaboration with more capable peers. To realize this, good teachers should make a good preparation and intervene appropriately and effectively. Guidance, a support and an aid from teachers are very useful to achieve the desired expression. If the main talks are achieved, the goal expected by the teacher can be achieved well too.

Those statements can be accomplished if the teachers are able to give an appropriate guidance, help, support and facilities and willingly to make a good preparation before teaching. The good preparation will make the teachers easy to present their teaching learning process. If the teaching learning process is successfully done, the main talks will be achieved easily too. It means that the students reach desired expressions without any difficulties.

As we know that the desired expressions are in the area of ZPD. So the role of the assistants is very important to scaffold the students to reach the target language expected. The assistants here are teachers because scaffolding talks take place in teaching learning process. The teachers should be able to mediate independent learning zone or student’s knowledge by using scaffolding talks. If the teachers are able to use the scaffolding talks properly the desired expression will be able to be accomplished well without any difficulties.

Scaffolding talks are an aid to the learners by providing the words or by probing to open the way to the learners in order easily to achieve the desired expressions. In this case, the teachers should be able to be good assistants, facilitators and guides in order to be able to mediate their students across the bridge safely to accomplish the main talks or desired expression more easily. Related to the statements above (Anderson, 2003) proposes that scaffolding talks are good guidance for teachers in construction of a semantic unit.

In accordance to the statements above, an attempt to reform and to improve English teaching, teachers of English have paid much attention to teaching and learning process. To be successful in achieving it, teachers of English should be able to scaffold well. To scaffold means teachers of English can be good mediators, good assistants, good guides and good models for their students.

It is not an easy way to become good models, good mediators, good assistants, and good guides. They should prepare them well by learning, attending training, attending an up grading and practicing more as a proverb says that practice makes perfect. In this case, teachers of English should not only master teaching materials but the language used in transforming their language skill and knowledge as well. Those who are lack of skills and knowledge may face difficulties in doing it but for those who are competent enough will be successful to achieve it.

In line with scaffolding talk, Bruner (in Roy Corden, 2000) states that scaffolding talk is also highly interactive, with constant interplay between teacher

and students in the joint completion of dialogue. The dialogue is crucial to the process for this is how support is provided and adjusted. In short, it can be said that with scaffolding talks the participation and the interaction of the students are high, so the goal that the teachers expected can be achieved.

Based on the explanation above, it can be said that before the teachers’ of English enter the main talk, it is better to have scaffolding talks as a guide to construct of a piece of a discourse. With this guidance, it will be easy for students to follow the lesson.

Additionally, scaffolding talks can make the students interested in the tasks given; can help the students overcome their frustration in doing the exercises during the tasks; and can make them more competent. Scaffolding talks mediate the students to achieve the desired expression. If the desired expression can be accomplished, teachers of English will be easy to enter the main talk. If the main talk is successfully done, the goal the teacher established can be accomplished well too. It means that students / learners’ acquisition can be accomplished too. In other words, they can acquire the target language they learn. In a broad sense, the goal of teaching and learning process will be achieved well too.

Related to the statements above, competent English teachers are needed badly in order that they can help the students to be successful either in doing final exam, in the society or in continuing to the next education. Competent English teachers are able to employ scaffolding talks easily in their lesson whereas those who are lack of vocabulary, lack of skill and knowledge may find it difficult in employing it. The key success of the students depends on the teachers. To support

this opinion, Mercer and Fisher (1992: 342) in Corden (2000) claim that the key factor in determining children’s learning potential will be nature of discourse and the quality of the teachers’ intervention.

In accordance with to key success of the students above, Vygosky and Bruner in Corden (2000) say that through teacher’s intervention and scaffolding strategies by modeling, demonstrating, and supporting the students as they learn and practice procedures to achieve desired expressions. Therefore, the teachers should work hard to be able to become competent teachers by learning more and more by following: training; an up grading; seminar; and symposium etc, and practicing more and more in order to be good models.

As we know that teachers talks during the lesson at the school are delivered in English , in Javanese, or in Indonesian. It happens because some teachers of English are lack of confidence to speak English or because their students are not able to catch what their English teachers are talking about. Besides that in our daily habits, we are always tempted to communicate by using English. Because of the situation is not conducive, it is hard for the teachers of English to speak English well.

In general, scaffolding talks in English are rarely used in Brebes as the writer observed several months ago, especially at the school. The teachers tend to order them direct to the point, e.g open the worksheet/textbook, dothe exercise on page 10. The teachers only sit. After that they ask each student to read the answer and the teacher correct any mistake. They almost never give brain storming as

warming up to their students in pre-teaching, so the students have not been ready to follow the lessons well.

Because of that, the students tend to be a passive students and do not understand what the teachers explain and say. It can be seen that if anybody who can speak English asks the students in English they only smile. They cannot follow the lesson well because the teachers cannot convey the desired expressions. Related to the role of English teachers, in 2006 Curriculum of English it is stated that in teaching and learning English, teachers are as assistants and the facilitators. The subjects are the students. Let them do by themselves in teaching learning process. The teachers help the students when they need help. They only open the way to reach the main talk or desired expression by employing scaffolding talks. In order that they feel more freedom to do, so they will gain their acquisition much better.

Accordingly teachers are as assistants and facilitators. Ellis (1990) in his book says that in teaching learning process teachers must be able to ensure their learners not to feel anxious and they have to be able to make the learners relax and confident in order that comprehensible inputs can get easily into their mind. Because of that, the students can do the activities actively and focus on self-experience.

Learning experiences are important for each student in learning English. As teachers, we should help expose them a lot in using English especially how the English teachers scaffold the lesson before they reach to the main talk. In this case, the English teachers should be able to help them build their English

knowledge and understanding of how English fits together. To make the student relax, confident, free and more initiatives, the teachers provide a richer learning environment than would occur if we are just being facilitators, and we help each of them reach beyond their present level (Paul, 2003)

Based on the statements above, it can be said that teachers’ talks are very important in any English classes. It does not mean that teachers will dominate the talk so that the students have very few opportunities to speak but the teachers can talk just to open the way toward the main talk. Related to teachers’ talk (Harmer, 1998) says that good teachers maximize students talking time and minimize teacher-talking time.

