“ IMPRoving speaking skills through instruction in
oral classromm participation”
lilyhayati7@gmail.com
/ @LAbbyasha
Teacher Training and Education Faculty , English Study Program of Islamic University of Riau , Pekanbaru
Teacher Training and Education Faculty , English Study Program of Islamic University of Riau , Pekanbaru
Abstract
This papers addresses the various difficulties encountered when delivering oral classroom instruction to EFL Young learners . however, getting students to respond in a language classroom- especially in a foreign language class, is a problems is most language teacher face. it is essential for teachers to develop an awareness of the importance of oral instruction for good class management. And talking how the teachers gives a directions to their students in young learners based on their experiences in classes . supporting with data and theories from expert to do this journal .
This papers addresses the various difficulties encountered when delivering oral classroom instruction to EFL Young learners . however, getting students to respond in a language classroom- especially in a foreign language class, is a problems is most language teacher face. it is essential for teachers to develop an awareness of the importance of oral instruction for good class management. And talking how the teachers gives a directions to their students in young learners based on their experiences in classes . supporting with data and theories from expert to do this journal .
We examine teacher talk, important
features for classroom management some
developmental characteristic of children. We support our viewpoints with data
obtained from an action research study that consisted of classroom observations
of EFL Young learners. In this journal
its using observations and experiment in classroom , because to found the
character of children and get their natural abilities . for this journal was
made to improved students especially in learning process earlier for a foreign
language , likes giving instruction and
gives some oral instruction between their range ages.
Background
The Linkage between student’s participation and their academic achievement is undeniable ( Lim, 1992 ; Wudong , 1994 ; Zhou, 1991 ). Studies have shown that when students participate actively in class, their academic achievement seems to be higher than that of those who are passive in class. Krupa - kwiatkowski (1998) summarized in her study that “interaction involves participations, personal engagement , and taking initiative in some way, activities that in turn are hypothesized to trigger cognitive process conducive to language learning” (p. 133 ). Although studies indicate some language learner undergo a “silent period “ (Hanania & Gradman , 1977 ; krasen, 1982;Rodriguezt 1982 ) it is considered to be a natural part of second language acquisition (SLA) And may be beneficial to the second language (L2) learning process (Dulay, Burt, & Krasen 1982 ). Since oral participation is the most observable behavior, studies in the field of language learning have focused on the significance of student’s oral participation .
The Linkage between student’s participation and their academic achievement is undeniable ( Lim, 1992 ; Wudong , 1994 ; Zhou, 1991 ). Studies have shown that when students participate actively in class, their academic achievement seems to be higher than that of those who are passive in class. Krupa - kwiatkowski (1998) summarized in her study that “interaction involves participations, personal engagement , and taking initiative in some way, activities that in turn are hypothesized to trigger cognitive process conducive to language learning” (p. 133 ). Although studies indicate some language learner undergo a “silent period “ (Hanania & Gradman , 1977 ; krasen, 1982;Rodriguezt 1982 ) it is considered to be a natural part of second language acquisition (SLA) And may be beneficial to the second language (L2) learning process (Dulay, Burt, & Krasen 1982 ). Since oral participation is the most observable behavior, studies in the field of language learning have focused on the significance of student’s oral participation .
As part of our task as methodology teachers we are in charge of the the supervision of students – teachers in their practicum. People who enroll in our program are non-native speakers of English that spend five years at university to graduated as EFL teachers . The practicum covers two academic years . having spent many hours observing classes and collecting data on observation schedule with different categories, we were able to identify several problems related to class management we decide to focus on one particular area ; giving instructions to young learners.
As Wallace ( 1998 ) points out
deciding exactly what is to be observed is very important. At first the idea of
making an instrument was not very clear but we had observe many instances in
which unplanned and unstructured oral classroom instructions were very ineffective. We though, then, that by making
a list of the most common problems
encountered we could be able to prepare an observations schedule to collect
samples.
