Discussion RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

74 until the student answer. Techer really wants to know the answer. Both, display and referential questions are used by the teacher to encourage responses from students. however, referential and display questions are not only asked by the teacher but also by the students. Thus, the display questions addressed to their peers as in spelling bees game. The nature of this game required the students to think of a word and asks other students to guess the correct spelling of that word. For example in question like “How do you spell „Center‟?”. This question will be answered by the student who rose up their hands quicker. Another function of teacher talk which was found in teacher initiation is greeting. In result of analysis, this function found but not really shows significant increases in indoor compare with outdoor category. Greeting in teacher talk responses by responding greetings from students, like for example; “good morning” will also be replied by saying “good morning” too. This function usually used to open a conversation. In the classroom context, teacher usually greets the students before starting classroom activities. The purpose of greeting is not only to ask students‟ attention by saying “hallo, good morning everyone” in the crowded class, or to know the students‟ condition like in „How are you today?‟ question. Another function of greeting is to establish relationship and creating positive social environment among teacher and students Bodman and Besnier, 1989. When the students feel accepted and comfortable, it motivates them to involve themselves in the learning process and to participate in the classroom activity. It makes them feel that they become as the important part as in the learning activities. 75 The function of asking for permission represents in student talk in very little amount. This function is used when the students willingness to get a grant permission from teacher of their request. When the student says these: “Mister, can I speak in bahasa?” “Mister can we open the book?” “Mister, may I?go to the back side of the line”they are asking for permission. By consistently applying the rules in the classroom, students will aware when the time that they have to ask for permission to do a certain act. Inviting is one of the teacher initiation which is not really dominantly occur in teacher talk. This function represents in either indoor or outdoor. Even though the total number is small, but then it has a big deal in students‟ learning process. Inviting students means the students are requested to do something. The examples of invitation can be seen as follow: “Ok. I would like to please to invite the operator to play the video.”, “Ok. Today, before we begin the activities, I would like to call Peter to lead us in pray.”, “Ok. Imel please? Invite a student to spell a word.”.From the examples above, teacher uses imperative and interrogative sentences to ask students to do some activities. Requesting, asking for attention, and summons appear very little contributions to teacher and student talk. Physically response is students‟ non-verbally response like: gesture, facial expression, eye movement, eye gaze, eye contact, posture, body movement, facial direction, style of body movement, or body position Rymes, 2008. Students listen to teacher‟s instruction and they responding physically. For example: when the teacher asked students to find the unfamiliar words in the dictionary, he instructed them to open it and the students did it. Physically response also can be as the response of student‟s own initiative for example when a student asks 76 permission to replace her friend job to open the dictionary and the teacher acknowledged. She directly does the instruction, for example: S: Mister, can I change her? I will find MOLE D1.S.Ask.Prmt. T: ok. D1.T.Ack. S: a student runs in front of the class to replace her friend to find the word in the dictionary The results show that, this function is the highest frequent number compare with students‟ verbally response. Asher 1977 states that, children, in learning a language, appear to do a lot of listening before they speak, and that their listening is accompanied by physical responses. He added that, the TPR classroom was one in which students did a great deal of listening and acting. Therefore, students in this level of age tendto be active. The theories of IRF especially in follow up used to be the part of teacher. However, based on the results of this study, follow up was also initiated by students. In the results, follow up can be in the positive and negative forms. Teacher provides positive follow up when a student answered correctly or done something under expectation. Conversely, teacher provides negative follow up when the students contributes incorrect answer or showed or expressed unexpected behavior. In another cases, even in the small numbers of occurrence, students also provided follow up to the other friends. These positive follow up recurred mostly when the students are playing a game. They provide positive follow up to encourage or to congratulating their group members or to support them in the competition such competition games. For example, they will encourage their friends to say the correct answer or to do things faster than the opposite groups. 77 As mentioned before that there are two categories in follow up move; positive and negative follow up. Positive follow up includes encouraging and congratulating . These functions are used when the teacher accepts, acknowledges, confirms, encourages, or congratulates student‟s ideas, behavior, or feeling. The purpose is to give confidence and make students more likely to continue or improve their positive act. Praise or giving motivation is included here. Moreover, negative follow up includes disagreeing and criticizing. These functions refer to a teacher‟s comment on a student‟s incorrect responses either verbally or physically responses. The functions are used when the teacher refuses, criticizes, ignores, or discourages student‟s ideas. However, some of these responses are stated in question form, but would be taken as criticism by the students Amidon and Hunter, 1967. The purposes of these functions are to make the students learning from their mistakes and have an effort to find another alternative in order to improve their performance. It can increase their motivation in learning. The examples of how teacher criticize student such as; Figure 8: positive and negative criticizing Positive Negative Encouraging Congratulating Disagreeng Criticizing “Come on...you still have five more minutes to finish your topping pizza.” “Ok. Very good...clap hands every one...” “No, wrong. Sorry, you should sit there...” “So, it‟s „wardrobe‟. So, it is not „one drop‟” “Don‟t worry, if you can give me your correct spelling, then, you can go back there” “Wow....one hundred for you...you survive.” “No. Minus one hundred point” “I am so sorry, the time is over. You should do it faster.” 78 Criticizing not always bring image as a negative response from the uncorrect answer. It is purposed to provide the information that the students should do better or they need to change their mind or behaviour when they encouter with the same occasion. 79

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the conclusion of the results analysis and its discussion. The chapter consists of conclusions and recommendations.