In this case, teachers do not dominate the class but only to open the way for the students to talk in order that they can reach the desired expression/ the main talk easily. The more learning experience the students get the easier for the students to achieve the main talk. If the teachers become the students’ partners, assistants, consultants and facilitators, the students will be ready to achieve the main talks easily. In short, I can say that they only speak and help the students when it is needed.

Teachers are not the only the decision markers in teaching and learning process since students become their partners, coaches, facilitators, and guides so the students will be more independent, have more initiation and are not worried to their teachers, Celce Murcia et al. (2000:17). It does not mean that almost in any lesson teachers tend to dominate the talk so the opportunity to speak for the students is very little. If the domination of teachers’ talks happen in teaching and

learning process it will restrict the students attributive turn, not only that but also delimit the range of discourse function that they perform. In this situation teacher’s talk occurs in one to many interaction, where the level of proficiency is various and where there are only a few students to give feedback (Ellis, 1985)

If the situation above happens in teaching and learning process to have students active will never occur. The new paradigm of teaching and learning process, teachers are as facilitators, just opening the way to reach the desired. Therefore, the goal to make students active not be realized. It means that the level of literacy of the students as stated in the English curriculum 2006 is not able to be accomplished too.

Because of that, scaffolding talk is needed badly in English class especially at the school. From now on, it is better for the teachers to start employing scaffolding talk before reaching the main talk. Here, the role of teachers is as the bridge to mediate the students to reach desired expression. In order to reach it they should practice more and try as hard as possible without giving up until they are successful.

Based on the facts above, it encourages me to conduct research on teachers’ scaffolding talks, as teachers are main key success of the students in teaching learning process. The writer takes the data of teachers’ scaffolding talks in teaching learning process of English classes from opening until closing activities at the school.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Based on the background above, the problem in this study can be stated as follows:

1. What types of scaffolding talks do the English teachers carry out during the teaching and learning process?

2. What linguistic features characterize the scaffolding talks during the teaching and learning process?

3. What speech functions are realized in the scaffolding talks during the teaching and learning process?

1.3 THE REASON FOR CHOOSING THE TOPIC

Up to now, most of the students at the school are still passive English learners. They do not understand what their English teachers are talking about. They cannot speak and write in English well. It means that the level of the students’ literacy in English is still very low.

In line with the statements above, most of teachers of English are conventional teachers. They rarely speak English so the students can not speak English. (1)They rarely speak English because they worry about making mistakes; and are lack of skill to speak. (2) They tend to speak Javanese, Indonesian, instead of English. (3) They are not patient in guiding them to speak. (4) They tend to answer their own questions. (5) The failure of Unnas caused by English in the academic year of 2002/2003 up to 2006/2007.

Besides that, the teachers of English there are reluctant to prepare teaching and learning process before teaching. Some of them almost never learn more to enhance their own competence after they graduated from their university. The ability to transform their speaking ability they got from the university to their students is still low too. Therefore, their students’ ability in speaking is also low.

To solve that problem the teachers of English have to learn to speak and practice more and more until they can speak. They have to prepare well and willing to learn more. When it happens, it will open the way to be successful. In order to be successful in making their students talk, the teachers should talk to their students. They have to use scaffolding talk as a bridge and help to achieve the main talk easily in their English class. As scaffolding talk is a good guide for teacher in constructing a text (Anderson, 2003:52). A text here is a medium of expression either spoken or written. In brief a text is essentially a semantic unit ( Halliday, 1985:10). Teachers’ scaffolding talk will make students fully involved so at a certain time they will be automatically active without any pressure from their English teachers. The students feel relax but improve their ability in speaking because of their teachers guide in constructing oral discourse.

As long as I am concerned, conducting research on the topic scaffolding talk is still rare in Brebes so to conduct it on teachers’ scaffolding talks at the school will be very useful for students, teachers of English either at the school or teachers of English in Brebes. I conduct research on the topic of teachers’ scaffolding talks, for the following reasons:

1. Teachers who are trying to improve their competent and the level of literacy of the students.

2. The institution for developing the curriculum and the course content related to the teaching of English at senior high school.

3. The students in facing final exam; for the future study or job.

Besides that, I am very much curious to know whether the teachers of English at the school use English during teaching and learning process. The English used should be focused on discourse competence such as linguistic competence, actional competence, sociocultural competence and strategic competence or not.

By doing so I intend to make a group of discussion at the school to discuss what difficulties faced by the English teachers in the field in order that the teachers are able to improve their competence; especially in applying teachers’ scaffolding talks in each class they have. They should enhance the quality of teaching learning as well as the quality of students’ learning so the students will be successful in facing the future.

1.4 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

Based on the problem given above, the objectives of the study are as follows: 1. To describe the types of scaffolding talks the teachers carry out during the

teaching and learning process.

2. To describe linguistic features characterizing the scaffolding talks during the teaching and learning process.

3. To explain the speech functions realized in the scaffolding talks during the teaching and learning process.

1.5 RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE

The topic above is necessary to be investigated because it is certainly useful for the teacher education institution in preparing English teachers. To unfold the advantages of the research above for the theories and practice, the following are the advantages either for theory or practice.

1. The advantage for theory is to give more information in the study of discourse, especially classroom discourse.

2. The advantage for practice is

a. it will be useful for teachers of English in general, especially for teachers of English at the school;

b. to understand the types of scaffolding talks in teaching English at senior high school;

c. to understand how to carry out scaffolding talks in English during the teaching and learning process;

d. to understand linguistic features characterizing the scaffolding talks during the teaching and learning process;

e. to understand speech functions realizing the scaffolding talks during the teaching and learning process;

f. to enrich references of teaching and to enhance the teaching of English at the school.

3. For the students is to learn more about linguistic features in spoken discourse. 4. For the institution is to be useful for developing the curriculum and the course

content related to the teaching of English at the school.

1.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

To limit the wide range of topic, the writer only discusses several points, particularly:

1. the subject to be observed are focused on teachers’ scaffolding talks in teaching and learning process from opening until closing activities in English class conducted at the school in academic year 2006/2007.

2. I analyze teachers’ scaffolding talks in teaching and learning process from opening until closing activities in English class with regard to discourse analysis, from the tenth grade up to twelfth grade using 2006 English Curriculum. The location of the research is at the school in the academic year 2006/2007.