Teachers
Talk
Teachers talk is central in language class not only for classroom organizations and for the process of acquisitions ( nunan. 1991 ) but also as a mean for controlling students behaviors
( Allwright & Bailey, 1991 ). Researches has shown that teachers tend only sources of comprehensible input and live target language model. Several aspect of teachers talk have been the focused of researches ; amount of teachers talk as compared to that of students , code switching, speech modifications , types of questions used ( Nunan, 1991 ) , error treatment ,and the function distributes of teachers talk in relation to pedagogical and functional moves
( chaudron, 1988 ) ; however , to our knowledge , scarce attentions has been paid to the delivery of oral instructions specially on second or foreign language contexts.
Studies of classroom interactions have shown that it has a well-defined structure ( coulthard, 1997 ) and that pedagogical discourse differ from natural discourse. Teachers modify their speech during instructional in a way that resemble caregiver talk but with some peculiar and distinct features at the level of phonology , lexis, syntax, and discourse.
Teachers talk is central in language class not only for classroom organizations and for the process of acquisitions ( nunan. 1991 ) but also as a mean for controlling students behaviors
( Allwright & Bailey, 1991 ). Researches has shown that teachers tend only sources of comprehensible input and live target language model. Several aspect of teachers talk have been the focused of researches ; amount of teachers talk as compared to that of students , code switching, speech modifications , types of questions used ( Nunan, 1991 ) , error treatment ,and the function distributes of teachers talk in relation to pedagogical and functional moves
( chaudron, 1988 ) ; however , to our knowledge , scarce attentions has been paid to the delivery of oral instructions specially on second or foreign language contexts.
Studies of classroom interactions have shown that it has a well-defined structure ( coulthard, 1997 ) and that pedagogical discourse differ from natural discourse. Teachers modify their speech during instructional in a way that resemble caregiver talk but with some peculiar and distinct features at the level of phonology , lexis, syntax, and discourse.
Many researchers have tried to demonstrated the
benefits of simplified input. Input may be made comprehensible by the use of
verbal and nonverbal clues. ( 1983 as cited in scarcella and oxford , 1992 )
mentions some of the characteristic of simplified input at the different linguistic level ;
pronunciations, vocabulary, grammar.( Enright ,1991 ) explains that teachers
adapt their language in different ways to address children ; non-verbal
adaptations through gestures ,mimes, etc ; contextual ( visual and auditory
aids ) ; para-verbal ( speaking, clearly slowing pace, using pauses ) and
discover ( rephrasing , repetitions ).
In our observations , we have
detected an oversimplification and over modification of teachers speech that
result in phonological distortion and unidiomatic . we consider that teachers
could instead use more contextual aids or discourse strategies such as
rephrasing or repetition .
Instructions
As regards the functional allocations of teachers talk, J.D Ramirez et al ( 1986 as cited in chaudron, 1998 ) found that two – thirds of teachers explanations in elementary bilingual programs are procedural ones (i.ee. ways of structuring lessons activities ). Soliciting moves, in others words those intended to elicit a ) a verbal response b ) a cognitive or c ) a physical response are an essential element of classroom discourse ( Bellack et. al.,1996 ass cited in coulthard,1997 ).
children do not have difficulties in recognizing the controlling role of the teacher in the classroom . They “seems to learn to scan all teacher’s utterances for potential directive function “ ( Holmes, 1983, 112 ) identifying those that have the force of commands and that it other context may be interpreted as suggestions or advice. Willes ( 1975 as cited in Holmes, 1983 ) explain that students are moved by a strong desire to please their teachers.
Holmes groups teacher directive into three main categories ; imperative , interrogatives and declaratives.
