jircd (print) issn 20405111

jircd (online) issn 2040512x

Article

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

of students with specific learning difficulties
learning English as a foreign language
Irit Cohen*
Kibbutzim College of Education, Tel Aviv, Israel
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to explore teacher-student interaction in
classrooms of students with specific learning difficulties (SpLD) learning English
as a foreign language (EFL). This article presents an analysis of data from one
of three classrooms involved in a larger-scale research project. The conceptual
framework for the analysis and interpretation of the data includes socio-cultural
models of teacher-student interaction and examination of deviations from traditional, restricted Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) classroom sequences. The
main sources of data comprise transcripts of observation notes and video-taped
classroom interactions. Results show how one EFL teacher created and increased
opportunities for students participation in learning through her choice of teaching
strategies, verbal interaction and mediation. Findings reveal specific interactional
strategies, such as deviations from the IRF sequence and the teacher's questioning
and feedback style, which appear to facilitate participation and open up opportunities for EFL learning.
Keywords: ethnographic methodology; conversation analysis; case study

Correspondence address: Email: cirit1@netvision.net.il

jircd vol 2.2 2011 271292

2011, equinox publishing

doi : 10.1558/jircd.v2i2.271

272

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

1 Introduction
There is a tradition of support for language pedagogy throughout the
history of education. Globalization and the forces of economic and social
convergence have had a significant impact on wanting to achieve the best
possible results in foreign language learning (Coyle et al. 2010). While
learning a foreign language is an achievable goal for most learners, it may
become an especially burdensome task for those with specific learning difficulties (SpLD). These students are often poor foreign language learners
because they have less developed native language skills, particularly at the
phonological/orthographic levels (Ganschow et al 1995: 95), and the teaching methods may not accommodate their learning or processing strengths.
The aim of the study presented in this article is to examine teachers interactional strategies when teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) to
high school students with SpLD in order to search for types of interactions
which appear to support EFL learning.
This study follows a growing body of research in the field of second and
foreign language learning (henceforth referred to as L2) which has included
socio-cultural theoretical frameworks in an attempt to explore how L2 is
best taught (e.g., Aljaafreh and Lantolf 1994; Donato 2000; Jarvis and Robinson 1997; Ko et al. 2003; Lantolf 2000; Lantolf 2006; Lantolf and Poehner
2004; Nassaji and Cumming 2000; Walsh 2002). These studies draw on the
work of Vygotsky (1978) as well as later theoreticians (see, for example,
Wells 1999; Wertsch 1991) in an attempt to show how L2 development is
influenced by social interaction in the classroom. These socio-cultural theories have been successfully applied to L2 contexts, thus offering applied
linguistics an alternative to cognitive L2 acquisition theories and shifting
the concept of learning away from the acquisition metaphor towards metaphors of participation (e.g. Block 2003; Donato 2000; Swain 2000). From
the view that language grows through participation in social interactions,
it follows that L2 research should also probe the kinds of interactions that
may benefit its development.
Research in both L1 and L2 classroom interaction that builds upon
socio-cultural frameworks embodies the view that learning is a socially
constructed activity. It ascribes active roles to both teacher and student in
a learning partnership where learning is facilitated, but not controlled, by
the teacher. According to Webster et al.s model of adult-child proximation (1996: 4445), effective learning is viewed as a complex process, more
than just the sum of a number of small sub-skills. Learners are not seen
as isolated individuals who succeed or fail by their own efforts, but rather
teaching and learning are treated as social and communicative processes.
Teacher interaction opens up opportunities to take risks and make mistakes

Irit Cohen

273

and learning becomes a collaborative effort with partners who contribute

different perspectives and understandings. Tasks are contextualized in the
sense that teachers share the meaning and purpose with pupils. This model
of adult-child proximation is used in the current study in order to provide
background reference points against which data from the observational
study was interpreted.
Many studies examining classroom instructional conversation from a
socio-cultural perspective have based their classroom interaction analysis on
a pioneering study that identifies recurring patterns of teacher-pupil talk in
first language classrooms (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975). This study identifies a
three-part sequence generally known as: teacher initiation (the I move), learner
response (the R move) and teacher feedback (the F move). These components
have been found to be typical of classroom interaction. Applied linguists have
argued that although the IRF sequence also occurs quite frequently in everyday conversation, it is often used differently in the classroom (e.g. Nassaji and
Wells 2000: 377; Seedhouse 2004). In the classroom it is usually the teacher
who initiates the exchange, often characterized by display questions requiring
recitation and recall. Moreover, the teacher always has the right to provide the
feedback which is very often evaluative in nature (Nassaji and Wells 2000).
In such classroom interaction pupils become passive learners (vessels to be
filled) who are expected to come up with the right answer (Webster and Roe
1998; Webster et al. 1996). Studies which examined L1 adult-child interaction
amongst children with special needs found that during pedagogical interaction, teachers used strategies which required student imitation and repetition
significantly more than natural conversation (Heineman-Gosschalk 1999;
Webster and Roe 1998).
Nevertheless, L2 research studies have argued that in L2 instructional contexts where learners have limited language proficiency, it is more difficult for
teachers to replicate speech events that are natural outside of the pedagogical
setting (Gil 2002; Seedhouse 1996). Natural conversation, they argue, is differentiated from institutional discourse, and, in theory, it is not possible for L2
teachers to replicate conversation in the L2 classroom as part of a lesson (e.g.
Gil 2003; Seedhouse 1996, 2004). Research studies of L2 classroom interaction
that have gone beyond the IRF framework have found that significant effects
on the process of the discourse as a whole can be achieved by slight deviations
from the restrictive, traditional IRF sequence (Bliss et al. 1996; Cullen 2002;
Gibbons 2003; John 2003).
Despite the socio-cultural turn in L2 research (Johnson 2006), few empirical studies which have focused on L2 learners with SpLD have adopted the
socio-cultural perspective, thus shifting the attention from the pupils cognitive problems to the teaching context and the teacher. According to Fred-