3. I analyze the different types of teachers’ scaffolding talks, linguistics features characterizing the scaffolding talks and the speech functions realized in the scaffolding talks. They are based on teaching and learning process from opening until closing activities in English class with regard to discourse analysis, from the tenth grade up to twelfth grade at the school in the academic year 2006/2007.

1.7 OUTLINES OF THE STUDY

1. Chapter I is an introduction. It consists of the background of the research, the reason for choosing the topic, research questions, the objective of the study, limitation of the study, significance of the research, the outlines of the study, and the definition terms.

2. Chapter II is review of related literatures. It covers various theories, which support this research and give the overview of the framework forming bases of conducting this research.

3. Chapter III presents the methods

4. Chapter IV covers presentation of the analysis and its interpretation. 5. Chapter V presents the conclusions and pedagogical implications.

1.8 THE DEFINITION OF TERMS

To avoid misinterpretation dealing with the topic discussed, I present the definition of each key word or phrase stated in the writing.

1.8.1 Scaffolding talk according to Richard et al (1992:321) are “the building up of target language structure over several turns in an interaction. In short, scaffolding is to make a hearer comprehend a speaker’s meaning, the speaker needs to express the meaning segment by segment and organize those segments in a linear fashion according to the socially acceptable structure.

1.8.2 Literacy in this study is the ability to communicate actively in a foreign language based on literacy principles such as interpretation, collaboration,

convention, cultural knowledge, problem solving, reflection and self reflection, and language use.

1.8.3 Discourse is a text, either spoken or written in a certain context. The certain text consists of context of situation and context of culture. Context of situation is register and context of culture is genre Eggins (1994). 1.8.4 Discourse analysis according to Brown and Yule in Schriffrin (1994:31) is

the analysis of language in use. Deep analysis of discourse is based on the kinds of linguistic features, such as conversational gambits, the use of discourse markers, mood & modality, etc. ( Coulthard 1997).

1.8.5 Teacher’s talks in the classroom setting occur between the teacher and the students and usually the interaction take place not only in one - to one interactions but also in one - to many interactions depending on the number of students involved in the teaching and learning process. (Agustien, 2000 ).

1.8.6 Linguistic features. It is called linguistics as the forms employed in analyzing the teachers talk. The forms can be formulaic expressions, such as: gambits, pattern of speech functions, mood and modality, transitivity, discourse markers etc.

1.8.7 Speech functions. Four basic types of moves such as : statement, questions, offers and command are called speech functions (Halliday 1994).Four basic types of moves interactants can make a piece of dialogue. The speech function in details can see speech function network in the appendix.

1.8.8 Discourse markers are expressions, which signal a sequential relationship between the current message and the previous discourse Fraser (1990:383).

1.8.9 ZPD stands for Zone of Proximal Development. It is the difference between the students’ actual development level determined by their capability to master the tasks independently and their potential development level determined by the capability to complete the tasks under the help of teachers or more capable peers. In the ZPD the teachers provide the students’ tasks beyond their actual development which only can be completed by the help of teachers or more capable peers.

1.8.10 Genre is a text type ( Martin J.R 1992 ). In these study teachers’ scaffolding talks are spoken discourse so they belong to spoken text types. It can be said that the genre in this study is spoken.

1.8.11 Register is a set of vocabulary items, associated with discrete occupational or social group. (Wardaugh 1998 : 48).

1.8.12 Teachers in this study are the English teachers of SMA Negeri 01 Losari-Brebes

19

In the review of literatures I discuss not only discourse, basic concept of discourse, discourse analysis, classroom discourse, discourse markers but also scaffolding talks, teachers’ talks, linguistic features realized in the scaffolding talks and speech functions in scaffolding talks.

Since there are many linguists who have different opinions about those components. I emphasize on working definition from Roy Corden (2000) and Gibbon (2002), (Turney et al.1983), etc. for scaffolding talks. Linguistic features, such as gambits Eric Keller (1988); mood, modality and transitivity (Gerot and Wignell 1995); discourse markers (Fraser 1990), and speech function in the scaffolding talks (Slade and Eggins1997) and other theories which are relevant to this study. I think those definitions are manageable and teachable. In order to know about the theories given by the linguists, the following I present short explanations based on the theories of the experts.

Scaffolding talks provide help, support, guidance, model, facilities to build up an interaction at a target language structure over several turns. Initially in language learning, students may not be able to produce certain structures within single utterances, but may build them through interaction with other speaker. In short, it can be said that scaffolding talk is used to make students comprehend (teacher’s) meaning, the (teacher) need to express the meaning step by step and to

organize those steps in a linear fashion according to the socially acceptable structure.

The scaffolding is to help the students by providing the words or by probing to open the way to the students to achieve the desired expression. Besides, the teachers should be good models, good mediators, good facilitators and good guides in order that the learners can cross the bridge safely without any difficulties. The bridge here is the scaffolding itself in which the students have to pass it to reach desired expression.

In the scaffolding talk, teachers should be able to provide a lot of experience, which is useful for the students. By having a lot of exposures in English and learning experiences in the teaching and learning process, the students are ready to follow the classroom discourse well, so the classroom discourse runs smoothly without any difficulties. It means that they achieve the desired expressions easily.

Teachers’ talks in the classroom discourse is divided into two namely, main talks and scaffolding talks. To reach the main talk teachers need to use the scaffolding talk. In scaffolding talks, teachers should be able to provide help, support, guidance, model, facilities to build up an interaction at a target language structure over several turns. Initially in language learning, learners may not be able to produce certain structure within a single utterance, but may build them through interaction with other speaker.

In line with scaffolding talks, it is also important to involve scaffolding talks in discourse as scaffolding talks are part of discourse, especially in spoken

discourse as Eggin (1994) defines that discourse is a text, either spoken or written, in context of situation (register) and context of culture (genre). Genre is a text type. The scaffolding talks are text types which belong to spoken discourse or spoken text types. It can be said that genre in this study is spoken.

Concerning with spoken discourse, which takes place in the classroom, it also includes the talks about an oral communication between teachers and the students. They interact each other perform their ability in communication. To make it clear it will be important to elaborate the concept of communicative competence from Celce-Murcia (1995).