As regards the functional allocations of teachers talk, J.D Ramirez et al ( 1986 as cited in chaudron, 1998 ) found that two – thirds of teachers explanations in elementary bilingual programs are procedural ones (i.ee. ways of structuring lessons activities ). Soliciting moves, in others words those intended to elicit a ) a verbal response b ) a cognitive or c ) a physical response are an essential element of classroom discourse ( Bellack et. al.,1996 ass cited in coulthard,1997 ).
children do not have difficulties in recognizing the controlling role of the teacher in the classroom . They “seems to learn to scan all teacher’s utterances for potential directive function “ ( Holmes, 1983, 112 ) identifying those that have the force of commands and that it other context may be interpreted as suggestions or advice. Willes ( 1975 as cited in Holmes, 1983 ) explain that students are moved by a strong desire to please their teachers.
Holmes groups teacher directive into three main categories ; imperative , interrogatives and declaratives.
Speech function directives
|
||
1. imperatives
|
form
|
example
|
a. Based form on verb
|
-
Speak louder
|
|
b. You + imp.
|
-
You go on with the work
|
|
c. Pres. Part.
|
-
Looking at me
|
|
d. Verb ellipsis
|
-
Hands up
|
|
e. Imp + modifier
|
-
Turn around , please go
|
|
f. Let + 1st pers. Prop.
|
-
Let’s try
|
|
2. interrogatives
|
a. Modals
|
-
Will you read this page
for me
|
b. Non – modals
|
-
People at the back are you
listening
|
|
3. declaratives
|
a. Embedded agent
|
-
I want you to draw a
pictures
|
b. Hints
|
-
Sally, you are not saying
much.
|
It
is evident that teachers directives may be realizes in a wide array of forms.
Holmes found in her data that imperative were the most frequent type in all its
variants and these were explicit not to cause any misunderstanding expect for
those that contained elliptical forms. Indirect forms did not cause much
trouble either specially if they referred to required or proscribe activities. Most of
the interpretative problems she found were related to contextual factors or
behavior expectations of the teachers.
Instructional Principle: When teachers explain exactly what
students are expected to learn, and demonstrate the steps needed to accomplish
a particular academic task, students learn more. Direct instruction rejects (or
at least sets aside) the assumption that students will spontaneously develop
insights on their own. Rather, direct instruction takes learners through the
steps of learning systematically, helping them see both the purpose and the
result of each step. The basic components of direct instruction are:
- Setting clear goals for students and making sure they understand these goals.
- Presenting a sequence of well-organized assignments.
- Giving students clear, concise explanations and illustrations of the subject matter.
- Asking frequent questions to see if the students understand the work.
- Giving students frequent opportunities to practice what they have learned.
Note that Direct Instruction
(spelled with capital letters) often refers to a specific system for implementing direct instruction, developed by Siegfried Engelmann
and others. (See the link to the Association
for Direct Instruction.)
Direct instruction does not
contradict the notion of constructivist learning, which maintains that learners must
construct meaning for themselves with regard to any topic. A constructivist
would simply say that with direct instruction learners receive assistance in
developing meaning for themselves. That is, learners are more likely to develop
insightful understandings about relatively "objective" topics if they
receive expert guidance. The function of the teacher is to maximize the
learner's active thinking about the topic. The learners still actively
construct their own knowledge.
Not all topics are amenable to
direct instruction. Direct instruction has proved especially effective in
teaching basic skills (such as how to use a microscope or the definitions of
important terms in biology) and skills that are fundamental to more complex
activities (such as basic study skills or the prerequisite skills for long
division).
Direct instruction is not as
likely to be useful for teaching less structured topics, such as English
composition or the analysis of social issues. However, research has shown
(e.g., Cotton, 1991) that as long as teachers also employ other effective
pedagogical principles, direct instruction works in a surprisingly wide range
of situations. An excellent discussion of direct instruction can be found in Rosenshine (1986). Direct instruction
is one of the activities that the computer performs especially well.
Some examples to children to
increase their ability in speaking skills :
(giving command):
(giving command):
- Please, go to school.
Pergilah ke sekolah. - Please, help me.
Tolonglah saya. - Please, study hard.
Belajarlah dengan keras. - Please, write down the
sentence.
Catatlah kalimat tersebut. - Please, read the letter.
Bacalah surat tersebut. - Please,
do the homework.
Kerjakanlah latihan tersebut. - Please, come early.
