THE STRUCTURE OF ENGLISH CLASSROOM DISCOURSE IN SMP NEGERI 1 TEBING TINGGI.

(1)

THE STRUCTURE OF ENGLISH CLASSROOM DISCOURSE

IN SMP NEGERI 1 TEBING TINGGI

A Thesis

Submitted to English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

EVA NOVELIA SIREGAR

Registration Number: 8136112017

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

Siregar, Eva Novelia. 2016. The Structure of English Classroom Discourse in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Postgraduate School, State University of Medan.

This study is concerned with the structure of English classroom discourse in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing tinggi. The objectives of this study were to describe the structures of English classroom discourse, to describe how the structures are linguistically realized and to reason for the realizations of the English class structure. The source of the data in this study were English teachers and also the students while the data of the study are the utterances from the teacher and the students and semiotic markers as marked in the text. The instruments used for

colleting data were video tape recorder and researcher’s fieldnote. The data were

collected by observing and recording the utterances uttered by the teachers and students and writing all semiotics that teacher and students did in the classroom while teaching learning process and classifyed them into types of exchanges as Sinclair and Coulthard theory. Based on the data analysis, it was found that the structure of English classroom were teacher elicit, teacher direct, teacher information, boundary, pupil elicit, check, repeat, reinforce and reinitiation. The structures occured dominantly were teacher elicit, teacher direct and teacher information. These structures were dominantly realized by IR structure. There were some reasons why the realization as the ways they are. The teacher control interaction in class more dominantly caused the teacher talk more than students talk consequently impact to the teaching technique became conventional teaching. English as a foreign language was also one point made the students afraid of uttering the utterances in teaching learning process.

Keywords : Classroom Discourse, Sinclair and Coulthard Theory, structures, pattern.

(6)

ABSTRAK

Siregar, Eva Novelia. 2016. Struktur Wacana Kelas Bahasa Inggris di SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi. tructure of English Classroom Discourse in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi.Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Medan.

Penelitian ini berkenaan dengan Struktur Wacana kelas Bahasa Inggris di SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menemukan struktur wacana kelas Bahasa Inggris, bagaimana struktur wacana direalisasikan dan alasan realisasi dari struktur wacana tersebut.Sumber data penelitian ini adalah guru dan murid bahasa Inggris dan data penelitiannya adalah ujaran dari guru dan tanda semotik di teks ujaran.Instrumen penelitian dalam pengumpulan data adalah video tape recorder dan catatan lapangan penelitian. Data dikumpulkan dengan meneliti dan merekam ujaran guru dan murid dan menulis seluruh tanda semiotik yang terjadi di proses belajar mengajar, mengklasifikasi ujaran dan menganalisa ujaran berdasarkan teori Sinclair dan Coulthard berdasarkan pembagian exchanges. Dari hasil data analisa ditemukan bahwa struktur wacana kelas Bahasa Inggris adalah teacher elicit, teacher direct, teacher information, boundary, pupil elicit, check, repeat, reinforce and reinitiation. Struktur yang dominan terjadi adalah teacher elicit, teacher direct and teacher information. Struktur ini didominasi oleh struktur IR. Ada beberapa alasan mengapa hal ini terjadi. Kontrol interaksi guru dikelas menyebabkan guru berbicara lebih banyak daripada murid berbicara yang menyebabkan teknik mengajar menjadi teknik konvensional. Bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa asing juga menjadi salah satu poin murid menjadi takut dalam mengujarkan ujaran dalam proses belajar mengajar.

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Praise the Lord Jesus Christ for the mercy, guidance and love which have been given to the writer so this thesis could be completed.This thesis is a scientific writing that to be completed in order to fulfill one of the academic requirements for the degree of Magister Humaniora at English Applied Linguistics Program: Postgraduate School, State Uiversity of Medan.

Foremost, the writer would like to express her sincere gratitude who have given valuable guidances, suggestions and useful influences on the writing of this thesis. The writer would like to deliver her grateful appreciation to her first advisorProf. T. Silvana Sinar, M.A., Ph.D. and her second advisor Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A. , Ph.D. Moreover, the writer would like to express to her examiners, Dr. Syahron Lubis, M. A., Dr. Zainuddin, M.Hum. , and Prof. Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S. Besides, the writer would also like to thanks to all the lectures of English Applied Linguistics Program who have given much encouragementa and knowledge during taking the college.