Referring to discourse analysis I also need theory of moves because four basic types of moves such as : statements, questions, offers and commands are called speech functions. The unit of analysis in this study is clauses used by the teachers either in English or in Indonesian or even in Javanese. Because of the speech functions in the study is in Indonesian and English or even in Javanese so the theory of code switching is also needed here, especially for situational code switching. The definition of code switching is that communications between two or more parties. Situational code – switching takes place when the conversants speak in one language in one situation and another in a different one.

As we know that scaffolding talks are the support, help, guidance giving some facilities to the students to reach the desired expressions. The desired expressions here are in the area of ZPD. ZPD stands for Zone of Proximal Development. The ZPD in this study is the second language acquisition itself in which the students acquire the target language. To reach the desired expression; in

the ZPD the teachers should be able to use the scaffolding talks properly to pass through language learning process in the class. I also need theory of language learning, second language learning & the ZPD in this study.

Talking about scaffolding talks under this study cannot be separated from communication. Scaffolding talks take place because of the communication between teachers and the students in the classroom discourse. Classroom discourse is called a lesson.

In line with classroom discourse or a lesson, there is a relationship between classroom discourse and communication as communication consists of negotiation, several turns, moves, mood, modality, transitivity and conversational gambits to form a classroom discourse or a lesson. The communication in classroom discourse or a lesson occurs in nature that is in classroom setting so the theories of conversational gambits, communicative competence, turns, move, mood and modality, transitivity, discourse markers and also discourse, discourse analysis and classroom discourse are needed in this study.

Other theories which are relevant to this study, such as motherese, foreigners’ talks, teachers’ talks, main talks, scaffolding talks, speech functions, register, code switching, classroom interaction, teachers’ role in teaching learning process and genre are also needed in this study.

Referring to the theories presented above it will be easy for the writer to conduct this study. Those theories are badly needed to back up and support what the writer is done in analyzing scaffolding talk in this study. The theories are relevant to conduct this study on the topic teachers’ scaffolding talks. I hope I face

no difficulties, especially in reviewing related literatures and making the report of this research clear, true and accountable.

To make the theories above clear and accountable, it is important to elaborate the concept of theories needed in this study.

2.1 COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE

Discussing an oral interactional activity in a classroom means that it talks about an oral communication or a conversation between teachers and the students. They interact each other to perform their ability in communication to create a communication competence. To make it clear it is important to elaborate the concept of communicative competence

Concerning the statements above, Celce-Murcia et al. (1995) propose five items of communicative competence, as follows,

1. Grammatical competence is the aspect of communicative competence that deals with knowledge of lexical item and rule of morphology, syntax, sentence structure, and phonology. Grammar is considered as an important component of communicative competence.

2. Discourse competence is ability of participants to connect sentences in stretch of spoken and written discourse and form of a meaningful series of utterances, they also have to make use of their own knowledge to express their ideas and opinions in the communication.

3. Sociolinguistic competence covers all the participants’ role requiring or understanding of social context in which language is used such the role of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction. 4. Strategic competence encompasses the full spectrum of the construct by

manipulating the language in order that communicative goals run smoothly without any occurrences communication breakdowns.

5. Actional competence as a new competence which has the meaning to convey and understanding communicative intent by performing and interpreting speech act, speech act sets, and discourse competence.

Dealing with the statement above, Celce Murcia et al. (1995) suggest there are two main components of actional competence domain namely:

a. Language functions cover seven areas such as interpersonal exchange, information, opinions, feelings, suasion, problems, and further scenarios.

b. Knowledge of speech act sets: most of the patterns of interaction surrounding a particular speech act are conventionalized and many of these larger units have referred to a speech act set, verbal exchange pattern, or speech event. In order that the language learners can use language function in context well, they should be familiar with how individual speech acts are integrated into higher level of communication system. Therefore, actional competence covers knowledge of how speech acts and language functions can be patterned and sequenced in real life situation.

Relating to the statements above Celce-Murcia et al.(1995) propose a communicative model. It illustrates the schematic representation of

communicative competence as a pyramid enclosing circle and surrounded by another circle, the circle within the pyramid is discourse competence and the these points of the triangle one are sociocultural competence, linguistic competence and actional competence. While strategic competence is in the big circle as the following schematic representation of communicative competence

Discourse competence

Linguistic Competence

Actional Competence Socio

Cultural Competence

Strategic Competence

Figure 2.1. Schematic Representation of Communicative Competence, quoted from Celce-Murcia et al. (1995:10)

2.2 LITERACY IN LANGUAGE TEACHING

Literacy is also involved in creating discourse. To make clear the meaning of literacy, here is its basic concept. Literacy is the ability to read and write (Holme, 2004). In a broad sense the definition of literacy is the ability to communicate orally, writtenly and actively involved. Not just that, literate people mean that they are not only able to read and write but also to listen and speak, as well as to do what they read, write, listen, and speak.

Related to the statement above, Wilkinson (1965) in Corden (2000) coins that speaking and listening to be much more prominent and to be included in the conception of literacy. Based on the definition of literacy above, I can say that literacy is not only the ability to read and write but also the ability to listen and speak and how to apply them.

In 2006 English Curriculum, whose the embryo is 2004 Curriculum, states that the goal of English teaching and learning process in senior high school is that by the end of the study the students are expected to be able to communicate in English with the level of literacy not only performative and functional level but also informational level. In the performative level, the students are expected to be able to read and write. In the functional level, they are expected to have ability to use the language for communication or for survival, such as reading newspaper they are interested in, etc. While in the informational level, they are expected to be able to access knowledge using English as they are prepared to continue to the university. Consequently, it is important for SMA students to develop the knowledge through their language by having skills on

reading and writing as the basic knowledge if they want to continue to the university.

Reading and writing from literacy perspective is the ability to interpret and create English text either spoken or written. In addition, Kern (2000) claims that “Instructional activities emphasize interpendence among four language skills such as: listening, speaking, reading and writing and focus on linguistics form, situational context, and communicative and expressive functions”

The principles of literacy in the context of academic language teaching which is described by Kern (2000: 16 – 17).

1. Literacy involves interpretation. Speakers/Writers and listeners/readers take part in double acts of interpretation - the speaker/writer interprets the world, such as experiences, ideas, etc. The listener/reader interprets the speaker/writer interpretation in terms of his or her conception of the world. 2. Literacy involves collaboration. Writers not only write for the readers but also

write for themselves. Their decisions about what he/she wrote and said are based on the need and their understanding of their audience. Readers in turn must contribute their motivation, knowledge, and experience in order to make the writer’s text meaningful.

