Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 16 no. 5 (2023)

Teacher and Student Interaction: An Analysis of Flint and Feedback Response Pattern

Christian Jay O. Syting | Gretchen Mediano | James Cruz | Shanylle Tayo

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This descriptive qualitative research aimed to describe the teacher and students' interaction using the Foreign Language Interaction (FLINT) system. This study also utilized Initiation- Response-Follow-up Acts (IRF) to identify the categories of initiation, response, and follow-up acts used in CTE classrooms at the University of Mindanao. The study utilized purposive sampling to select the participants. Then, data collection was done through an interview and observation conducted among eight (8) participants: five (5) CTE teachers for the interview and three (3) CTE classrooms for a 2-hour observation each. The results show that in terms of initiation, students occasionally initiate conversation, and then teachers often follow up with a response. Thus, it does not imply that follow-up happens after every contact in the classroom. Moreover, the data gathered revealed that the teacher and students take equal turns in the learning process. Teachers encouraged students to reflect on their thinking and learning processes and promote student autonomy. This includes accepting students' feelings, praising or encouraging them, using their ideas, asking questions, and giving time to support silent and confused students during class. On the other hand, students occasionally respond to teachers' initiation and even initiate queries and share ideas. Regarding turn-taking, it was found that one or two moves are needed, such as a follow-up move and an initiating move or a responding move and an initiating move. Hence, it cannot be argued that the order of initiation-response-follow always governs classroom engagement.



References:

  1. Abbas, R. (2020). “Silence got us nowhere. We need to speak up” ”: One woman’s anguish and outrage over her sister’s disappearance and the millions of others into the concentration camp network. Index on Censorship, 49(3), 14-16.
  2. Aelterman, N. M. (2019). “Toward an Integrative and Fine-Grained Insight in Motivating and Demotivating Teaching Styles: The Merits of a Circumplex Approach. Journal of Educational Psychology 111, 111 (3): 497–521.
  3. Ahmadi, F. &. (2018). The effect of indirect teacher talks on Iranian EFL learners' reading comprehension ability. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 201-214.
  4. Ajeet Singh P., &. F. (2020). The Use of Authentic Assessment in Evaluating Learner's Competence in the 21st Century. A Systematic Literature Review. Journal: Education Sciences, . https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/10/5/134.
  5. Alcott, B. (2018). Does teacher encouragement influence students’ educational progress? A propensity- score matching analysis. Research in Higher Education, 58, 773–804.
  6. Alerby, E. (2020). Silence Within and Beyond Pedagogical Settings. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Pivot.
  7. Amerstorfer, C. M. (2020). ). Problem-based learning for preservice teachers of English as a foreign language. Colloquium New Philol, 5, 75–90. doi:10.23963/cnp.2020.5.1.4 .
  8. Amiryousefi, R. &. (2019). The effectiveness of direct and indirect instruction in enhancing EFL learners' writing performance. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(3), 631-637.
  9. Andrews, R. L. (2019). Cultivating Inclusive Learning Environment through Student-Centered Teaching Practices. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 22, 1-12.
  10. Ani, A. (2019). Positive feedback improves students’ psychological and physical learning outcomes.
  11. Indonesian Journal of Educational Studies, 22 (2), 135-143.
  12. Appel, H. (2021). Positive Feedback for Students. Examples and How You Can incorporate it into Your Classroom., https://edulastic.com/blog/positivefeedback-for-students-examples/.
  13. Aubrey, S. K. (2020). Language learner engagement during speaking tasks: A longitudinal study. RELC Journal, 0033688220945418.
  14. Baepler, P. W. (2019). It's not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Active Learning in Higher Education, 20(1), 9-21.
  15. Bartholomew, T. L. (2021). Teachers’ questioning strategies: An important element of teaching and learning. Educational Research Review, 32, 100374.
  16. Bates, L. &. (2020). Communication in the Classroom: Strategies for Supporting Students' Cognitive and Affective Learning. In L. M. Webb & J. T. Dillon (Eds.). Helping Students Learn, (pp. 45-64).
  17. Batson, C. (2021). New Teachers. How to Start Your First Year With Confidence., Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/new-teachers-how-start-your-first-year-confidence/.
  18. Beltran, J. C. (2018). Examining the effects of the Application of a Student Response System in teaching Media and Information Literacy to Senior High School Students. Philippines. Ateneo De Manila University. .
  19. Black, L. (2004). ). Differential participation in whole-class discussions and the construction of marginalised identities. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 5(1), 34–54 .
  20. Bradshaw, C. A. (2017). Employing a Qualitative Description Approach in Health Care Research. Sage Journals. , https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393617742282.
  21. Brown, H. D. (2001). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Wesley Longman, 2000.
  22. Buecker, S. N. (2018). Subjective well-being and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality , 74. https://edtechbooks.org/-PHzN .
  23. Cefai, C. C. (2019). Understanding and promoting student well-being in schools: An investigation into student perspectives. Educational Research, 61(2), 203-222.
  24. Chin, M. J. (2020). Bias in the Air: A Nationwide Exploration of Teachers’ Implicit Racial Attitudes, Aggregate Bias, and Student Outcomes. Educational Researcher Cresswell, JA. The qualitative orientation in medical education research. Korean J Med Educ, 2017 Jun29 (2):61-71. .
  25. Cleaver, S. D. (2019). Overview of Performance Feedback. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute.Retrieved from https://www.winginstitute.org/teacher-evaluation-feedback.
  26. Cleland, J. (2017). The qualitative orientation in medical education research. Pubmed, 29(2):61-71 Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28597869/.
  27. Cohen, E. G. (2018). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York : Teachers College Press.
  28. Crabbe, R. P. (2019). Contemporary college students’ reflections on their high school peer crowds.
  29. Journal of Adolescent Research, 34(5), 563–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558418809537.
  30. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research , 209(240), 209-240.
  31. Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, And Mixed Method Approaches: Fifth Edition. America. (New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 2001) : SAGE Publications. Inc.Pedagogy. Second Edition.
  32. Dwiana, N. R. (2021). “I’m afraid I can’t”: Initiating Acts on Refusal Strategy Realization. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 297-308 .
  33. Ferdian, S. (2020). IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback) on Classroom Interaction in Speaking Class at Second Semester. Lain Bukittinggi .
  34. Ferlazzo, L. &. (2018). Activating Prior Knowledge with English Language Learners. Edutopia, https://www.edutopia.org/article/activatingprior-knowledge-englishlanguagelearners/#:~:text=Students%20learn%20better%20when%20they,English%20anguage%20learners'%20academic%20literacy.&text=Activating%20prior%20knowledge%20means%20both,order%20to%20access.  
  35. Fong, C. S. (2018). When feedback signals failure but offers hope for improvement: A process model of constructive criticism. . Thinking Skills and Creativity, DOI: 10.1016/j.tsc.2018.02.014 .
  36. Furrer, C. J. (2019). Criticizing students or justifying your own authority: Implications for teacher credibility and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(7), 1142-1157.
  37. Gan, Z. A. (2021). Teacher Feedback Practices, Student Feedback Motivation, and Feedback Behavior. How Are They Associated With Learning Outcomes?, 12, | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.697045.
  38. Hagan-Burke, S. B. (2021). Teacher-student rapport and school success: A systematic review and meta- analysis.            Review            of Educational Research,       91(2),   250-301. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320962152. 
  39. Hanh, N. (2020). ). Silence is Gold? . A Study on Student's Silence in EFL Classrooms, Retrieved from eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1258946.
  40. Hanna, A. (2021). Silence at school: Uses and experiences of silence in pedagogy at a secondary school. British Educational Research Journal, 47(5): 1158–1176.
  41. Hansen, B. (2021). Handling Unexpected Negative Feedback as a Teacher. Retrieved from https://apuedge.com/handling-unexpected-negative-feedback-as-a-teacher.
  42. Hariri, E. &. (2020). Refusal Speech Act in EFL Context. The Relation between Social Status , Distance, and Strategies Used, 5(7), 1301–1313.
