teaching learning is 100 English. Third reason was based on the first pre- observation that have done in 15
th
November 2015, the researcher found that the students were actively speaking in English in order to have some discussion both with
teacher and their friend. Furthermore, Miss Pipin one of lecture in English Studies Program Sanata Dharma University suggested the researcher to conduct this research
there. The researcher had no problems when conducted this study in this school.
Hopefully, the research result contributed to the development of English teaching and learning quality to this school in the future. Particularly, in term of young learner
classroom interaction in foreign language. Finally, the research setting could be considered as having credible data, provided an effective interaction and an easy
access for collecting data.
3.5. Research Instruments
This study apply of two instruments in collecting the data. They were a video- camcorder and observation protocol. Video was used to take the class observation
data while the interview guideline was used in interviewing the participants about the language used in the classroom. Since this study focused on the teacher talk therefore
researcher focused the observation on how the teacher delivered their verbalspoken language in teaching-learning process.
3.5.1 Observation Protocol
During the observation, the researcher got the reliable data, since the researcher would put the code on the certain teacher talk during the interaction occurred in the
classroom. Before the researcher filled the observation protocol sheet. The researcher PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
had to understand observation protocol guidance that included list of Flander’s Interaction Analysis Categories FIAC that the researcher adapted from Flander
1970 cited in Hai and Bee 2006. The observation protocol guidance is provided in chapter 2.
There were some rules for deciding which one the best category should be put out the code consistency. Flander 1970 cited in Sign et al.2008 provided rules to
help researcher in identifying the talk. Rule 1
When it is not certain in which of two categories a statement belongs, choose category that is numerically farthest from category 5
Rule 2 The observer should not involve their personal point of view. If a
teacher attempts to be clever, student see teachers’ statement as critics of students; the observer sues category 7.
Rule 3 If more than one category active in a span of 3 second, and then all
the categories should be recorded Rule 4
If the same period of silence exceeds 3 seconds. It should be recorded the category No.10
Rule 5 When teacher calls a child by name, the observer is supposed to
record a 4
th
category. Table 3.1: Five rules for deciding which category should be put code consistency.
Below was the observation protocol that was for putting out the code. This would help the researcher to decide particular type of talk during observations time. The
recorded utterances were in form of conversation between teacher-students, student- teacher and student-student
Table 3.2: Matrix of Flander Interaction Analysis. 1970 cited in Hai and Bee 2007.
DayDate :
Meeting :
Teacher’s Name :
Material :
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
Indirect talk
Accepts feelings Praise or
encouragement
Accepts or uses ideas of students
Direct talk
Asking questions Lecturinglecture
Giving direction Criticizing or
justifying authority
Student response
Student talk response
Student talk initiation
Silence or pause or confusion
TOTAL
3.5.2 Recording Instrument