3. Literacy involves convention. The people read and write text regulated by cultural convention that change through use and are modified for individual purposes.

4. Literacy involves cultural knowledge. Reading and writing function within particular systems of attitude, beliefs, customs, ideals, and values. Readers and

writers were operating from outside a given cultural system risks misunderstanding or to be misunderstood by those operating on the inside of cultural system.

5. Literacy involves problem solving. Words are always embedded in linguistic and situational contexts; reading and writing involve figuring out relationships between larger units of meaning, and between texts and real or imagined worlds.

6. Literacy involves reflection and self-reflection. Readers and writers think about language and its relation to the world and themselves.

7. Literacy involves language use. Literacy is not only about writing system, lexical and grammatical knowledge but also requiring knowledge of how language is used in spoken and written contexts to create discourse.

The seven principles above can be summarized into the macro principle of literacy, that is communication. It has important implication for language teaching, as it provides a bridge to span the gap that so often separates introductory communicative language and advanced ‘literacy’ teaching. In this case, the teachers should be able to develop the students’ ability to communicate in English, think and see the world differently.

In line with literacy Wells (1987) claims that there are four levels of literacy, namely: performative, function, informational and epistemic Well (1991), Grant (1986), and Freebody and Luke (1990) in Hammond et al. (1992: 9 -10). To unfold the concept of literacy level above, it can be seen as follows:

1. Performative

“The emphasis at this level is on the code as code. Becoming literate, according to this perspective, is simply a matter of acquiring those skills that allow a written message to be coded into speech in order to ascertain its meaning and those skills that allow a spoken message to be decoded in writing according to the conventions of letter formulation, spelling and punctuations. At the performative level, it is tacitly assumed that written message differs from spoken message only in the medium employed for communication”

2. Functional

“This perspective emphasizes the uses that are made of literacy in interpersonal communication. To be literate, according to this perspective is able as a member of that particular society to cope with the demands of everyday lives that involve written language”.

3. Informational

“At this level, the curricular emphasis is on reading and writing – but particularly reading is on the student’s use for accessing the accumulated knowledge that is seen as the function of school to transmit”.

4. Epistemic

“At each for the preceding levels, but particularly at second and third, the concern is with literacy as mode of communication. However, to focus only on interpersonal communicative functions of literacy I fail to recognize the changes that reading and writing can make in the mental lives of individuals, and by extension, of the societies to which those individuals belong. The fourth perspective is to have available ways of acting upon and transforming knowledge and experience that are in general unavailable to those who never learned to read and write”

Based on the statement above the English teachers must work hard to be able to mediate their students to accomplish their literacy level based on their academic development as stated in curriculum 2006. The SMA graduates must be able to accomplish the literacy level of communication not only performative and functions level but also informational level as they prepare to continue to the university. In the informational level, the students are expected to be able to

access knowledge using English. In this case, the teachers should have skills to select material and execute learning activities appropriately in order that students can achieve the literacy level as stated in the curriculum 2006 well.

According to English Curriculum 2006, language is developed based on either context of culture or context of situation. It is characterized by of field (what is being talked or written about, (b) tenor (the relationship between speaker and listener or the writer and reader), (c) mode ( whether the language is spoken or written), context of culture produces various kinds of text and this is called genre. In learning English the student are engaged in interpreting and creating those texts in English genre, which are not the same as ours. Consequently English language teaching stated in Curriculum 2006 for SMA and SMP is genre based. This curriculum suggests two cycles, that is spoken cycle and written cycle. Each consists of four stages. The four stages are building knowledge of the field, modeling of the text, joint construction of the text and independent construction of the text.

The students learn English in the classroom from spoken cycle. Because of that, it is difficult for the teacher to develop students writing skill if they have not mastered the spoken language first. Written language is not oral language, which is written. They are different in certain aspects. Spoken or oral language consists of a lot of verbs complicated relation between sentences, various kinds of conversational gambits, fillers, etc; whereas written language involves lexical density and many complicated noun phrases, nominalization, etc.

Regarding the statements above spoken language at SMA level is developed throughout more formal and complicated text including the use of gambits, modals, discourse markers and linguistic features, such as: mood, transitivity, etc. The written text is expected to be produced at grade twelve. Those who do not reach the written skill and spoken skill meaning that the teachers do not have an ability to mediate their students to reach the target language expected.

To accomplish the literacy level stated by the curriculum during the learning process the teachers must be able to mediate the students to expose, to engage with spoken and written English in various contexts and to provide opportunities for their involvement during lesson. By the end of the twelfth grade, the students can reach the level of literacy in informational level as stated in the curriculum.

In the teaching learning process, providing learning experiences for the student is the most important factor. The more learning experiences the student get the easier for the student to reach the target language, as Willkinson and Silliman (2000) say that students must be given moral chances to integral oral and written language in the classroom because these learning experiences will encourage the development of literacy. Therefore, as English teachers, we must be able to give number of exposure to the students in order to help and support students to accomplish the level of literacy expected in the curriculum. Even if with different background of the students, the English teachers should consider

their ability in using their language and equip themselves with basic skills of teaching learning English.

2.3 DISCOURSE

To make the meaning of discourse clear, in this part, I will unfold the basic concept of discourse, discourse analysis and a classroom discourse. Here is the definition of the terms above by some linguists:

2.3.1 The Basic Concepts of Discourse

Regarding the concept of discourse, Fasold (1994:65) in Schiffrin (1994), defines that a discourse is the study of language in use. While according to Crystal (1992: 25, in Nunan 1993: 5) states that discourse as a continuous stretch of (especially spoken) language larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit, such as sermons, arguments, jokes or narratives. Another expert, Cook (1989: 56, in Nunan 1993:3) points out that discourse is stretches of language perceived to be meaningful, unified and purposive.

However, Nunan (1993:6) says that discourse is the interpretation of the communicative event in context. He separates discourse from the term text that refers to any written record of communicative event that involves oral language such as : sermon, a casual conversation, a shopping transaction or written language for example; a poem, a newspaper, an advertisement, a wall poster, a shopping list, a novel. Some experts argue that ‘discourse’ is language in action while text is written record that interacts the writer and the reader. Other expert,

Stubbs (1993:1) mentions that discourse is language above the sentence or above the clause renders an abstract view for the teachers of English.