Datanglah pagi-pagi/awal. - Please, catch the rabbit.
Tangkaplah kelinci tersebut. - Please, smile.
Senyumlah. - Please, open the door.
Bukalah pintu. - Please, close the window.
Tutuplah jendela. - Please, tell about it.
Ceritakanlah tentang benda.
children’s characteristic
we will now consider some of the natural abilities and character of children have since by trying to understand better how children learn we will learn from them. The problems teachers showed when giving instructions might be taken as an evidence of an overlook of the forces that drive children between 9 and 11 years old. following piaget ( 1967 )we can say these children are at the concrete stage where experience plays a major role in all learning.
when witness teacher talking without engaging students attention , about their problems:
1. Students interruption impatiently
2. Ignore the fact that children have a good instinct to get the “ sense or meaning of a situation “.
They work out the meaning, they interpret clues provide by the context or situation more
quickly than words.
3. We have to remember children learning by doing ( Holdrerness, 1991 )
4. Is very important if teacher want to capitalize the fact that children are curious and active and
that they engage in physical activities as much as they learn through interactions with others
people.
5. Checking understanding is also important, specially understanding of the whole message.
As ( Halliwel,1991 ) observe this can be done by being alert and watching faces, movement
and attitude.
Effective
Instructions
in our observations of young learner classes , the various difficulties encountered by teacher when delivering oral classroom .
1. Blackboard Activities
in our observations of young learner classes , the various difficulties encountered by teacher when delivering oral classroom .
1. Blackboard Activities
- Odd one out. Draw a circle, a square, the number 3 and a triangle on the board. Encourage the children to identify the image that does not belong (the number 3). Repeat this with new drawings or using flashcards/activity cards.
- What’s missing? Write 4 or 5 numbers on the board. Tell the children ‘Close your eyes’ and rub out one of the numbers. Children open their eyes and must say the number that is missing. Once they have played a few times, encourage children to come to the front of the class and rub out the numbers. This can also be done with pictures or flashcards.
- What is number three? Draw 3 or 4 classroom objects or animals on the board. Write random numbers (from 1-10) next to the pictures. Ask questions such as “What is number 7?” Ss: It’s a cat! “What number is monkey?” Ss: Three!! Point to pictures and ask: Is it a (mouse)?
- What is it? Begin drawing a picture on the board (for example, a mouse) but draw it very, very slowly stopping every once in a while for students to guess what you are going to draw. Ask ‘What is it?’
2. Physical Response Activities
- Please... Tell the children that they are going to play a game. They must only do the actions if the teacher says the word ‘please’. For example, say Please stand up (children stand up), please jump (children jump), close your eyes (children shouldn’t close their eyes as the word please was not said).
- Human numbers. Encourage the children to make numbers with their body. Say a number, the children try to form the number. Once they have done this a few times, they can try to form numbers with other members of the class.
- Mime and guess. Encourage different children to come to the front of the class and mime an emotion (bored, happy, sad, frightened). The other children guess the emotion then act out the emotion.
- Back drawing. Encourage the children to draw a number from 1-20 on their partner’s back. Their partner tries to guess the number then draws a number on the other child’s back.
- Count around the room. Tell the children to count from 1-20 taking turns saying the numbers. Establish the order in which the children will count before they begin. When the children reach 20 see if they can count backwards (20,19,18...).
- Body Connectors. Place the children in pairs or groups of 3. Give commands such as ‘Hand to hand’ (children put their hands together). Later, add commands such as Hand to arm, Arm to foot. Option: When the children have played a few rounds tell them that when you call out “body connectors” that they should change partners.
When working with large groups of young learners it is
important to be prepared for the unexpected. Children, like adults, are
unpredictable hence, as teachers, we should always be ready to change the pace
of the class and channel the children’s energy.