  43. Haryadi, R. S. (2021). Enhancing Students' High-Order Thinking Skills through STEM-Blended Learning on Kepler's Law During Covid-19 Outbreak. jurnal.untirta.ac, 7(2): 168-192. Retrieved from https://jurnal.untirta.ac.id/index.php/JPPI/article/view/12029/0.
  44. Hattie, J. &. (2020). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 1-27. .
  45. Hawaii public schools course description catalog. (2019). hawaiipublicschools.org, Available online at: https://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/DOE%20Forms/ACCNCourseGuide.pdf  (accessed March 12, 2020).
  46. Hernik, J. &. (2018, March 5-7). The effect of enjoyment on learning [Conference proceedings]. Valencia, Spain: International Technology, Education and Development Conference.
  47. Jaeger, E. (2019). Initiation, response, follow-up and beyond: Analyzing dialogue around difficulty in a tutorial setting. . An International Online Journal, 7, 1-26. .
  48. Kartini, K. S. (2022). Initiation-Response-Feedback Pattern Used by Lecturer-Students in EFL Classroom Interaction.Researchgate.net, 6(1) Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362667883_Initiation-Response-Feedback_Pattern_Used_by_Lecturer-Students_in_EFL_Classroom_Interaction.
  49. Kelvin, S. (2017). Leaving principals and applications. McGraw Hill International. McGraw Hill International. .
  50. Klapproth, F. F. (2020). Teachers’ experiences of stress and their coping strategies during COVID-19 induced distance teaching. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(4), 444–452.
  51. Kocak, F. &. (2020). Effects of Classroom Management on Student Engagement in Learning: A Systematic Review Study. Journal of Education and pRactices, 11(3), 43-54. 
  52. Koenka, S. &. (2020). Students as co-designers: A review of the benefits and challenges of involving students in educational design. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(2), 293-319. .
  53. Lee, J. H. (2020). The role of teacher care in promoting positive student outcomes. . Teaching and Teacher Education, 89, 103007. .
  54. Lee, J. S. (2019). Teacher as change agent: attitude change toward varieties of English through teaching English as an international language. Asian Engl, 21, 87–102. doi: 10.1080/13488678.2018.1434396 .
  55. Li, C. (2022). Foreign language learning boredom and enjoyment: the effects of learner variables and teacher variables. . Lang. Teach. Res, 1362168822. doi: 10.1177/13621688221090324 .
  56. Liao, Y. &. (2018). Student talk in mathematics classrooms: A systematic review. Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College, 9(1), 1-13. .
  57. Liu, Y. (2020). Praise and encouragement: A review of empirical studies. International Journal of Educational Research, 99. 101507.
  58. López, P. J. (2021). Monitoring psychological factors when using “reading to speak” strategies to prevent development of mute english phenomenon in efl classrooms (Master›s thesis).
  59. Mercer, S. a. (Doi: 10.1017/9781009024563 ). Engaging language learners in contemporary classrooms.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  60. Mizokawa, A. &. (2017). Sensitivity to criticism and theory of mind: A cross cultural study on Japanese and Italian children. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14:2, 159-171, DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2016.1180970.
  61. Moskowitz, G. (1971). Interaction Analysis- a new modern Language for supervisors. Foreign Language Annals, 5, pp. 211-21.
  62. Moskowitz, G. (1971). Interaction Analysis: A New Modern Language for Supervisors. In: Brown (2001). Teaching by Principles: an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. .
  63. Mousavi, S. N. (2021). Teachers' scaffolding and preferences of display vs. inferential questions: Initiation-Response-Follow-up (IRF) model. Preventive Counseling, 2(1), 13-29. 
  64. Niu R., J. L. (2018). ). Effect of proficiency pairing on L2 learners’ language learning and scaffolding in collaborative writing. . Asia Pac. Educ. Res. , 27 187–195. 10.1007/s40299-018-0377-2 .
  65. Palinkas, L. H. (2015). Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Adm Policy Ment Health , 42, 533–544 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y. 
  66. Pekrun, R. E. (2021). Achievement goals and achievement emotions as mediators between teacher lecturing and student performance: A longitudinal field study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(1), 171-182.
  67. Putri, E. V. (2021). Analyzing the Initiation- response and feedback patterns and its impact on the interaction between teacher and students in English classroom. Indonesian Research Journal in Education, 5(2), 462-478.