Based on the definition of the experts above it can be said that discourse is the application of language and culture consisting as little as one word or two words. The statements stated by Stubbs and Schriffrin are relevant to the subject matter defined above as a system either socially and culturally organized of any speaking which is realized through particular functions. Besides, the definition about discourse made by Cook is also included in the study as Cook has given a view of discourse as language in use for communication.

2.3.2 Discourse Analysis

Some experts still argue about discourse. They say that discourse is language in action while text is the written record of that interaction which leads the writer to explore more and makes further clarification of text analysis and discourse analysis. Brown and Yule in Schriffin (1994:31) point out that discourse is the analysis of language in use. Their opinion is supported by Celce Murcia et al. (2000:4) say that discourse analysis is minimally the study of language in use that extend beyond sentence boundaries.

Referring to the concept above Nunan (1997:7) also states that discourse analysis is the analysis of language in use that the aim of analytical write is to show and to interpret the relationship between regularities of language and the meanings and the purpose realized through discourse. While discourse analysis according to John Stone (2001:2) is the study of language, in daily sense which

most people use the form. Swales (1997: 1) defines that genre (type of text) analysis is a means of studying spoken or written discourse.

Based on the fact above, it is obvious that text analysis or discourse analysis is a medium of analyzing spoken or written discourse. It can be said that there are no differences between discourse and text from language point of view. In this study, the discourse analysis is as device form of analyzing communicative event, as the subject under this study is teachers’ scaffolding talks, which belong to spoken text type or spoken discourse.

2.3.3 Discourse Markers

Discourse markers are expressions, which signal a sequential relationship between the current message and the previous discourse (Bruce, 1990: 383). Those expressions are for instance now, well, however, then, yes, ok, etc. The discourse markers are used to separate teachers’ scaffolding talks from the teachers’ talks. In this study, I use those discourse markers to separate teachers’ scaffolding talks from the teachers’ talks.

2.3.4 Gambits

Gambits are one of the elements in discourse analysis. Keller (1988) divides 3 types of gambits such as opening gambits, linking ambits and responding gambits. Opening gambits are used to help the conversant introduce ideas into the conversation they make. Typically when a conversation occurs the conversant can only talk about the same topic for a short time. Then they must move in a different direction. Linking gambits are usually used in order the listener will be more prepared for the arguments and views of the speakers.

Responding gambits according to Warner (1988) is that successful conversation depends partly on how the listener responds what the speaker says. In short responding gambits are used when the listener will respond the speaker’s talk. So the interaction between speaker and listener will occur successfully or the conversation between conversant will run well.

The Gambit in this study is also realized in the teachers’ scaffolding talks. Therefore, the theory above is useful to find out the gambit in the scaffolding talks in this study.

2.4 LANGUAGE LEARNING AND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, AND

ZPD

To unfold the concept of Language Learning and Language Acquisition, and Zone Proximal Development the following I present some opinions from some linguists:

2.4.1 Language Learning and Language Acquisition

Krashen (1989) states that language learning and language acquisition are different. The different is the most fundamental of hypothesis widely known among linguists and language practitioners. Schusts (2000) says that acquisition or acquired system is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children experience in acquiring their first language requiring meaningful interaction in the target language-natural communication in which speakers concentrated not on the form of their inherence, but on the communication act.

Whereas learning is the product of formal instruction, consisting of a conscious knowledge about language.

In accordance with the statements above, language acquisition is how to gain the target language in which the language learners concentrate on the communication act either naturally or in-naturally. Natural means that the language learners acquire the first language because of their environment. In-naturalcommunication they learn the language in the classroom by having a tutor or teacher through a teaching learning process that it produces conscious knowledge about language.

Dealing with the discussion of second language acquisition Klein (1986) states that the language acquisition is acquiring a larger language in a variety of ways, at any age, for different purpose, and variety of degrees. It exhibits certain regularities and is constrained by the number of factors determining its course, rate of progress and outcome.

While according to Brown, (1987) second language acquisition is primarily defined as the process of acquiring whatever items are different from that of the first language. It is called constructing a system in which learners are consciously testing hypothesis about the target language from a mount of source of knowledge. It can be said that when the learners have a chance to communicate, they make use of existing knowledge to internalize knowledge of the target language. In short, Second language acquisition is the way in which people learn other than their mother tongue, inside or outside of a classroom Ellis (2003).

In accordance with the concept of second language acquisition above, I can say that second language acquisition is mainly defined as the process of acquiring the target language either by spontaneous learning or by guided language learning. The focus through out is the learner, who is seen as being obliged by the social circumstances to apply his language learning capacity to the available linguistic material. The humans are endowed with a language device, which is specific for language learning as opposed to the acquisition of other forms of knowledge.

In Indonesia English is a first foreign language. Why is it called first foreign language because there are more than one foreign languages that are given at school. As we know, that English is a compulsory lesson at junior high school up to university and it is considered as a first foreign language. In line with those, Crystal (1994) says that foreign language refers to any language that is not a native language in a country. This is more restricted as a non-native language taught in school that has no states as a daily means of communication in that country.

Because of the function of English in Indonesia is as a first foreign language it is not a medium of communication among members of the society. The language learners study English at school as a compulsory lesson especially in junior high school, senior high school and university so teachers provide them a chance to make communication as meaningful communication abilities and in linguistic abilities (Ellis 1994).

In line with the statements above, I can say that the learners/the students learn the language with the help of the teacher or a tutor. It implies language learning and language acquisition. The process of it is called language learning. The people who learn the language with the help of a teacher or tutor are called language learners.

When language learners have a chance to communicate, they use their knowledge they have in mind to internalize knowledge of the target language. It is considered as learning process (Ellis 1994). Sometimes in making communication, language learners face the problem to express the word needed but they do not know, they try to paraphrase or coin a new word. It means that they develop their strategic competence to overcome the communication problems. Strategic competence is used in order that the communication runs well. Besides, they also employ knowledge from the input they are exposed through interaction. It can be said that they can acquire new knowledge of language. To overcome communication breakdown in acquiring the new knowledge of language it is important to negotiate meaning in order that the process of acquiring the knowledge of the language runs smoothly.

The language learners make mistakes in taking turn in classroom interaction. In this way, they have experience systematic stages of acquisition to encounter forms and function in meaningful counter gradually the process of trial and error they slowly succeed in mastering a language system like native speakers.

The language learning and the language acquisition above are realized in this study. The process of acquiring the target language or the desired expressions in the classroom discourse innatural process of language learning implies in the language learning and the language acquisition. Through a lot of learning experiences given and by the teachers in innatural language learning, the students or the learners will gain the acquisition well. In other words, I can say that they are able to acquire the target language or the desired expression depends on the teachers’ skill in employing scaffolding talks and creating learning experiences in the classroom discourse in teaching learning cycle from opening and closing activities.

2.4.2 Zone Proximal Development

The ZPD in teaching learning process (Vygosky and Bruner in Corden 2000) is the area where the learning acquisition is accomplished through teachers’ guidance and collaboration with more capable peers. To realize this good teachers should prepare a good preparation and intervene appropriately and effectively. It is obvious that the guidance, a support and an aid from teachers are very useful to achieve main talks. If the main talks are accomplished, the goal expected by the teacher can be achieved well too.

The relationship between ZPD and literacy under my study is it is expected by the end of their study the students are not only able to write and read but also listen and speak English. It is clearly mentioned in the English Curriculum 2006. Besides that, it prepares the students to be able to participate in

creating various English texts (discourse competence) supported by linguistic, actional, sociocultural, and strategic competences as stated in the curriculum.

Those statements above can be accomplished if the teachers give an appropriately guidance, help, support and facilities and willingly to make a good preparation before teaching as those items make the students much easier to achieve the desired expressions in the area of ZPD. The ZPD is also in the area of the main talk. To achieve the target language the teachers should mediate independent learning zone or student’s knowledge by scaffolding talk.

Scaffolding talks are a good guidance for teachers in constructing a semantic unit Anderson (2003). It can be claimed that scaffolding talks are an aid to the learners by providing the words or by probing to open the way to the learners in order to easily achieve the desired expressions. In this case the teachers should be able to be good assistants, facilitators, and guides in order to be able to mediate their students across the bridge safely to accomplish desired expressions in the ZPD much easier than the teachers do not mediate it.

2.5 TYPES OF TALKS

Human beings belong to social individuals. As social individuals, they need to interact and to communicate to each other. In the interaction, speakers carry meaning. Eggins supports this statement and Slades and Eggins (1997:6) that interacting is a semantic activity, a process of making meaning. The speakers relate the interaction to their goal as stated by Nunan (1993:18), there are three goals in communication, that is: (a) transactional goal concerns with the exchange

of good and services, (b) interpersonal goal concerns with socializing, and (c) only for the sake of talking itself. The three goals are important element in communication or in talking.

Related to the statements above in order to unfold type of talks, in this part I discuss types of talks, such as motherese, foreigners’ talk, main talks and teachers’ scaffolding talk.

2.5.1 Mothers’ Talks/Motherese

Mothers’ talk is a simple talk used by mothers, fathers, baby sisters, etc. It is also called motherese. Young learners who are learning to talk use shorter utterances, simple grammar, and clearer pronunciation. While to talk to young learners for difficult words, they use a lot of repetition. The more repetition they get the easier they acquire the target language they want to achieve. The example of mother’s talks or motherese is repetition, prompting, prodding and expansions.

In line with the statements above, Jack Richards (1985: 34) states that caretakers’ speech, motherese or mother’s talks are easier for children to understand, and many people believe that it helps children to learn the language.

Teachers can adopt the theory above to teach young learners. By adopting the theory above in teaching learning process, it will make the students much easier to achieve the target language than if the teachers do not adopt it. In other words, motherese/mothers’ talks are also employed in the scaffolding talks. The functions, such as to help, mediate, assist and provide the words step by step and organize those steps in a linear fashion according to social acceptable structure or to repeat on and on towards the desired expressions. Based on the statements

above, I can say that it will be easy for the students to follow the lesson and to understandwell. Those are also found in the scaffolding talks in this study.

2.5.2 Foreigners’ Talk

To elaborate the meaning of the foreigners’ talk, the following is the concept or foreigners talk. Foreigners talk is the type of speech, which is used by native speakers of a language when they speak to foreigners who are not proficient in the language. They usually speak more slowly and loudly than normal speech. They use simple grammar and vocabulary and topics are sometimes repeated, Jack Richards (1985:108).

In line with foreigners’ talk above, Ellis (1985: 146) says that foreigners’ talks normally take place in one to one interaction. Where there are a lo of feedback from the students. It needs the ability in using English from the beginning until the end of conversation with a lot of feedback between the teachers and the students. The class will be active. The communication in the classroom runs well without any difficulties.

If the condition above is applied in the English class for non-native English teacher and students, they will have difficulties in doing it. Because of the different cultural background, they are incapable to converse all the time in English. It is one of the obstacles for the teachers and learners to learn a foreign language.

Foreigners’ talk is important for my study as it is helpful for the foreigners to reach the desired expressions.Native speaker of language uses foreigners’ talks

when they speak to foreigners. They tend to speak to the foreigners slowly and clearly in order that the foreigners follow the desired expressions well.

In accordance with teaching learning process, English teacher can adopt the theories above in order that the students reach the desired expressions without any difficulties. Because of their English teachers are helpful and patient to help their students, the way to achieve the target language is easy. It means that the teachers are able to scaffold the main talks well to their student so they are able to reach the goal expected without any difficulties.

2.5.3 Teachers’ Talk

Teacher’s talk takes place in a classroom setting between teachers and the students. Teachers tend to dominate the communication that happens in the classroom during the teaching learning process. They tend to dominate speech interaction in the classroom through their talks. It does not mean that but because they have different purposes in the talks, such as: give an example; to become a model; to give an instruction etc.

Most of English teachers, sometimes find it hard to help the students talking in English in the classroom during teaching and learning process because they don’t have the English cultural background. Because of incondusive condition, teachers are expected to add their knowledge after they finish their study by attending an up grading, workshop, seminar, in service program, and training and keep on reading in order that they can be a good model in teaching learning process. They can use English throughout the teaching learning process.