274

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

erickson and Cline (2002: 133134), the predominant approach to studying

L2 difficulties has been based on cognitive learning theories within the positivistic paradigm, focusing on individuals weaknesses as the prime cause of
poor language learning. For example, Sparks and Ganschow (1991), looking at
what causes difficulties in foreign language learners amongst college students
with SPLD, suggested that weak foreign language readers and writers had difficulties mostly with the phonological, orthographical or syntactic codes of
language. Their Linguistic Coding Deficit Hypothesis, stated that difficulties
with foreign language acquisition stem from deficiencies in one or more of
the linguistic codes in the students native language system. As a result Sparks
and Ganschow believed that the SpLD students may have difficulty with the
actual perception and production of language necessary for basic comprehension, speaking and spelling (Ganschow et al. 1998; Sparks, 2006; Sparks and
Ganschow, 1993a, b; Sparks et al. 2006).
However, subsequent studies shifted the focus from students difficulties to
teaching programmes that were thought to enhance L2 learning, frequently
within experimental or semi-experimental designs. Those experiments aimed
at finding relationships between the use of certain teaching methods and
learners L2 acquisition (e.g., Schiff and Calif 2004; Sparks et al. 1997, 1998;
Torgesen et al. 2001).
Few published studies have broadened our understanding of the types of
teacher-student instructional interaction which facilitates learning in students
with SpLD (e.g. Kraker 2000; Rex 2000). Kraker (2000) undertook a longitudinal case study of four remedial teachers of L2 learners with SpLD. The
study was framed within a socio-cultural perspective, attempting to determine
the types of teacher support required for students to achieve academic progress. The research focused on one teacher, who taught five fifth grade students
with SpLD from ethnically diverse homes in which the English language was
impoverished. Analysis of the videotaped language lessons indicated verbal as
well as non-verbal interactions which appeared to improve students engagement in learning. These included: direct corrections, writing for students,
modelling the correct use of language, expansion of students ideas, monitoring students performance and giving an element of a choice. These strategies
appeared to promote students' question-initiation and self-corrections.
The second published empirical study informed by the socio-cultural view
to teaching and learning is a classroom based case study of a learner studying in a classroom which was part of a programme called Academic Foundations for Success (Rex 2000). This programme aimed to promote social
integration between student groups L2 learners, pupils with SpLD and
gifted learners. The educational philosophy underpinning the programme
was that in order to become identified as a rightful, capable member of a

Irit Cohen

275

classroom learning culture, pupils considered to be lower achievers had to

become equal participants and contributors to the classroom academic discourse. This philosophy involved their learning to ask genuine questions,
which meant that pupils were encouraged to ask any question they thought
relevant and important for them to know or understand. Specifically, the
researcher examined segments of instructional discourse where the teacher
created, through verbal classroom interactions, conditions for the active participation for Judy, an L2 learner with SpLD. The teachers feedback to Judys
questions aimed at providing her opportunities to reconstruct her questions through rephrasing and articulating her meaning through a request
for clarification while acknowledging her questions and sending a message
to the class that her questions can be valuable. The researcher concludes by
providing some evidence from Judys interview and test results at the end
of the school year which indicates her sense of improvement and successful
academic achievement.
From the above literature review it is apparent that research in the intersection of L2 and SpLD has been meagre and small scaled, focusing on one
teacher or one student. The aim of the current study was therefore to expand
the investigation of teacher-student interaction in English as a foreign language classroom of pupils with SpLD.

2 Method
The research question which guided the design and data analysis of this
study was: In what ways do teachers, through their choice of verbal interaction, create and increase opportunities for students with SpLD to participate in EFL learning? Participation in learning was defined as observable
manifestations of students actions that are oriented towards the goal of
learning ones that demonstrate taking part in the learning activity,
engagement, personal involvement and/or taking of initiative (van Lier,
1988). Thus, learning was defined by the newer participation metaphor
(Sfard 1998; Swain 2000).
This article presents data analysis from one of three classrooms involved in
a larger-scale research project (Cohen 2006).
2.1 Participants
This research was conducted in the classroom of a teacher who taught students who had severe difficulties in EFL literacy at a Kibbutz comprehensive
high school located in a central area of Israel. English in Israel is considered
a foreign rather than a second language as it is taught in the framework of
school a few hours a week. The students received four hours a week of EFL.
The teacher was recommended to the researcher by the pedagogical adviser