Her gratefulness also goes to the Head of English Applied Linguistics Program, Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed. and Prof. Dr. H. Abdul Muin Sibuea, M. Pd as the Director of Postgraduate School at State University of Medan.

The writer would also like to deliver his gratefulness to the head of SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi, Doanta Surbakti, S.Pd and Hendra as the English teacher for giving chance to do research in this school.

Special thanks are also for her parents M.J.T Siregar and B.E Gultom, S.Pd and her siblings Ucok, Lita and Ryan for their encouragement, care and love

(8)

during doing this thesis. The best thanks also goes to her friends in LTBI B-2 especially Diana who helped her doing the thesis. And at last for the dearest one Deddy Linggom Pasaribu who supported for writing this thesis.

Finally, the writer hope this thesis will be useful and can be the references for the next researh and enhance our knowledge. God bless us.

Medan, February 3rd 2016 The writer

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ... i

Abstrak ... ii

Acknowledgements ... iii

Table of Contents ... v

List of Tables ... vii

List of Figures ... viii

List of Appendices ... ix

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 TheBackground of the Study ... 1

1.2 TheProblems of the Study ... 5

1.3 TheObjectives of the Study ... 5

1.4 TheScope of the Study ... 5

1.5 TheSignificances of the Study ... 6

CHAPTER II.REVIEW OF LITERATURE ... 7

2.1 Theoretical Framework ... 7

2.1.1 Classroom Discourse ... 7

2.1.2Classroom Discourse Analysis ... 10

2.1.3Previous Relevant Studies ... 18

2.2 Conceptual Framework ... 20

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHOD ... 23

3.1 The Research Design... 23

3.2 Data Source and Data of Study ... 23

3.3Instrument of Data Collection ... 23

3.4 The Procedure of Data Collection ... 23

3.5 Technique of Data Analysis ... 24

(10)

CHAPTER IV. DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSIONS ... 27

4.1 Data Analysis ... 27

4.1.1 The Structure of English Classroom Discourse in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi ... 27

4.1.2 The Realization of English Classroom Discourse Structure in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi ... 32

4.1.3The Explanation of the Pattern of the Englis Classroom Discourse Structure Realization as the Ways They are ... 36

4.2 Findings ... 35

4.3 Discussions ... 36

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 39

5.1 Conclusions ... 39

5.2 Suggestions ... 40

REFERENCES ... 41

(11)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Types of Act ... 11

Table 2.2 The Example of Sinclair and Coulthard Model ... 22

Table 4.1 Types of Classroom Discourse Structure ... 28

(12)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Conceptual Framework ... 22 Figure 3.1 Miles &Huberman’s Interactive Model ... 25

(13)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Transcription of Class A ... 43 Appendix 2 Transcription of Class B... 46 Appendix 2 Transcription of Class C... 56

(14)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1The Background of the Study

Classroom discourse has been regarded important in the development of pedagogic implications. It can be seen in the researches that had been done. Hillocks (1986) cited in Nystrand (1998) found that the classroom discourse most conducive to enhancing writing skills involved peer-response groups with an "inquiry" focus: assigned topics involving analysis of readings or other "data" and attention to rhetorical strategies. Cots (1995) also stated that adopting a discourse approach to language teaching involves a new way of looking at it, but this does not mean that we should throw out the baby with the dirty water. In line with this, Sinar (2008) also stated that discourse which enables human to develop through school educations activities in the classroom are institutional, for the classroom is part of the design school education system as an institution. As teacher understands the meaning of classroom discourse, it is expected that teacher can fulfill the students’ need.

Classroom discourse analysis has developed in the education field. Analysing the classroom discourse has given much contribution to the students’ outcome. The classrooom discourse itself concerned with the frame of the teaching learning process, the communication between the teacher and students and also the medium to direct the students to achieve the goal of learning. As teachers can analyse the classroom discourse, it is expected that teachers can evaluate their teaching learning process. The purpose of the classroom discourse analysis itself

(15)

is to observe the quality of the teacher and students’ communication.In line with this , Yu (2009) also stated that the application of discourse analysis to second language teaching and learning can reveal much about how teachers can improve their teaching practices by investigating actual language use in the classroom, and how students can learn language through exposure to different types of discourse.