0, 00

10, 00

20, 00

30, 00

40, 00

50, 00

T y p e s O f S c a ff o ld in g

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

Teacher's

A1

A2

B1

B2

C1

C2

Total Amount of Teacher Scaffolding Talk Types

0, 64 2, 95 3, 72 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 Showing Desired Solut ion

16 0, 00 0, 00 2, 03 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 Evaluat ing 15 1, 28 1, 11 2, 03 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 Reviewing 14 2, 56 4, 06 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 Making Links 13 1, 28 1, 85 4, 05 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 Making Emphasis 12 6, 07 9, 23 10, 14 5, 88 1, 72 2, 33 Reraf orcy 11 9, 90 3, 69 3, 38 14, 12 5, 16 3, 33 Reveloping St udent 's Underst and

10 23, 96 14, 39 22, 30 20, 59 23, 78 11, 33 Clasif iying St udent 's Underst and

9 16, 93 16, 97 12, 16 8, 24 18, 91 12, 00 Quest ioning 8 9, 27 13, 28 14, 53 3, 53 5, 16 6, 00 Invit y St udent 's Part icipat ion

7 16, 93 4, 06 4, 05 30, 59 39, 26 50, 00 Expl aining 6 4, 47 19, 93 13, 18 8, 82 4, 58 10, 67 Direct ing 5 1, 28 0, 74 1, 01 1, 76 1, 43 4, 33 Modelling 4 2, 88 1, 48 4, 05 4, 12 0, 00 0, 00 Prompt ing 3 1, 92 4, 80 2, 36 0, 00 0, 00 0, 00 Gaining At t ent ion

2 0, 64 1, 48 1, 01 2, 35 0, 00 0, 00 St art ing t he goal

1 C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1

Precent age of Teacher's Scaf f ol ding Talk Types ( % ) Types of Scaf f olding

No

H. THE GRAPH OF TYPE OF SCAFFOLDING TALKS/

LINGUISTIC FEATURES/SPEECH FUNCTIONS/THE

LANGUAGE USED BY THE TEACHERS IN THE

SCAFFOLDING TALKS

Total Amount of Process Types

0, 87 0, 00

0, 56 5, 26

0, 00 0, 33

At t ribut ive 7

6, 52 14, 29

8, 89 4, 09

1, 12 7, 54

Verbal 6

0, 43 1, 05

1, 94 0, 58

1, 12 0, 66

Behavioral 5

5, 22 2, 79

4, 17 6, 43

4, 76 6, 56

Exist ent ial 4

57, 39 43, 55

41, 94 38, 01

48, 18 53, 44

Ident if iying 3

4, 78 3, 83

16, 67 19, 88

7, 00 5, 25

Ment al 2

24, 78 34, 49

25, 83 25, 73

37, 82 26, 23

Mat erial 1

C2 C1

B2 B1

A2 A1

Precent age of Teacher's Scaf f olding Talk Types ( % ) Process Types

No

0,00

10,00

20,00

30,00

40,00

50,00

60,00

P

ro

c

e

ss

T

y

p

e

s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Teacher's

A1

A2

B1

B2

C1

C2

Mood Types of Teacher’s

Scaffolding Talk

5, 43 26, 48

18, 25 11, 70

2, 79 7, 21

Imperat ive 3

26, 96 25, 78

24, 56 15, 79

32, 96 16, 72

Int erogat ive 2

67, 61 47, 74

57, 19 72, 51

64, 25 76, 07

Declarat ive 1

C2 C1

B2 B1

A2 A1

Tot al Amount of Mood Types Mood Types

No

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Mood Ty

pe

s

A1

A2

B1

B2

C1

C2

Teacher's

Mood Types of teacher's Scaffolding Talk

Declarative Interogative Imperative

Total Amount of Mood Types

Polarity /Temporal Deicticity/Modal

4, 57 6, 62 6, 67 18, 71 4, 47 3, 93

Modul

3, 26 5, 23 24, 91 7, 02

1, 12 5, 90

Past

92, 17 88, 15 68, 42 74, 27 94, 41 90, 16 Present

3

3, 48 0, 35 3, 16 21, 05 0, 28 0, 00

Non Int eract an

96, 52 99, 65 96, 84 78, 95 99, 72 100, 00 Int eract ant

Mood Person

2

3, 91 5, 92 5, 61 5, 26 8, 10 10, 16

-96, 09 94, 08 94, 39 59, 65 91, 90 89, 84 +

Polarit y

1

C2 C1 B2 B1 A2 A1

Precent age of Tot al Amount of Process Types

Process Types

No

Modal Temporal Deicticity

0,00

20,00

40,00

60,00

80,00

100,00

P

ro

c

e

ss

T

y

p

e

s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Teacher's

A1

A2

B1

B2

C1

C2

Total Amount of Speech Function

5, 43 26, 13

18, 25 11, 70

6, 42 7, 54

Command

4

0, 00 0, 35

0, 00 0, 00

0, 00 0, 00

Of f er

3

26, 96 25, 78

24, 56 15, 79

27, 65 16, 07

Int errogat ive

2

67, 61 47, 74

57, 19 72, 51

65, 92 76, 39

St at ement s

1

C2 C1

B2 B1

A2 A1

Precent age of Teacher's Amount Speech Funct ion Types

Types of Speech Fonet ic No

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

T

y

pes

of

S

peec

h

Fu

n

c

ti

o

n

A1

A2

B1

B2

C1

C2

Teacher's

Statement

Interrogative

Offer

Command

100 100

100 100

100 100

0, 43 0, 00

0, 00 0, 00

0, 00 0, 00

Sundanese 4

0, 00 0, 00

0, 00 0, 00

0, 84 4, 26

Javanese 3

69, 57 77, 35

32, 63 66, 08

90, 50 90, 82

Indonesian 2

30, 00 22, 65

67, 37 33, 92

8, 66 4, 92

English 1

C2 C1

B2 B1

A2 A1

Percent age (%) of Language Used By The Teachers

Language No

0,00 10,00 20,00 30,00 40,00 50,00 60,00 70,00 80,00 90,00 100,00

Language

A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2

Total Amount Of Language Used By The Teachers

TOTAL AMOUNT OF LANGUAGE USED BY THE TEACHER

In English In Indonesia In Javenese Sundanese