276

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

of the school as a good practitioner and thus served as a suitable opportunity sample for the investigation of constructive interaction. The teacher
was a female non-native speaker of English who had taught English for more
than ten years. The class consisted of 17 twelfth graders in their last year of
high school. Sixteen out of 17 of the class students had been diagnosed as
having SpLD. The students were preparing for the basic level (3 points) of the
matriculation examination in EFL which is considered the most high-stakes
examination in the Israeli school system. A pass-grade on the three-point level
exam is a minimum requirement for a high school diploma, without which
high school graduates cannot be admitted into higher education institutions
and find their job prospects restricted. The observation of the lessons started
four months before the EFL matriculation examinations took place, and many
lessons took the form of review and practice.
The procedures for identifying pupils with SpLD in the Israeli educational system are based on two definitions: the IQ-Achievement discrepancy
definition (DSM-IV) and the Interagency Committee on learning disabilities
definition (1987) (Sharabi and Margalit 2009: 4849). The discrepancy definition states that a significant IQ-Achievement discrepancy is a criterion for
an individual being identified as SpLD. Significance is defined as a discrepancy of more than two standard deviations between achievement and IQ,
and between one and two standard deviations in cases where an individuals
performance on an IQ test may have been compromised by an associated
disorder in cognitive processing (DSM-IV: 4647). The second definition
is based on the Interagency Committee on learning disabilities definition
(1987), which states that: Learning disabilities is a generic term that refers
to a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties
in acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning,
or mathematical abilities, or of social skills. These disorders are intrinsic to
the individual and presumed to be due to central nervous system dysfunction (1987: 222). Determination was based upon didactic assessments (for
example, phonological awareness, word decoding, reading comprehension,
spelling and written expression) performed by qualified educational diagnosticians to evaluate the pupils academic difficulties and abilities as well
as their basic learning skills, and/or psychological assessments to evaluate
pupils' psychological profile, performed by qualified psychologists (Sharabi
and Margalit 2009: 4849).
2.2 Data collection
The approach used in this research was a qualitative, case study methodology
(e.g., Bogdan and Biklen 1998; Davis 1995; Holliday 2002; Miles and Huberman 1994; Stake 1995). As mentioned before, this article presents data analy-

Irit Cohen

277

sis from one of three classrooms involved in a larger-scale research project

(Cohen, 2006). In the classroom discussed in this article the students were
17 twelfth graders in their last year of high school. Data from ten 45-minute
lessons were collected taking observation notes, audio and video recording.
Classroom observations were undertaken by arriving to the classroom with
the teacher, sitting at the back of the classroom taking field notes, audio or
video recordings. At first, only field notes and audiotapes were taken during
classroom observation for a couple of lessons and only later was videotaping used. Introducing the research instruments gradually made it easier for
the teacher and students to adapt to their presence. The data represented in
this article is based on four out of the ten lessons examined in the original
research.
2.3 Data analysis
Once data were collected and transcribed the data were divided into broad
units of lessons. Within each lesson, certain episodes were selected for analysis
according to their capacity to provide valuable information in relation to the
research questions. In line with Nassaji and Wells (2000) episode was defined
as being made up of sequences that, individually and cumulatively, contribute
to the achievement of the activity or task goal. Each sequence consists of an
exchange each exchange consists of obligatory Initiating and Responding
moves and may also contain a Follow up move (p. 383).
The data analysis consisted of: first, data analysis whilst in the field, during
data collection, (Bogdan and Biklen 1998; Miles and Huberman 1994), which
allowed further steps in data collection to be based on actual data which
emerged from the fieldwork. Second, data which was considered relevant and
of interest to the research questions were highlighted and then transcribed.
Initially, the selected data were transcribed verbatim. However, since the
classroom and interview data were a mixture of English and Hebrew, utterances that were originally in Hebrew and were translated into English were put
between slashes to differentiate them from ones that were originally spoken in
English.
The transcribed data were arranged chronologically and divided into
broad units of lessons which included descriptions of the relevant contexts for each lesson taken from observation notes. Within each lesson,
certain episodes were selected for analysis according to their relevance to
the research questions, and their capacity to provide valuable information in relation to the research questions. The analytical frameworks used
to describe, analyse and interpret the data are: the teacher-pupil quadrant
model (adapted from Webster and Roe 1998; Webster et al. 1996), and analysis of deviations from the IRF (Nassaji and Well 2000; Seedhouse 2004).

278

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

The analysis of deviations from the traditional, restricted IRF pattern (Dinsmore 1985; Nunan 1987) was chosen because studies of L2 classroom
interaction suggest that it is the IRF cycle which is primarily responsible
for traditional patterns of interaction. However, research has shown that
close examination of verbal interaction with a focus on deviation from the
IRF may yield instances of interaction that are not necessarily completely
restricted by the IRF pattern (Seedhouse 2004: 64).
Third, narrative description (Nunan 1990) was used to describe episodes,
events, actions, processes, situations, characters and the setting. These were
considered valuable to understanding the classroom interaction and how it
opens up learning opportunities.
Finally, thematic and categorical analysis of data was used (Bogdan and
Biklen 1998; Holliday 2002; Miles and Huberman 1994). When certain segments of data (verbal or non-verbal interaction) appeared to link to the
research questions they were marked and categorized under thematic headings, using a qualitative software (Kuckartz 2001). Using software ensured a
punctual and rigorous analysis of the data through which reoccurring interactional patterns were clustered and organized as categories and sub-categories
(Holliday 2002: 100). To examine the reliability of the categorization, samples
of categorized data were sent to a second analyst with research and TEFL
experience, asking him to categorize and/or analyse different episodes. The
second analysts analysis was then compared with the researchers and the categories were adjusted accordingly.

3 Results
The findings of this study reflect the analysis of four lessons. Findings generated from the analysis of the broader lessons are presented first, followed
by findings generated from analysis of shorter episodes containing deviations from the IRF sequence. This order reflects the stages in which the data
was indeed analysed starting from a wide perspective of whole lessons and
zooming into smaller units of interaction.
3.1 Analysis of whole lessons
The adult-child proximation quadrant model (Webster et al 1996; Webster
and Roe 1998) was used to analyse the broader lessons. The quadrant model
includes two continua which provide the structure for the framework. The
horizontal axis represents the degree of initiative, engagement and active
involvement of the pupil in the learning process, while the vertical axis represents the nature and level of the teachers management and control and
the way that the teacher mediates learning in general. The model provided a

Irit Cohen

279

framework for describing and locating the quality of teacher-student classroom interaction and enabled a wide perspective and a larger variety of
points of reference through which teacher-student interaction was analysed
and interpreted.
3.1.1 Teachers preparatory work regarding text, task and resources
The first finding was termed teacher's preparatory work regarding text, task
and resources. It appeared that preparatory work by the teacher was conducive to evoking the students participation. Data analysis of two consecutive 45-minute sessions in which students were engaged in a vocabulary
task while watching a sight and sound internet presentation revealed that
student participation was high. Analysis of the observation data revealed
that this may have been a result of the following factors. The teacher had
chosen a topic relevant to the students age and interest (a social-political
issue); although the topic itself was sophisticated, the teacher designed and
adapted texts so that they would not be too long or too difficult in terms of
syntax and vocabulary, while not sacrificing the contents of the text. Moreover, the teacher designed tasks that elicited success. For example, a task
that required students to scan certain lines of the text in search of specific
words and find their meanings was suitable for them, because it focused
on a specific skill and was limited to segments of text rather than whole
paragraphs or a whole text. In addition, the sight and sound internet presentation appeared to contribute to the students involvement in that it was a
multisensory input in which the voice text assisted those students with word
decoding difficulties to comprehend the text and the pictures assisted those
students with comprehension difficulties to infer meaning from context. In
this respect it appeared that using computer technology was supportive for
the students who otherwise experience reading comprehension difficulties.
In addition, the colourful, interactive and dynamic activity also appeared to
engage students attention more than an ordinary pen and paper activities.
The example below is taken from classroom observation of two successive
classes which took place in the computer room. During this observation the
teacher first introduced a reading comprehension task to the students that
they were to complete whilst watching an internet presentation and then
supported them in completing the task. The internet activity itself took place
in the second lesson. This involved an interactive sight-and-sound presentation about current political events. Excerpt 1 demonstrates the teacher's
preparatory work regarding text, task and resources and how it affects her
ability to engage the students in learning. The participants were the teacher
and 16 students (seven boys and nine girls).

280

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

Excerpt 1. Classroom observation of preparatory work done on by the teacher

1.

The pupils sit down at the computers and

begin working individually or in pairs
After everyone logs in, the teacher
goes to a student who did not manage to
start and assists. She walks around and
then starts the presentation. The presentation includes text and pictures.
The text draws the attention by its big
fonts and bold titles. The background
is blue. Some words are underlined. It
contains photos of people in a social
situation It appears to speak to the
pupils

2.

Teacher:

Only the beginning is a bit difficult. We

will go through it (She shows a pupil
how to look up a word using the dictionary on 'Word')

3.

Teacher:

At this stage I am letting you work on

your own. (She asks the person in charge
of the computer room to let students
work each at their own pace She then
begins to walk around the room, helping
pupils with the task).

In the above episode the teacher recruits student attention through the attractive sight-and-sound internet presentation which deals with a relevant topic a
scaffolding strategy that helps activate prior knowledge and motivates interest in
the subject at hand. The teacher then helps those who need assistance in getting
started. Once the pupils seem to be engaged in completing the task, she lets the
learners work independently and begins to walk around and provide help to
specific pupils who need her assistance in order to complete the task.
3.1.2 Encouraging students active and independent learning
The second finding emerging from analysis of whole lessons was termed
encouraging students active and independent learning. The following example
is taken from observation notes of the last episode of the lesson in the computer room where the internet presentation was carried out. The excerpt demonstrates several scaffolding techniques that the teacher used to encourage
students independent work, until they eventually were able to complete the
task.

Irit Cohen

281

Excerpt 2. Encouragement of independent learning

1.

Teacher:

Is this correct or incorrect according to

the presentation. Look for the key words.
She sits beside the student. Pupils work
on the task individually or in pairs.
When the teacher sits next to a student
to help she doesn't respond to other students questions She reads out a few
sentences from the worksheet and translates some words for the student.

2.

Teacher:

Does your chatting mean that you have finished? If theres a problem call me The
teacher approaches another student - the
one who told her during the break that
she thought the task was too difficult for
her to cope with. She sits next to her
for a few minutes and assists her

3.

Teacher:

But what does it say here? [She reads out

loud the text for the student]

4.

Teacher:

Is this right? [ She turns to a pair of

students working together]

5.

Teacher:

How are you doing?

6.

Student:

/We are making progress. We have finished

everything but missed a question. /

7.

Teacher:

Go back to it. [She approaches the

student]

8.

Student:

/Is the answer/ the west?

9.