Sincair and Coulthard in 1975 introduced the term of rank scale as a model for analysing discourse analysis. The rank scale has realized into five divisions. The highest rank in the discourse classroom is lesson. Lesson is consisted of one or more transactions, transacation is consisted of one or more exchanges, and exchange is consisted of move and move is realized by acts. The examples of classroom discourse analysis can be seen in the example below, recorded on March 16,2015, grade seven, with the teacher N. Siregar :

Teacher: Can you give me the example of simple present tense? (Initiation) Student: I go to school everyday(Response)

Teacher: Good (Feedback)

This example is analyzed through the Sinclair and Coulthard theory, thatis known as IRF (Iniation-Response-Feedback) pattern. This moves in the dialogue create the exhanges which is can be grouped as IRF.

Jiang (2012) also stated that classroom discourse analysis is an aspect of classroom process research, which is one way for teachers to monitor both the quantity and quality of students’ output. Through analyzing the classroom discourse , it is expected that it can be observed what are the strength and the weaknesses of the teachers classroom discourse and how the classroom discourse can be designed well.

(16)

In the pleminary observation at school, some teachers always explains the material by reading the book. There is no two ways communication between the teacher and students. The students keep silent and have no questions for the teacher. For example :

Teacher: Open your book page 12 Students: (open the book)

Teacher : Please keep quiet, I will explain for you! (reading the book) (Recorded on March 20, 2015, grade seven with the teacher N. Siregar) This situation requires some serious reflection and discussion,the better to understand and interpret it as a social phenomenon, and the better to provide for enhanced educational practices in the future. Two ways communication in classroom discourse creates the good interaction in the teaching learning process.

English as the lingua franca has given a deep impact for education sector. The globalization makes people around the world can go and trade from one to another country. All products of information technology and even the job field requires English fluency. For these reasons students must master the English language skills. It can be also viewed in the curriculum of Indonesian education from the elementary level till the secondary one. Therefore, government has made English is one of compulsory subjects in formal education.

The goal of learning English in curriculum is to be competent in four language skills, that is, reading, writing, speaking and listening. To achieve them is not an easy work for students, because English is a foreign language

(17)

for them. Teacher must also use some strategies and method that can arise the students motivation to learn it. Many teachers are suggested to be creative to do it.

Teaching is an activity that teachers have to design well to achieve the objective of the instructional process. Many teachers concern about the method, the strategy and also the technique that they use in organizing the instructional process because it is tought that those things play a big role in achieving the objectives. Teaching is not all about those things. Teaching is a condition where the teacher and student have an interaction on delivering and accepting the material. Teachers rarely concern about the communication of teachers and students in the class. Seemly, the important thing is to deliver the material. Otherwise, the communication between teacher and students play the big role in their achievement of the study objectives.

The communication of teachers and student can be regarded as the classroom discourse. Classroom discourse also refers to the language that teachers and students use to communicate with each other in the classroom. Nunan cited in Liu (2012) viewed classroom discourse as the distinctive type of discourse that occurs in classroom. Talking, or conversation, is the medium through which most teaching takes place.

Based on these phenomena, the researcher is interested to investigate the structure of English classroom discourse especially at SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi. Through this research, it is expected give a new finding that classroom discourse give contribution in teachers’ quality and students’ output. As her observation, this school is the model for other school in

(18)

Tebing Tinggi. This research will investigate the structures of the classroom discourse in English teaching learning process based on the Sinclair and Coulthard model.

1.2The Problems of the Study

The problems of the study are formulated in the form of research question as the following.

1. What are the structures of English classrooom discourse of the SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi?

2. How are the structures of English classroom discourse realized linguistically?

3. Why are the structures realized in the ways they are?

1.3The Objective of the Study The objectives of the study are

1. to describe the structures of English classroom discourse 2. to describe how the structures are linguistically realized, and 3. to reason for the realizations of the English class structures

1.4The Scope of the study

This study is focused on finding the structures of English classroom discourse as they are mainly linguistically realized.

(19)

1.5The Significance of the study

The findings of the study are expected to have theoretical and practical significance for the readers and teachers especially English teachers.

a. Theoretically, the findings deals with two aspects. First, about the structures of discourse analysis in the classroom, how the knowledge will implement and how the result of the research, can be the reference for other’s research about classroom discourse. Secondly, the object and the investigation of this study is classroom discourse phenomenon, and whatever to be achieved in this study will enrich the classroom discourse studies

b. Practically, the findings are concerned about the discourse phenomena in the classroom, whatever the research result will achieve it can be the enrichment for classroom discourse studies in specific situation as SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi. Secondly, this research under the investigation of clasroom discourse phenomenon which deals with the utterances between teachers and students and derives from the institutional linguistic domain. In this respect , it can can contribute to the textual studies of English as a foreign language and it also can be the evaluation for the teachers in doing the instructional process.

(20)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1Conclusions

The study concerned on the structure of English classroom discourse in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi. The objectives of this study are to describe the structures of English classroom discourse, to describe how the structures are linguistically realized, and to reason for the realizations of the English class structures.

Having analyzed the data, the conclusions are stated as follows:

1. The exchange structures dominantly occurs in the English classroom discoures are teacher elicit, teacher direct, and teacher information. The others are boundary, reinforce, check, reinitiation, repeat and pupil elicit. 2. The structure of the classroom discourse was dominantly formed by IR

structure, then IRF and I structure.

3. a. These structure occurs because of the teacher control of interaction , teaching technique and less of feedback from the teacher, and the students of being afraid and ashamed in doing mistakes in uttering English dialogue.

b. The structure of English Classroom discourse reflects the teacher technique in teaching and the description of the teaching learning process itself.

(21)

5.2 Suggestions

Related to the conclusion of this study, the following suggestions are suggested:

1. It is suggested that teacher should analyze their lesson by using Sinclair and Coulthard theory to find out their structure of classroom discourse so they can measure the effectiveness of their teaching learning process.

2. It is suggestedthat teacher should give any feedback to students in every exchange they utter and also take a notice for their technique in teaching.

3. It is suggested that teacher give chances for the students to speakout their mind so that the classroom have a good structure in classroom discourse and consequently it will contribute to the quality of students’ output.

(22)

REFERENCE

Bogdan, R and Biklen, S. 1992. Qualitative Research for

Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Christie F. 2002. Classroom Discourse Analysis:A Functional

Perspective. New York : Continuum

Cots, J. M. 1995. Bringing Discourse Analysis into the

Language Classroom. Links & Letters 3. 1996 page 77-101. Dahal, B. 2010. Analysis of Spoken Discourse Pattern in Nepali

ELT Classes. Journal of NELTA Vol. 15 No. 1-2.

Jiang, X. 2012. A Study of College English Classroom Discourse. Finland: ACADEMY Publisher. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 2, No. 10, pp. 2146-2152. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.10.2146-2152

Liu J and Le T. 2012. A Case Study on College

English Classroom Discourse. International Journal of

Innovative Interdisciplinary Research. Issue 2

Nicholson, S.J. 2014. An Impetus for Change: Classroom Analysis Using Sinclair and Coulthard’s Model of Spoken Discourse. South Korea:

International Journal of Linguistics , Vol. 6, No. 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v6i2.5464

Nystrand , M. et all. 1998. Towards an ecology of learning:The Case

of Classroom Discourse and Its Effects On Writing in High School English and Social Studies. New York : National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement.

Simbolon, L.2014. Phasal Realizations In Classroom Discourse. A

Systemic –Finctional Analysis. A Thesis. Medan : UNIMED

Sinar. T, S. 2007. Phasal and Experiential Realizations in

Lecture Discourse A Systemic-Functional Analysis. Medan : Kopertis Wilayah I Sumut-NAD

Sinclair, J and Coulthard, M. 1992. Towards An Analysis of Discourse. Walsh, S. 2006. Investigating Classroom Discourse. New York :

(23)

White, A. 2003. The Application of Sinclair and Coulthard’s

IRF Structure to a Classroom Lesson : Analysis and Discussion.

England: Universiy of Birmingham.

Xin,et al. 2011. EFL (English as Foreign Language) Classroom Discourse

.Analysis of a Vocational College and Some Reflections .US-China Education Review, ISSN 1548-6613

Yu, W. (2009). An Analysis of College English Classroom Discourse.

China : Asian Social Science.Vol 5 no 7. www.ccsnet.org/journal.html Zhang, Y. 2008. Classroom Discourse and Student Learning. Asian

(1)

Tebing Tinggi. This research will investigate the structures of the classroom discourse in English teaching learning process based on the Sinclair and Coulthard model.

1.2The Problems of the Study

The problems of the study are formulated in the form of research question as the following.

1. What are the structures of English classrooom discourse of the SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi?

2. How are the structures of English classroom discourse realized linguistically?

3. Why are the structures realized in the ways they are?

1.3The Objective of the Study The objectives of the study are

1. to describe the structures of English classroom discourse 2. to describe how the structures are linguistically realized, and 3. to reason for the realizations of the English class structures

1.4The Scope of the study

This study is focused on finding the structures of English classroom discourse as they are mainly linguistically realized.

(2)

1.5The Significance of the study

The findings of the study are expected to have theoretical and practical significance for the readers and teachers especially English teachers.

(3)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1Conclusions

Having analyzed the data, the conclusions are stated as follows:

structure, then IRF and I structure.

b. The structure of English Classroom discourse reflects the teacher technique in teaching and the description of the teaching learning process itself.

(4)

5.2 Suggestions

Related to the conclusion of this study, the following suggestions are suggested:

2. It is suggestedthat teacher should give any feedback to students in every exchange they utter and also take a notice for their technique in teaching.

(5)

REFERENCE

Bogdan, R and Biklen, S. 1992. Qualitative Research for

Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Christie F. 2002. Classroom Discourse Analysis:A Functional

Perspective. New York : Continuum

Cots, J. M. 1995. Bringing Discourse Analysis into the

Language Classroom. Links & Letters 3. 1996 page 77-101. Dahal, B. 2010. Analysis of Spoken Discourse Pattern in Nepali

ELT Classes. Journal of NELTA Vol. 15 No. 1-2.

Jiang, X. 2012. A Study of College English Classroom Discourse. Finland: ACADEMY Publisher. Theory and Practice in Language

Studies, Vol. 2, No. 10, pp. 2146-2152.

doi:10.4304/tpls.2.10.2146-2152

Liu J and Le T. 2012. A Case Study on College

English Classroom Discourse. International Journal of

Innovative Interdisciplinary Research. Issue 2

Nicholson, S.J. 2014. An Impetus for Change: Classroom Analysis Using Sinclair and Coulthard’s Model of Spoken Discourse. South Korea: International Journal of Linguistics , Vol. 6, No. 2.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v6i2.5464

Nystrand , M. et all. 1998. Towards an ecology of learning:The Case of Classroom Discourse and Its Effects On Writing in High School English and Social Studies. New York : National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement.

Simbolon, L.2014. Phasal Realizations In Classroom Discourse. A

Systemic –Finctional Analysis. A Thesis. Medan : UNIMED

Sinar. T, S. 2007. Phasal and Experiential Realizations in

Lecture Discourse A Systemic-Functional Analysis. Medan : Kopertis Wilayah I Sumut-NAD

Sinclair, J and Coulthard, M. 1992. Towards An Analysis of Discourse. Walsh, S. 2006. Investigating Classroom Discourse. New York :

(6)

White, A. 2003. The Application of Sinclair and Coulthard’s IRF Structure to a Classroom Lesson : Analysis and Discussion. England: Universiy of Birmingham.

Xin,et al. 2011. EFL (English as Foreign Language) Classroom Discourse .Analysis of a Vocational College and Some Reflections .US-China Education Review, ISSN 1548-6613

Yu, W. (2009). An Analysis of College English Classroom Discourse. China : Asian Social Science.Vol 5 no 7. www.ccsnet.org/journal.html Zhang, Y. 2008. Classroom Discourse and Student Learning. Asian

THE STRUCTURE OF ENGLISH CLASSROOM DISCOURSE IN SMP NEGERI 1 TEBING TINGGI.