A. Conclusions

Teaching and learning are interactive processes which require a dynamic participation of teacher and students. As it is an interactive process, two ways communication is needed. It means that, there are dynamic communications between the teacher and his students. This leads to teacher and students interactions. In teaching and learning process, teacher uses teacher talk not only to organize the classroom activities, but also to be as the language input for students. This study indicates that, in general, classrooms are full of teacher and student talk which lead to meaningful interactions. In these interactions, different language functions were used in different contexts of situation. The analysis result of teacher talk indicates that the greater amount of teacher talk functions in indoor and outdoor category is primarily due to an emphasis on giving information. Whereas student talk in both indoor and outdoor category is largely on the function of responding physically. In the previous study done by Rymes 2008, there are 6 types of adjacency pairs dominantly found in classroom interaction, they are greeting greeting, question answer, invitation acceptance, assessment disagreement, appology acknowledgement,and summons acknowledgement. However, the context of the study was in U.S. and the students were all English native speakers. Compared to 80 this current study done in Indonesian context where the participants were those students who learn English as a foreign language, the types of adjacency pairs are also different. Those types were found in the present study are giving information acknowledging, giving instruction acknowledging, question answer, inviting accepting, asking for attentionshowing attention, greeting greeting, expressing opinion acknowledging, assessment acknowledging, assessment disagreement, apology acceptance, congratulating thanks, and summons acknowledgement. The differences are influenced by the context of students whether they learn the target language as their first or foreign language. Different contexts of students will affect the dynamic of classroom interaction. The pattern of teacher-student interaction varied based on who asked the questions and what pattern developed in that interactions.In almost every exchange, the teacher provides an initiating move, then the students responds individually or in chorus to it, and the teacher finally evaluates the student‟s response. The opportunities for individual student to respond were given equally and were not limited by teacher talk. However, the analysis of the brevity of responses shows that students had limited occasions to interact at length utterances toward teacher‟s initiations. When students responded to teacher‟s question or statements, their answers remained brief and did not exceed few words in most cases. The result even shows that, the highest frequent functions in students‟ category were responding physically. This non-verbal communication is dominantly preferred by students when they responses to the teacher‟s instructions. 81 The findings revealed that the types of adjacency pairs found in teacher- student interaction in indoor outdoor category are: giving information acknowledging, giving instruction acknowledging, question answer, inviting accepting, asking for attention showing attention, greeting greeting, expressing opinion acknowledging, assessment acknowledging, assessment disagreement, apology accepted, congratulating thanks, and summons acknowledging.

B. Recommendations

The result findings in this research have significant implications for teachers as the educators who are expected to be able to improve the quality of teaching and learning English in primary classroom. Since interactions in language learning provide learners with the opportunities to receive input, teacher should improve this activities in their classroom. Adjacency pair plays an important role in provoking interactions between teachers and students. Therefore, teacher should try to understand what languages would be more efficient to be presented to the learners especially in provoking interactions in the classroom. Teacher also should be able in creating an environment in which students feel more comfortable and more confident in interactive activities. Therefore, the findings of this research are expected to be considered for teachers who who want to improve their interactive activities in the classroom: a. Different students have different characteristic. The teacher tends to have negative thinking when they are being interrupting by students. They used to ingored this behavior,just skip it and continued the activities. However, s tudent‟s interrupting doesn‟t always contain negative meaning as theyare naughty or hyperactive. Whereas, they might have something in their mind. 82 Interrupting can be asking for attention to clarify or to contribute questions. Teacher needs to spend a minute of time to give them attention, then the teacher will know whether the interrupting is really meant for interrupt or conversly, interupting can contributes learning. b. The fact that, teacher is the one who spent more time in classroom talk rather than students. However, sometimes teacher did not patient enough to spend time to wait the students while finishing their long or unclear statement which is full of stummer. He just skip it and find another students to contribute the answer correctly. Actually this is a good chance for teacher to lead the students into the language learning. By giving provoking questions, teacher might find what the exact statements she wanted to express. c. Since children are often more enthusiastic and lively as learners, creative activities are emphasized in classroom setting as the suplementary activity.By using, for example games, songs and chants, role play, etc, teacher can collaborate the lesson into these activities. Thus, it can a bridge between students‟ interest and the goals of the lesson. Teacher can effectively introduce traditional games based on the local wisdom. d. Students use language and nonverbal communications in outdoor activities. They are able to develop social interactions. Thus, outdoor activities are recommended as an integral part in English learning. 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY Amidon, E. Hough, J. 1967. Interaction Analysis: Theory, Research, and Application . New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc. Cameron, L. 2001. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carter, R.Nunan, D. 2001. The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chafi, M.E. 2014. The dynamic of classroom talk in Moroccan primary school: Towards dialogic pedagogy. International Journal of Education and Research, Vol. 2 no. 5. pp. 101-102. Cullen, R. 2002. Supportive Teacher Talk: The Important of the Follow Up Move. International Journal of Education and Research, Vol. 56 P.117. Ellis, R. 2008. The Study of Second Language Acquisition: Second. Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Graddol, D. 2006. English Next: Why global English may mean the end of English as a foreign language . London: British Council. Hatch,E. 1978. Discourse Analysis and Second Language Acquisition. Newbury: Newbury House. Ivanova, J.P. 2011. The Effects of Teacher Talk on L2 Learners’ Comprehension. The University of Utah, Published Thesis MA. Johnson, K. E. 1995. Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Long, M. 1996. The Role of Linguistic Environmentin Second Language Acquisition. Handbook of Research on Second Language Acquisition. New York: Academic. Mehrdad, R. Farahian, M. 2012. An exploration of discourse in an EFL classroom: Teacher talk. Social and behavioral sciences,pp. 1237-1238. Miles, R. 2004. Evaluating the Use of L1 in the English Language Classroom. Department of English University of Brimingham: Unpublished Dissertation. Mustaqim, H. 2001. Psikologi Pendidikan. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar Offset.