Result
in this sections we will discuss the result obtained after collecting data in primary classes with the observations tool designed by us. Problems by percentage as ; speech modifications 28 %, no demonstrations 24 %, no organizations of pair / group 16 %, no engagement of attention 12 %, no checking understanding 12 %, asking for classifications before hearing whole instruction 8 %.
in this sections we will discuss the result obtained after collecting data in primary classes with the observations tool designed by us. Problems by percentage as ; speech modifications 28 %, no demonstrations 24 %, no organizations of pair / group 16 %, no engagement of attention 12 %, no checking understanding 12 %, asking for classifications before hearing whole instruction 8 %.
The
most conflict categories was speech modifications, mainly un-English discourse
. in a context like ours where English is taught as a foreign language ,
teacher language learning concentrates mainly on academic aspect , at the
expense of others aspect equally important. For example in a class teacher need
to demonstrate adequate English competence . several studies have show that
classroom interactions .
In
short, our research study reveals, as Ur
( 1991 ) very well states, that teacher must plan the deliver of
instructions beforehand , thinking not only of the words to be used but also
the gesture and aids to demonstrated meaning. And also from Wright ( 2003 ) the
characteristic of effective teachers commands . must refers one of task , used
specific language , objective on time, are stated as directives rather than
questions ,not included negative emotions .
References
Allwright , D. & K. Bailey . 1991. Focus on the language classroom . Cambridge : Cambridge
university press.
Brumfit, C. 1991. Teaching English to Children. (eds. C. Brumfit , J, Moon and R .Tongue ).
London , U.K : Harper Collins publisher.
Chaudron , C. 1988. Second language classrooms : research on teaching and learning . USA ;
Cambridge University press.
Coulthard. M. 1977 .An Introductions to Discourse Analysis . London : Longman.
Enright, S. 1991 . Supporting children’s English Language Development in Grade Level and
language classroom . in celce-Murcia (ed. ) Teaching English as a foreign language , USA :
Heinle & Heinle.
Holderness, J. 1991. Activity –based teaching : approached to topic – central work. In Teaching
English to Children .( eds. C. Brumfit , J.Moon and R. Tongue ). London, U.K : Harper
Collins publisher .
Holmes, J. 1983. The structure of teacher directives. In Richards , J. and schmidth , R ( eds. )
Language and Communications , England : Longman .
Krashen, S. D . 1985. The input Hypothesis : issues and implications . New York :
Longman.
Moon, j. 2000. Children learning English . oxford : macmillan Heinemann.
Nunan, D. 1991. Language teaching methodology. Great Britain ; prentice hall.
piaget , J. 1967. Six psychological studies. London : London University press.
Scarcella. R, and R. Oxford . 1992 The tapestry of Language learning. USA ; Heinle & Heinle
publisher.
Sinclair , J. M. and Coulthard, R. M. 1975. Towards and Analysis of Discourse. Oxford :
University press.
Ur. P. 1991 . A course in language teaching: practice and theory . Cambridge : Cambridge
university press.
Wallace, M. 1998. Action research for language teacher . Cambridge : Cambridge University
press.
Wright, J. Effective teacher commands : establishing classroom control . in the savvy teacher’s
guide : selected ideas selected ideas for behavioral interventions . www. Interventional.org.
Retrived May 10, 2003.
Moon, j. 2000. Children learning English . oxford : macmillan Heinemann.
Nunan, D. 1991. Language teaching methodology. Great Britain ; prentice hall.
piaget , J. 1967. Six psychological studies. London : London University press.
Scarcella. R, and R. Oxford . 1992 The tapestry of Language learning. USA ; Heinle & Heinle
publisher.
Sinclair , J. M. and Coulthard, R. M. 1975. Towards and Analysis of Discourse. Oxford :
University press.
Ur. P. 1991 . A course in language teaching: practice and theory . Cambridge : Cambridge
university press.
Wallace, M. 1998. Action research for language teacher . Cambridge : Cambridge University
press.
Wright, J. Effective teacher commands : establishing classroom control . in the savvy teacher’s
guide : selected ideas selected ideas for behavioral interventions . www. Interventional.org.
Retrived May 10, 2003.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar