CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the writer describes the information related to the research and
give important reason in deciding this title. That involves background of study,
limitation of problem, formulation of problem, and purpose of study.

A. BACKGROUND OF STUDY

According to Murcia, M (1995:51) stated that “language

instruction is communicative competence; language instruction must be
integrated with cultural and cross-cultural instruction.” In addition,
instructional explanation might serve as one example of a component of
teaching that is common across most instances of teaching (cf. Leinhardt,
2004).
In the other hand, language instructors should use materials that are
well contextualized and meaningful to learners. In addition, the learning
objectives should be grounded in some type of real world discourse: a
story, a dialogue/conversation, a cartoon strip with accompanying
language, a radio broadcast, a video/film clip, an e-mail message, a letter,
a recipe, etc. (Celce-Murcia and Olshtain 2000). Then the work on
instructional conversation points to the importance of how teachers take
up, elaborate, and extend students’ thinking during instruction (O’Connor
& Michaels, 1993). Furthermore, Instruction is the information how to do
(Oxford, PD., 2008: 231).
The writer assumes that instruction is how to do something that
teacher given for the students in learning classroom process, especially in
English classroom. The successful of activity is determined by teacher
instruction and students’ understanding in learning classroom. Especially,
the way teacher communicates with the students will provoke them to
understand what teacher means. So it depends on what the activity that
 teacher will do in the English classroom activity. It can be simply that it
related with the language that teacher use in learning classroom process.
Then, when delivering the instruction, the teacher should be
meaningful and can be understood by students. So it related with the
vocabulary that teacher used, and the teacher also should consider the
students’ understanding to deliver the instruction. In the understanding
students will provoke the students’ output, then students’ performance will
be reached. It can be assumed that the way teacher delivers instruction will
determine students’ performance. So the teacher should engage the
students to think over about the teacher instruction, when the students will
do something as the teacher’s instruction while in the English classroom.
Because of that reason, the writer wants to analyses how teacher
deliver the instruction while they are in English classroom. Notably, the
writer tries to investigate teacher’s instruction that identify learners output
in English classroom.

B. LIMITATION OF THE PROBLEM

Based on the background of study, the writer will limit the
problem. It focuses on an investigating teacher’s instruction that identify
learners output in English classroom.

C. FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM

Based on background of study and limitation of the problem, the problem
is formulated as this research question:

How does teacher’s instruction identify learner output in classroom

discourse?
D. PURPOSE OF STUDY
The purpose of this research as follows:
1. To know how the teacher instruct the students in classroom
discourse.
2. To know how the students respond of the teacher instruction
3. To know the teachers’ instruction influence students output in
classroom discourse.
 CHAPTER II

LITERARY REVIEW

A. Definition of Instruction
Instructions are a key aspect of classroom discourse which has
unfortunately received little attention in the literature. Furthermore,
instructions may be one of the few occasions on which language is being
used for meaningful communication rather than as an object to be learnt
(Campbell and Kryszewska 1995). Furthermore, according to Rosenshine
(1995: 1) explained that “instruction refers to specific pattern of
instruction that emerged from studies which attempted to identify the
instructional procedures used by the teachers”.So it means that the
instruction is sequence pattern to gain the students understanding in
learning class, then students can understand what the teacher say and do
the activity as the teacher’s instruction. Students get information from the
teacher’s instruction to do task or assignment. Instruction is the
information how to do (Oxford, PD., 2008: 231).

Principles of Instruction
Rosenshine (2010, 2012) defines the principle of instruction

….She has summarised at least 40 years of research on effective

instruction with a key set of principles that maximise its impact. The
starting point for this evidence base is a set of correlational studies
linking particular observed classroom teacher behaviours with higher
student outcomes. For each of these principles there is also
experimental evidence showing that attempts to train teachers in
adopting these behaviours can result in changes in teacher
behaviours and improvements in student outcomes.
In outline the ten principles are:
1. Begin a lesson with a short review of previous learning
2. Present new material in small steps, with student practice after each
step
3. Ask a large number of questions and check the responses of all
students
4. Provide models for problem solving and worked examples
5. Guide student practice
6. Check for student understanding
7. Obtain a high success rate
8. Provide scaffolds for difficult tasks
9. Require and monitor independent practice
10. Engage students in weekly and monthly review
It can be conclude that all of the items above are sequenced of
teacher instruction in classroom discourse. Those items concern on how
teacher deliver their instruction to engage the students doing the
instruction smoothly. So the teacher will know how far the students’
understanding the teacher instructs to do the exercises in classroom
discourse. Actually, the teacher will monitor the students’ performance.
Processing Instructional

Processing instructional is most crucial in classroom discourse.

Because it will influence students’ processing strategies in learning
language classroom, automatically it will influence also in students’
performance. It is proven base on the theory that processing instruction has
been compared to traditional output based instruction as found in
textbooks (Cadierno, 1995; VanPatten & Cadierno, 1993; VanPatten &
Wong, 2004), to meaning-based output instruction (Farley, 2000; 2001;
2004), and to explicit instruction alone and structured input alone (Benati,
2004; VanPatten &Oikkenon 1996).The primary goal of processing
instruction is to influence learner processing strategies to alter the
developing system (VanPatten, 2002).

Identifying and Classifying Exchanges

An exchange has been defined as the ‘minimum unit of interaction and
comprising one or more moves’ (Sinclair and Brazil 1982: 53). That it
focuses on exchanges in eliciting transactions. For directing transactions
where the teacher is the only speaker, how to identify units of interaction
is unclear.

Type of Characteristics of the Exchange

exchange
Boundary Realized by an exchange in which the teacher presents
a signal for the start of a new transaction. Boundary
exchanges usually include frame and focus.

Instruction Refers to any exchange indicating that the whole class

is required to do something, which can be performed at
the same or different period of time
Inform Realized by an exchange in which the teacher provides
information to the class related to the lesson. The
information may be transferred to the class by the
teacher verbally or nonverbally ,e.g. using visual aids
Insertion Realized by an exchange in which the teacher
introduces mostly off-topic information, e.g. jokes,
discipline, rhetorical questions, or other pieces of
information interrupting the main flow of the
discourse.
 Identifying and Classifying Moves
A move refers to the smallest free unit or unit which can stand by itself in
discourse (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975). As such, moves as discourse units
are likely to coincide with syntactically defined T-units (see Barnwell 1988;
Foster et al. 2000; Fries 1994), although single T-unit complex sentences
may consist of two moves.

Kinds of Move Characteristics of the Move Type

Frame Realized as a closed class pronounced in proclaiming tone
and followed by a measured pause.

Focus Realized as a set of sentences indicating a teaching unit

which may include a time expression.
Direct Realized by the teacher requesting the students to do some
activity.
Opening Realized by a move indicating that the first set of
information of a transaction is opened.

Counting Realized by a move in which the teacher counts.

Recall given Realized by the teacher reproducing an utterance previously
information uttered.

Transfer Realized by the teacher providing new information to the

knowledge discourse.

Give moral Realized by the teacher giving encouragement to the

support students.

Complaint Realized by the teacher complaining about classroom

discipline, activities, or any other aspect which may or may
notbe relevant to the lesson.
Organize the Realized by the teacher organizing group work prior to an
class
activity.
Filler Realized by a move making the main discourse delayed or
 paused

B. Learner Output
When the students heard the teacher’s instruction, the students do not
answer verbally; however, they understand the statements as instructions
by following them physically. The students follow the teacher instruction
through the performance. So it is called learner output. It base on Gass and
Mackey’s (2000)

C. Classroom Discourse
The definition of classroom discourse is various interpretations.
According to Nunan (1993) claimed that “views classroom discourse as
the distinctive type of discourse that occurs in classrooms. Discourse in the
language classroom is a matter of the oral use of language in the
classrooms.” Based on this theory, Classroom discourse is term that exists
in classroom especially in usage of language classroom.

Broadly speaking, classroom studies can be viewed from three different

perspectives (Johnson and Johnson, 1998):
1. From the perspective of interaction (between teacher/learners with
each other)
2. From the perspective of the effects of instruction on language
development.
3. From the perspective of whether different methods of instruction
have different effects on language development.

According to (Chang, 1999: 2-3), discourse in a classroom can be divided

into fourstructures as follows: 1. IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback), 2.
Instruction, 3. Probing Questions, 4. Argumentation.
IRF: IRF may have a traditional pattern of discourse, when the teacher
asks a question, the student answers and the teacher evaluates. The teacher
continues to ask another question and so the sequence continues. «In this
typical three-part structure, the teacher initiates a question in order to
check a student’s knowledge, a student’s responses, and the student’s
response is evaluated with Feedback from the teacher» (Our focus)
(Richards et al.,1992:52). The students’ answers are usually brief and
students are concerned about giving correct answers that are expected by
the teacher. The main role of the teacher is asking questions, but only a
few students are actively involved.

Instruction: Another type of discourse is giving instructions. The teacher

gives directive or informative statements. The students do not answer
verbally; however, they understand the statements as instructions by
following them physically.
Probing Questions: The probing a question is another discourse structure.
The teacherasks Referential questions or «thinking questions» (Brown,
2001: 171) and the students are encouraged to give longer answers through
their thinking. Their answers may challenge the teacher’s position.
However, evaluation does not come immediately after the students’
responses.
Argumentation: Argumentation can be regarded as probing questions
where the teacher involves the students in a challenging situation in order
to make them to justify their reasons. The questions asked are commonly
Referential questions, which try to elicit predictions, explanations and
clarification from the students.
 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the writer wants to expose about research method, subject of
research, data collection and data interpretation.
A. Research Method
In this study, the writer uses qualitative design to expose the
information of teacher instruction and learner output. It tends to the
description of each term especially in classroom discourse. The writer
supposed to acquire the information as natural as possible. So the
writer can be able to indicate the influence of each term. Then, the
tendency is to dig all the information be clear.
Notably, the writer use qualitative data to employ this research.
According to Nunan (1992:371) stated that “Qualitative data have to
do with meaning.” Based on this theory, the writer tends to the
meaning of the data which is gotten by the respondent which include
Classroom observation, questionnaires and interviews.
B. Subject of research
As Nunan (1992) claimed that the case study researcher typically
observes the characteristics of an individual unit- a child, a clique,
a class, a school, or a community. Based on the theory, the writer
will choose the subject of this study have one teacher and two
students of junior high school, where it takes from randomly that
the data exposed the information of teacher’s instruction that
identify learner output. Then, for the population that the writer had
chosen VIII A grade at Junior high school.
C. Data Collection
In this study, the writer uses the qualitative data to dig the
information more deeply as follows:
a. Observation
To know how teacher delivers him/her instruction in
classroom discourse and how the teacher types of exchange
and types of move in teacher instructions. So the writer uses
classroom observation to obtain the data more obvious. It
based on Nunan(1992:258) defined that ”Classroom
observation as a family of related procedure for gathering data
during actual language lessons or tutorial sessions, primarily
by watching, listening and recording.” Actually, the writer
uses videotape to observe the class.
b. Questionnaires

The writer wants to use questionnaires to require the

information accurate and more useful to collect and analyze.
So the writer could be easier to arrange and describe the data.
Notably, the writer uses the closed and open question in
questionnaire type. It could get the information completely.
According to Nunan (1992: 143) Stated that “ questionnaires
is relatively popular means of collecting data in field setting,
and the data themselves are more amenable to quantification
than discursive data such as free-form fieldnotes, participants
observe journal, the transcripts of oral language.” Actually,
the questionnaires will give for the students to know how far
students understand of teacher’s instruction. I obtained
permission from the authors of this instrument in order to
include these items on the questionnaire (Appendix I).
 c. Interview
Not only the questionnaires which used but also the writer
uses interview to get the information. The writer tries to gain
the information more clearly, so it can be provoke this study
be accurately. Actually the writer used unstructured interview
to dig the information more deeply. It based on
Nunan(1992:149) claimed that “An unstructured interview is
guided by the responses of the interview rather than the
agenda of the researcher. The researcher exercises little or no
control, and the direction of the interview is relatively
unpredictable.” So it can be conclude that the writer wants to
complex information to support this study. Basically, the
interview will be giving for the teacher. The writer wants to
know what the type of move and sequenced in teacher’s
instruction.
D. Data Interpretation
In this phase, the writer would like to interpret the data from data
collection and describe it. It involved Questionnaires and interview
that will be done for two students of senior high school.
a. Classroom observation
In this phase, the writer analyzes the data from videotape that
was the processing teacher instruction in classroom discourse.
And the writer also identifies learner respond in students’
performance of teacher instruction in classroom discourse.
b. Questionnaires
In this phase, the writer attains the data from the
questionnaires. There are 20 questions that consist of 15
closed items and 5 of opened items. Whereas, the closed item
includes the principle of teacher instruction, it belong to the
teacher.Then for 5 items is opened item that involve of
 students understanding of teacher instruction in classroom
discourse.

Actually, the writer used Likert scales consist of a series of

statements all of which are related to a particular target
(which can be, among others, an individual person, a group
of people, an institution, or a concept); respondents are asked
to indicate the extent to which they agree or disagree with
these items by marking (e.g., circling) one of the responses
ranging from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree. ' For
example: Hungarians are genuinely nice people. Strongly
Agree Neither agree Disagree Strongly agree nor disagree
disagree. After the scale has been administered, each
response option is assigned a number for scoring purposes (e.
g., 'strongly agree' = 5,'strongly disagree' = 1). With
negatively worded items the scores are usually reversed
before analysis. Finally, the scores for the items addressing
the same target are summed up or averaged. Thus, Likert
scales are multi-item scales, following a 'summative model. '
(Dornyei:37)
c. Interview
This last phase is to gain the information from the interviews
it is about the teacher instruction, how teacher’s instruction
could identify learner output and what principle of teacher in
giving the instruction in classroom discourse. The questions
are belong to the teacher. Then, the writer also will interview
students to know the teacher activity in the classroom
discourse, especially how they understand the teacher
instruction. How the difficulties when they try to understand
the teacher’s instruction, and how they will do when they did
not understand about the teacher’s instruction. So the writer
can able to indicate the teacher’s instruction identify students
output.