Teacher:

/Is it reasonable? Think again./

The above excerpt shows how while students work individually or in pairs
the teacher walks around the classroom checking in on the various students and
assisting when needed, sitting by different students to assist them with vocabulary, reading strategies and word-decoding. The teacher reads out loud, uses
verbal cues to prompt reading strategies, and facilitates student engagement and
participation in order for learning to progress. It appears that students are not
seen as isolated individuals who succeed or fail by their own efforts. Furthermore, rather than providing students with an evaluative feedback or the right

282

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

answer, we can see that in turns 89 the teacher encourages a student to make
connections between the word west and his general knowledge so that he can
make an intelligent inference rather than making an impulsive guess.
3.2 Analysis of deviations from the IRF sequence
Following the analysis of whole lessons, analyses of smaller units of classroom
interaction were conducted. Since the adult-child verbal interaction is at the
core of the socio-cultural frameworks, it was important to probe interactional
styles that deviate from the traditional, restricted IRF sequence in order to
search for instances of teachers verbal scaffolding which lead to participation
in the learning process. Using Vygotsky's concept of the Zone of Proximal
Development, i.e., the difference between what a child can achieve on his or
her own, and what the same child can achieve when supported by a teacher
or more able other (Vygotsky 1978), the aim was to look at how the teacher
advances learning through verbal interaction.
3.2.1 Initiation by students
Data show that one type of IRF deviation which reoccurred during those
lessons was that of students initiating questions. Recorded data and observation notes provide some numerical evidence showing that in five out of
the ten lessons observed, teacher and student initiations of questions were
almost equal in number. Between 44 and 48% of the initiations belonged to
the students themselves rather than the teacher. These lessons included: an
internet presentation in the computer room; group and pair work guided by
the teacher in the English centre; and a guided role play. In these lessons the
students had a high level of engagement throughout the class period and most
of them appeared engaged in practising their language skills. In the other five
lessons there was unequal proportion between teacher and student initiations
and the teachers largely exceeded the students (approximately 80% teacher
initiations). Here, the lessons were based on teacher instructions and explanations about the language.
3.2.2 Teacher's questioning style
Another type of IRF deviation was concerned with questioning style. Many of
the questions initiated by the teacher were process-orientated in the sense that
students werent expected to provide the right answer but rather how and why
they came up with their answers. Most questions did not demand display of
knowledge of the correct answer, or rote repetition, but aimed at prompting
thinking processes and endeavoured to increase the students strategic thinking,
as illustrated below. The following example illustrates the teachers questioning
style. The excerpt is taken from a transcription of a video-tape recorded while

Irit Cohen

283

observing a lesson which took place in the English center. In this episode, the
teacher sits with a small group of students (three girls) while the other students
work on their own or in pairs, completing reading comprehension or grammar
tasks. The teacher and the three students are engaged in a multiple choice
reading exercise where they have to fill in blank spaces with correct words. The
following episode focuses on two test items (stative verbs) and demonstrates
how the teacher uses questions in order to probe the students understanding,
check language awareness and increase meta-cognitive strategies.
Excerpt 3. Teacher's questioning style
1.

Teacher:

/Look at the brackets. Can you say which

one is in the present and which is in the
past?/

2.

Sharon:

/No/

3.

Teacher:

/What do you do then?/

4.

Keren:

/But what is this? Is it in the future?/

5.

Teacher:

/It doesnt matter. Why cant know get

ing?/

6.

Tamar:

/I dont know./

7.

Teacher:

/Which group of verbs does it belong to?/

8.

Keren:

Stative verbs.

9.

Teacher:

/To know. Is it an action?/

10.

Tamar:

/Aha. So all the senses./

11.

Teacher:

/Yes, to know is a thinking act (touches

her head). If you remember that know is a
verb that does not get ing, you quickly
rule it out. Then you are left with deciding between this and that. Right?/

12.

Sharon:

/But what's the difference between them?/

13.

Teacher:

Can't you see the difference between know

and knew?/

14.

Sharon:

I can, but-/

15.

Teacher:

/Youll also hear it on the tape. You will

listen to it.

284

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

We can see from the above example that the teacher uses this activity in
order to probe pupils understanding, asking process-oriented questions
aimed at increasing grammatical awareness (e.g. Why cant know geting?
in turn 5). Turns 19 also reflect how the teacher assesses whether or not students have retained previously learned concepts (in this case the passive verbs)
through informal assessment (see, e.g., Rea-Dickins 2001) and also encourages them to make connections between new concepts and past learning (turn
7). In turn 13 the teacher assesses whether the failure to distinguish between
know and knew stems from an auditory difficulty. When the student says
that she can tell the difference when hearing the words the teacher refers her
to the use of the tape.

3.2.3 Teacher's feedback

A third finding emerging from the analysis of IRF is of teacher's feedback
moves which took the form of questions. These feedbacks demonstrate that
the teacher replies to students questions by handing the question back to
the questioner. The following example illustrates how she used this feedback
strategy. The excerpt is taken from the internet presentation lesson where students were engaged in completing their vocabulary task, while the teacher was
walking around answering questions.
Excerpt 4. Teacher's feedback
1.

Student:

(Student is asking the teacher in L1)

What is this word concrete. What is
concrete?

2.

Teacher:

Yeah. What is concrete? Let's see what it

says in the text (she reads the paragraph
where the word appears: " It is made of
concrete ").

3.

Student:

What is made of?

4.

Teacher:

Pointing at her sunglasses and saying

this is made of plastic.

5.

Student:

(in Hebrew) Iron?

6.

Teacher:

(in Hebrew) Actually it's concrete.

The example above demonstrates how a feedback in the form of a question can initiate a response from the student. In this case the teacher encour-

Irit Cohen

285

aged intelligent guessing from the context by handing the question back to
the student (turn 1 Yeah. What is concrete?) while making it clear that the
answer lies in the context.
Another feedback strategy that emerges from the dialogue was providing a
contextual clue (turn 34): when the student needed the meaning of the term
made of in order to understand concrete, the teacher provided him with
yet another contextual clue, knowing that plastic is a familiar term. The fact
that he came up with iron and not another material shows that he had made
a good intelligent guess (a strong material). It was not accurate but it was in
the right ballpark. So instead of letting him guess on, she gave him the answer.
It appears that the teachers feedback strategies succeeded in activating the
student in a process of inducing meaning from context.

4 Discussion
While learning EFL in Israel is compulsory for all school students and is
essential for academic, occupational and social purposes, it may become
an especially burdensome task for those with SpLD. Success in L2 learning
amongst learners with SpLD depends on a range of factors including the
quantity and the quality of the input, the learners language aptitude and
motivation to learn the L2, and the social interaction with others which may
influence the learners to communicate and overcome his\her linguistic deficiency (e.g., Genesee etal. 2004). The present study examines one influential
factor teacher-student interaction, making use of socio-cultural frameworks. The study shows how one EFL teacher, through her choice of teaching
strategies, verbal interaction and mediation, created and increased opportunities for students participation in EFL learning (e.g., Nassaji and Wells 2000;
Vygotsky 1978; Webster et al. 1996).
The research results reported in this article are consistent with findings
from previous studies that attest to the effectiveness of the dialogic approach
in promoting specific literacy skills and strategies in students with impaired
capacities for learning (e.g., Genesee et al. 2005). The most salient finding of
this research was the little use of the IRF sequence when meeting the needs
of students with SpLD. Data reveal that the kind of pedagogical interaction
which led to students participation in EFL learning incorporated deviations
from the traditional, restrictive, IRF pattern. IRF deviations included: providing students with opportunities to ask questions and initiate turns; asking
process-oriented questions; and providing answers and feedback in the form
of further questioning. This discourse style appeared to encourage students
to engage in higher order strategies which successful readers employ (e.g.,
making connections between new input and previous knowledge, making
intelligent contextual inferences, monitoring of comprehension) so that they

286

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

could comprehend text in English. This finding is in line with a large number
of previous experiments which have demonstrated how the process oriented questioning and reading comprehension strategies increased students'
comprehension of texts (e.g., Pressley 2000; Pressley and El-Dinary 1997).
Instruction of reading and meta cognitive strategies has been found effective
for L2 learners in advancing their understanding of academic texts (Genesee
et al. 2005; Vaidya 1999; Wayne and Collier 1997). These kinds of strategies
that are instinctively drawn upon by skilled readers when encountering challenging texts, were intentionally taught by the teacher in the current study
to these students who lacked them. By doing so, she encouraged them to
become more independent readers. The teacher used several more verbal
and non-verbal instructional techniques to encourage students independent
learning (e.g., moving around the classroom or sitting by various students
and assisting them when needed, reading out loud for certain students, using
verbal cues to prompt reading strategies). This facilitated student engagement and participation and enabled them to carry out the tasks which they
would not have been able to manage on their own. This finding accords with
sociocultural view of educational scaffolding (e.g., Mercer 2000; Wells 1999),
which is, in socio-cultural terms, a way of operationalizing the concept of
working in the zone of proximal development (Vygotsky 1978). Bringing the
learners to a state of competence which will enable them eventually to complete their tasks on their own and achieve some greater level of independence
is at the heart of Vygotskian theory (Wells 1999).
In addition to using the above scaffolding strategies while teaching, the
teachers preparatory work regarding the selection and adaptation of texts
and tasks (i.e., the internet presentation on a relevant political issue) enabled
her to engage the students in a grade-level and challenging theme which was
presented in a visually stimulating way. This finding accords with previous
research studies which provide research-based guidelines for making the
grade-level curriculum understandable and promoting academic success
for struggling L2 learners (e.g., Echevarria and Graves 2003; Echevarria et
al. 2004; Freeman and Freeman 2002). Adaptation of materials, the use of
visuals, connections to student experiences and prior learning, engagement
of students in challenging themes and student-to-student interaction have
been found as ways to promote L2 learning. Furthermore, research studies
comparing students who had been taught by teachers employing instructional approaches which included cooperative learning strategies, academic
tasks related to students personal experiences, technology, critical thinking and learning strategies, were found to be more engaged, comprehended
texts better and made faster long-term progress than students attending
more traditionally taught classes (Freeman and Freeman 2002; Wayne and
Collier 1997).

Irit Cohen

287

Although the results reported in this article are derived from a small-scaled
corpus of data, their compatibility with previous educational models provides
sound support to the claim that the current results indeed reflect supportive
teacher-student interaction. The aim of this study was to provide detailed analyses of everyday, natural classroom interaction by close examination of data
emerging from one classroom of a specific teacher, but with a view to good
practice. The results emerging from the fine-grained analyses of opportunities
that arose through sustained goal-directed interaction may have some important implications for professional practice and language education policy. The
results suggest that instructional strategies and the quality of teacher verbal
interaction have a potential to open up and increase learning opportunities for
SpLD students despite their limited literacy and communication skills. Programmes for training and practising EFL teachers should include systematic
opportunities for teachers to increase their awareness and knowledge not only
of SpLD causes, symptoms and intervention programmes, but also of sociocultural theories and the types of verbal interactions which have the potential
to facilitate learning. This may encourage practitioners to adopt better strategies for classroom interaction and consequently better meet some challenges
posed by the specific needs of students with SpLD learning EFL. It would be
interesting and important for future qualitative research on classroom interaction to embed some assessment measures of language acquisition which may
shed more light on causal links between teachers instructional interactions
and students language development.

Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the teachers who participated in this study, to Dr Kevin Haines,
my second analyst, to Professor Pauline Rea-Dickins, my EdD dissertation
supervisor, and to the anonymous reviewer for the constructive feedback on
earlier versions of the manuscript.

About the author

Dr Irit Cohen is a teacher of English as a foreign language (EFL), specializing in
remedial instruction and the assessment of specific learning difficulties. She has
worked as a teacher trainer at several remedial instruction specialist programmes
in Israel, notably in the English department of Beit Berl College and at the Kibbutzim College of Education. She has also worked as a remedial teacher assessor
of EFL difficulties in high schools and at a student support service centre at Bar
Ilan University. Her research interests include EFL instruction for students with
learning disabilities and the relationship between socio-cultural theory and L2
learning. Email: cirit1@netvision.net.il

288

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

References
Aljaafreh, A. and Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and 2nd-language
learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal 78 (4): 465483.
doi:10.2307/328585
Bliss, J., Askew, M. and Macrae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: Scaffolding revisited. Oxford Review of Education 22 (1): 3761. doi:10.1080/0305498960220103
Block, D. (2003). The Social Turn in Second Language Acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to
Theory and Methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Cohen, I. (2006). Effective Teacher-pupil Interaction in Classrooms of Pupils with Specific
Learning Difficulties Learning English as a Foreign Language. A dissertation submitted to
the University of Bristol for the degree of Doctor of Education in the Faculty of Social
Science and Law, Graduate School of Education.
Coyle, D., Phili, H. and Marsh, D. (2010). CILL. Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cullen, R. (2002). Supportive teacher talk: The importance of the F-move. ELT Journal 56
(2): 117127. doi:10.1093/elt/56.2.117
Davis, K. A. (1995). Qualitative theory and methods in applied linguistics research. Tesol
Quarterly 29 (3): 427453. doi:10.2307/3588070
Dinsmore, D. (1985). Waiting for Godot in the EFL classroom. ELT Journal 39 (4): 225234.
doi:10.1093/elt/39.4.225
Donato, R. (2000). Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second
language classroom. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language
Learning, 2750. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DSM-IV (n.d.). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition.
Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Echevarria, J. and Graves, A. (2003). Sheltered Content Instruction: Teaching English-language Learners with Diverse Abilities (2nd edn). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E. and Short, D. (2004). Making Content Comprehensible to English
Language Learners: The SIOP Model (2nd edn). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Feiler A., and Gibson, H. (1999). Threats to the inclusive movement. British Journal of Special Education 26 (3): 147153. doi:10.1111/1467-8527.00127
Frederickson, N. and Cline, T. (2002). Special Educational Needs, Inclusion and Diversity: A
Textbook. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Freeman, Y. and Freeman, D. (2002). Closing the Achievement Gap: How to Reach Limited
Formal Schooling and LongTerm English Learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Ganschow, L., Sparks, R. and Schneider, E. (1995). Learning a foreign language: Challenges

Irit Cohen

289

for students with language learning difficulties. Dyslexia (Journal of the British Dyslexia
Association) 1 (2): 7595.
Ganschow, L., Sparks, R. L. and Javorsky, J. (1998). Foreign language learning difficulties: An historical perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities 31 (3): 248258. doi:
10.1177/002221949803100304
Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W. and Christian, D. (2005). English language
learners in US schools: An overview of research findings. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 10 (4): 363385. doi:10.1207/s15327671espr1004_2
Genesee, F., Paradis, J. and Crago, M. (2004). Dual Language Development & Disorders:
A Handbook on Bilingualism and Second Language Learning. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in
a content-based classroom. Tesol Quarterly 37 (2): 247273. doi:10.2307/3588504
Gil, G. (2003). Two complementary modes of foreign language classroom interaction. ELT
Journal 56 (3): 273279. doi:10.1093/elt/56.3.273
Heineman-Gosschalk, R. (1999). The Roles of Teachers, Parents and Deaf Adults in Promoting Reading in Deaf Children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Bristol.
Holliday, A. (2002). Doing and Writing Qualitative Research, London: SAGE.
Interagency Committee on Learning Disabilities (1987). Learning Disabilities: A Report to
the US Congress, 222. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health.
Jarvis, J., and Robinson, M. (1997). Analysing educational discourse: An exploratory study
of teacher response and support to pupils' learning. Applied Linguistics 18 (2): 212228.
doi:10.1093/applin/18.2.212
John, C. (2003). Talking to Learn in the Literacy Hour: Patterns of Didactic and Informal Talk
and the Development of Reading with Particular Reference to Children Learning English as
an Additional Language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Bristol.
Johnson, K. (2006). The sociocultural turn and its challenge for second language teacher
education. Tesol Quarterly 40 (1): 235257. doi:10.2307/40264518
Ko, J., Schallert, D. L. and Walters, K. (2003). Rethinking scaffolding: Examining negotiation of meaning in an ESL storytelling task. Tesol Quarterly 37 (2): 303324. doi:10.2307/
3588506
Kraker, M. J. (2000). Classroom discourse: Teaching, learning, and learning disabilities.
Teaching and Teacher Education 16 (3): 295313. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00063-3
Kuckartz, U. (2001). MAX Qualitative Data Analysis Introduction. Berlin: VERBI Software.
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford and New
York: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J. P. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28 (1): 67109. doi:10.1017/S0272263106060037
Lantolf, J. P. and Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: bring-

290

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

ing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics 1 (1): 4972. doi:10.1558/
japl.1.1.49.55872
Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds: How we Use Language to Think Together. London:
Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203464984
Miles, M. and Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data-analysis: An expanded sourcebook.
Journal of Environmental Psychology 14 (4): 336337.
Nassaji, H., and Cumming, A. (2000). Whats in a ZPD? A case study of a young ESL student
and teacher interacting through dialogue journals. Language Teaching Research 4 (2):
96121.
Nassaji, H., and Wells, G. (2000). Whats the use of triadic dialogue? An investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics 21 (3): 376406. doi:10.1093/
applin/21.3.376
Nunan, D. (1987). Communicative language teaching. Making it work. ELT Journal 41 (2):
136145. doi:10.1093/elt/41.2.136
Nunan D. (1990). The teacher as researcher. In C. Brumfit and R. Mitchell (eds) Research
in the Language Classroom. Basingstoke: Modern English Publications and The British
Council.
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L.
Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson and R. Barr (eds), Handbook of Reading Research:
Volume III, 545561. Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
Pressley, M. and El-Dinary, P. B. (1997). What we know about translating comprehension strategies instruction research into practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30 (5):
486488. doi:10.1177/002221949703000504
Rea-Dickins, R. (2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall: Identifying processes of classroom
assessment. Language Testing 18 (4): 429462.
Rex, L. A. (2000). Judy constructs a genuine question: A case for interactional inclusion.
Teaching and Teacher Education 16(3): 315-333. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00064-5
Schiff, R., and Calif, S. (2004). An academic intervention program for EFL university students with reading disabilities. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 48 (2): 102113.
doi:10.1598/JAAL.48.2.2
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Seedhouse, P. (1996). Classroom interaction: Possibilities and impossibilities. ELT Journal
50 (1): 1624. doi:10.1093/elt/50.1.16
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one.
Educational Researcher 27 (2): 413.
Sharabi, A. and Margalit, M. (2009). Learning disabilities among the young in Israel: From
theory to research to intervention. In I. Levav, Psychiatric and Behavioral Disorders in
Israel from Epidemiology to Mental Health Action, 47-62. Jerusalem: Ed Green Publishing
House/Ministry of Health.

Irit Cohen

291

Sinclair, J. M. and Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used
by Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Sparks, R. (2006). Is there a disability for learning a foreign language? Journal of Learning
Disabilities 39 (6): 544557. doi:10.1177/00222194060390060601
Sparks, R. L., Artzer, M., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., Miller, K., Hordubay, D. J. and Walsh, G.
(1998). Benefits of multisensory structured language instruction for at-risk foreign language learners: A comparison study of high school Spanish students. Annals of Dyalexia
48: 239272. doi:10.1007/s11881-998-0011-8
Sparks, R. L. and Ganschow, L. (1991). Foreign language learning difficulties: Affective
or native language aptitude differences? Modern Language Journal 75 (1): 316. doi:
10.2307/329830
Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., Humbach, N. and Javorsky, J. (2006). Native language
predictors of foreign language proficiency and foreign language aptitude. Annals of Dyslexia 56: 129160. doi:10.1007/s11881-006-0006-2
Sparks, R. and Ganschow, L. (1993a). Searching for the cognitive locus of foreign language
learning difficulties: Linking first and second language learning. Modern Language Journal 77 (ii): 289302. doi:10.2307/329098
Sparks, R. and Ganschow, L. (1993b). The impact of native language learning problems on
foreign language learning: Case study illustrations of the linguistic coding deficit hypothesis. Modern Language Journal 77 (i): 5874. doi:10.2307/329559
Sparks, R., Ganschow, L., Artzer, M., and Patton, J. (1997). Foreign language proficiency of
at-risk and not at risk learners over 2 years of foreign language instruction: A follow-up
study. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30 (1): 9298. doi:10.1177/002221949703000108
Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA and London: Sage.
Swain, M. G. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Meditative acquisition through
collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language
Learning, 97114. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K., Conway, T. and
Rose, E. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of
Learning Disabilities 34 (1): 3358. doi:10.1177/002221940103400104
Vaidya, S. R. (1999). Metacognitive learning strategies for students with learning disabilities. Education, 120 (1): 186190.
Van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner: Ethnography and Secondlanguage Classroom Research. London: Longman.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes
(M. Cole, ed.). Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
Walsh, G. (1998). Benefits of multisensory structured language instruction for at-risk foreign language learners: A comparison study of high school Spanish students. Annals of
Dyslexia 48: 239272. doi:10.1007/s11881-998-0011-8

292

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms

Webster, A., Beveridge, M. and Reed, M. (1996). Managing the Literacy Curriculum: How
Schools can Become Communities of Readers and Writers. London: Routledge.
Webster, A. and Roe, J. (1998). Children with Visual Impairments: Social Interaction, Language and Learning. London: Routledge.
Wells, C. G. (1999). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Rducation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511605895
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wayne P. and Collier V. (1997). School Effectiveness for Language Minority Students. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Retrieved from http://
www.edtechpolicy.org/ArchivedWebsites/thomas-collier97.pdf