  68. Rahmi, A. A. (2018). An analysis of irf (initiation-response feedback) in interaction between teacher and students in English class at sma negeri 2 Padang Panjang. Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(3), 415-425.
  69. Rashidi, N. &. (2010). Analyzing patterns of classroom interaction in EFL classrooms in Iran. The Journal of AsiaTEFL, 7(3), 93-120.
  70. Reibel, A. (2021). Uncovering Implicit Bias in Assessment, Feedback and Grading.
  71. Rodriguez, J. &. (2018). Rodriguez, J.B., & Wilstermann, I.M. (2018). Learner initiative in the Spanish as a foreign language classroom: Implications for the interactional development Hacettepe. University Journal of Education, 33 (2018), pp. 113-133 .
  72. Sani, F. H. (2022). The Analysis of Teachers’ Talk during Classroom Interaction in English Class Using Flint Category. Proceeding of International Conference on Language Pedagogy (ICOLP), 2(1), 143–151. Retrieved from https://proceeding-icolp.fbs.unp.ac.id/index.php/icolp/article/view/82shan.
  73. Schmidt, S. W. (2016). How faculty learn to teach online: What administrators need to know?. Online Journal of Distance Learning  Administration, Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring191/schmidt_tschida_hodge191.ml .
  74. Sedova, K. &. (2020). ). Teacher expectancies, teacher behaviour and students’ participation in classroom discourse. The Journal of Educational Enquiry, 15(1), 44–61.
  75. Sedova, K. N. (2020). Silent students and the patterns of their participation in Classroom talk. Researchgate.net.
  76. Sequeira, L. (2020). Silence in the classroom is not necessarily a problem. blogs.lse.ac.uk.
  77. Shanmugavelu, G. A. (2020). Questioning Techniques and Teachers’ Role in the Classroom. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8(4), 45-49.
  78. Simon, C. A. (2019). National Council of Teachers of English. Using the think-pair-Share technique. readwritethink.org.
  79. Smith, L. a. (2018). “Silence in the foreign language classroom: The emotional challenges for L2 teachers,” in Emotions in Second Language Teaching, ed. J. D. Martinez Agudo. 323–339. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-75438-3_18 .
  80. Snell, J. a. (2018). ‘‘Low ability,’’ participation, and identity in dialogic pedagogy. . American Educational Research Journal, 55 (2018), pp. 40-78 .
  81. Sofyan, R. R. (2014). Teacher Talk in Classroom Interaction: A Study at an English Department in Indonesia. ojs.unm.ac.id, 1(1).
  82. Spiegel, V. (2021). Acknowledging and Affirming Our Students’ Experiences. mathforamerica.org.
  83. Tsui, A. (1985). Analyzing input and interaction in second language classrooms. RELC Journal, 16(1), 8-32. .
  84. Tsui, A. (1994). English Conversation by Amy Tsui. escholarship.org, 6(2): 1050-4273.
  85. University., N. (2023). Qualitative Descriptive Design - Section 2 - NCU Library. Resources.nu.edu, Retrieved from https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013605&p=8395553.
  86. Vahedi, E. &. (2021). Teachers’ Scaffolding and Preferences of Display vs. Inferntial Questions.Initiation-Response-Follow-up (IRF) Model, 2(1), 13-29. .
  87. Wormeli, R. (2018). Fair Isn't Always Equal: Assessment and Grading in the differentiated Classroom.
  88. Second Edition. Second Edition, Eric.ed.gov.
  89. Xu J., K. J. (2018). The effect of task type on group interaction in college English classrooms. . Foreign Lang. Teach, 24 29–38. .
  90. Yang, J. L. (2020). How teachers’ praise and questioning affect students’ cognitive ability: An analysis using structural equation model based on CEPS data. Education Guide, 2020(5):45-50.
  91. Yang, W. &. (2018). he role of direct teacher talk in vocabulary instruction for EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 11(4), 1-11.
  92. Yao, D. X. (2021). Effects of teachers’ praise and criticism on students’ academic performance, an intermediary effect analysis based on CEPS data. Peking University Education Review, 2021(1):109-133.

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic