the relationship between class size and young …
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG
LEARNERS’ INVOLVEMENT IN INTERACTION
WITH TEACHER:
A Preliminary Study of Two Different-Size EFL Classes
Erfan
Indonesia University of Education
ABSTRACT
Observing the interaction among learners and their teachers is really necessary in
order to know what makes comprehensible input that can be internalized and to
notice effective output for externalization as realization of the function of linguistic
structure. This article focuses on the relationship between interaction patterns in
different class-size, especially the students’ involvement to the interaction.
Employing conversational analysis and qualitative investigation of problems based
on theoretical framework, this study found out that different teachers’ talk initiates
different involvement of interaction. The patterns of interaction between students and
teacher depend on what the content of talk itself is. In this preliminary study, the
teacher of the larger class size tended to talk in order to make the students act
because the talk or the instruction is addressed to many individuals. Meanwhile, the
teacher of smaller class size tended to talk in order to generate students’
communicative competence because the teacher addressed individual. In addition,
because of the pattern of interaction in the context of this study site, the smaller class
size has high-involvement interaction whether between teacher and students or
student and student. The high involvement interaction is apparent in the topics,
pacing, narrative strategies, and expressive phonology, as pragmatic aspects of
high-involvement interaction.
Keywords: class-size, teachers’ talk, and high-involvement interaction
![Page 2: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
A. Introduction
Acquiring language in the primary years is really important. Language
reflects the complexity of human brain – because more than anything else, language
is what shapes the human brain during critical period in which each individual moves
from infancy into and through early childhood (Halliday, 2005). In adolescent
period, thinking about language is taken for granted because naturally adult people
tend to pay attention to the function of linguistic utterance rather that conscious
attention to what is heard and said. Therefore, explaining issues about language
education in practical situation is really important to know the map of how language
is used in its acquisition period.
Practically and formally, deliberate language education in childhood period
takes place in classroom, especially for education in which the conscious attention to
linguistic awareness is developed. Many observations on many aspects of teaching
and learning in a classroom have been conducted to reveal what makes difference
among one educational program to others. Debate in determining the effectiveness of
teaching because of some aspects of teaching-learning emerges, such as different
view about class size toward teaching effectiveness (Blatchford, 2003). Debate about
class size affect many aspects of teaching, such as teaching activities, teaching
support, children attention, peer-relation, etc.
The effectiveness of teaching in the smaller size of class, one of them, is
because of the availability of interaction between teacher who presumably has better
knowledge about particular language and his/her students who still evolve to better
use of that particular language. Interaction with the experienced in using language is
really important in facilitating second language learning (Swain and Suzuki, 2008).
Interaction does not only provide more input but also chance to make output for an
enhancement of language use, called externalization.
Observing the interaction among learners and their teachers is really
necessary in order to know what makes comprehensible input that can be internalized
and to notice effective output for externalization as realization of the function of
linguistic structure. However, there should be careful attention to how the interaction
is acted out. Interaction meant by Swain and Suzuki (2008) is a communicative one,
![Page 3: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
in which students participate and are engaged in two-way talks so that the talks
become meaningful. This meaningful communication can also provide corrective
feedback for language learning.
This article focuses on the interaction between teachers and students. The
observation about the significance of interaction in classroom has been conducted,
such as done by Swain and Suzuki, but further notice about the relationship between
interaction pattern and class-size, especially the students’ involvement to the
interaction, still needs investigating. This article investigates the students’
involvement in interaction with teachers. Because of diversity of interaction that can
emerge from those variables, the following questions clarify what this article tries to
find out:
1. Does teachers’ talk make students’ high-involvement interaction?
2. Which class-size that shows students’ high-involvement in interaction with
teachers?
Constructive Talk
Teachers’ job involves a lot of talk (Coultas, 2009). Teachers may make
questions, direction, instruction, information, etc., in classroom. What this article
means by talk, particularly teacher’s talk, refers to variety of language sometimes
used by teachers when they are in the process of teaching (Richards & Schmidt,
2002). In trying to communicate with learners, teachers often simplify their speech,
giving it many of the characteristics of foreigner talk and other simplified styles of
speech addressed to language learners. By this teacher talk, teacher tries to make
support as well as demand in teaching process to bridge students for comprehensible
input or stimulate meaningful output.
In determining what kind of talk that teacher should do in the classroom,
Coultas (2009) suggests constructive talk that can lead student to attentive listening
and high involvement in the classroom. She noticed some features of constructive
talk, as the followings:
1. Being ready for the pupils and greeting them on arrival
2. Talking about direct experience and encouraging pupils to do the same
![Page 4: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
3. Encouraging students to work in pairs and small groups and training them to
share and value each other’s ideas and opinions
4. Setting up informal debates and panels to encourage students to express their
opinions and giving them a chance to speak to different audiences
5. Allowing students to become involved in peer mentoring or reading projects with
younger students
6. Talking one-to-one with the pupils about the lesson and about other issues of
interest to them
7. Making it clear why speaking and listening are important and recording and
rewarding pupils for progress in this strand
8. Using different arrangements of furniture, different rooms for different activities,
and different equipment, e.g. tape recorders, video cameras and ICT, to record
and develop oral skills
9. Using open-ended questions and allowing pupils to do the same
10. Encouraging pupils to evaluate their learning and showing pupils that you will
adapt your teaching as a result of their feedback
11. Talking about how we learn and establishing ground rules for talk.
Related to class size, the talk of teachers sometimes shows domination in the
classroom. Walsh (2002) identifies some features of teacher’s talk wherein the
following features happen because of too large extent of EFL classroom:
1. teachers largely control the topic of discussion;
2. teachers often control both content and procedure;
3. teachers usually control who may participate and when;
4. students take their cues from teachers;
5. role relationships between teachers and learners are unequal;
6. teachers are responsible for managing the interaction which occurs;
7. teachers talk most of the time;
8. teachers modify their talk to learners;
9. learners rarely modify their talk to teachers; and
10. teachers ask questions (to which they know the answers) most of the time.
Children’s Talking in the Language Teaching Classroom
![Page 5: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
In order to be able to talk, children must have acquired the ability to use
language. There are three senses when asserting child’s acquisition of language
(Bruner, 1983: 17):
1. The first is in terms of well-formedness: that he or she is becoming able to make
utterances that conform to the rules of grammar.
2. The second is its capacity to refer and to mean. There might be a child who can
construct utterances that syntactically well formed but that do not mean anything.
3. The third is its function and communicative intent or how to get things done with
words.
In developing children’s language, comprehensible input is necessary. To
understand language, one must have gone a little beyond where he/she is now. In
order to achieve it, the use of context, knowledge of the world, extra linguistic
information is helpful to understand new language (structure) (Krashen, 1982).
Exposure to the target language (language being learned) takes better role, for this
view, than training to use certain function of some structure of language.
The view about language learning above has ever stood out through years
before output hypothesis of Swain’s develops such view. From Swain’s hypothesis,
language learning is expected to be more communicative and meaningful not only in
one-way, teacher to students, but also students to teacher. Therefore, interaction
between teachers and learners facilitates language teaching (Swain & Suzuki, 2008).
Attention, noticing, and awareness of students’ as learning in communicative
situation are increased as they are involved within. In order to acquire language in
those three senses it is very necessary for students to communicate what they have
got so that immediate feedback can confirm the use of the language they have
acquired.
Domination of adult, parents or teachers, to children in terms of
communication is getting attention from children caretaker. This is not only about the
needs of language acquisition but also, in the sense of human right (law) (McLeod,
2008). Allowing children to talk, McLeod adds, makes the work with them more
effective. In language teaching in communicative situation, collaboration between
teachers and students is really necessary to make the communication more
![Page 6: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
meaningful, besides giving their right to talk. The chance to talk for children leads
them to high-involvement of children in the interaction (talks).
Another support for this view is article by Brown and Kennedy (2011) about
students’ learning through conversation. Teacher-students interaction supports the
socialization experience of students, and in addition to that, the interaction also
supports the very process of learning. From the beginning to end of the program,
Brown and Kennedy (2011) notice certain shift of conversation pattern between
teachers and learners. At first, the students still need support even to participate in
the conversation, but at the end, classroom conversation became more typical of a
dialogue, of course, with cooperative support of the teachers.
Study about the relationship between class-size and teaching process has been
conducted, as Blatchford, et.al. did for their comprehensive investigation using
multimethod analysis. The result shows that in smaller classes there is more
individualized teacher support for learning (Blatchford, et.al., 2002). Smaller classes
provide more teaching time allocation to each individual. This time allocation
becomes the main reason that students’ individual support from teacher can be
provided. However, longer time allocation doesn’t guarantee for students’
involvement to the interaction.
High-Involvement Interaction Features
Students’ involvement in interaction with their teachers is really important as
indicated in the output hypothesis as externalization and confirmation of their
knowledge. In addition, this involvement also helps the ‘original mental capacities’
in learning language, namely, means-end readiness; a sensitivity to transactional
enterprises; systematicity in organizing experience; and abstractness in rule
formation (Bruner, 1983). By trying to speak up what they mean, students develop
‘means-end readiness’. Transactional enterprises are also constructed as they try to
make interactive talk with others. Systematicity in organizing experience is enhanced
by the practice of experiencing the using of language. Finally, the abstractness in rule
formation is characterized as they do externalization of using the language.
Is every student’s conversation with teacher always good for learning?
Mercer (2002; in Brown and Kennedy, 2002) believes that good conversation for
![Page 7: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
learning in the classroom is exploratory talk, which explores students’ emotion or
social behavior in a interactive and collaborative ways.
The characteristics of exploratory talk are included in the high involvement
interaction. Therefore identification of kinds of interaction in the classroom is
identified in the sense of its language features proposed by Tannen (2005). She
identified some conversational styles. By identifying the features of certain
conversational style, she noticed interpersonal involvement of certain conversation
by the following features:
1. Topic
a. Prefer personal topics
b. Shift topics abruptly
c. Introduce topics without hesitation
d. Persist (if a new topic is not immediately picked up, reintroduce it, repeatedly
if necessary)
2. Pacing
a. Faster rate of speech
b. Faster turn taking
c. Avoiding interturn pauses (silence shows lack of rapport)
d. Cooperative overlap
e. Participatory listenership
3. Narrative strategies
a. Tell more stories
b. Tell stories in rounds
c. Prefer internal evaluation (i.e., the point of a story is dramatized rather than
lexicalized)
4. Expressive paralinguistics
a. Expressive phonology
b. Marked pitch and amplitude shifts
c. Marked voice quality
d. Strategic within-turn pauses
![Page 8: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
By identifying features above, interaction in the two different-size classes is able to
be identified. This features become means to map the pattern of relationship between
class-size and students’ interaction with their teacher.
B. Method
Main objectives of this study are to depict and to report into visible
presentation about what happened in two classes of different size in terms of the
teacher-students interaction in language teaching process. This article leans towards
employing grounded theory study of qualitative research. This study doesn’t try to
quantify the data with statistical measurement or analysis so that qualitative research
is appropriate for this study (Marczyk et. al., 2005: 17). Grounded theory study is
employed in this study for it can move beyond description to generate or discover a
theory, an abstract analytical schema of a process (Creswell, 2005: 62-63).
In addition, some principle of conversational analysis (CA) is also used in
this article in order to interpret the interaction. Conversation analysis is an approach
to the study of social interaction that focuses on practices of speaking that recur
across a range of contexts and settings (Sidnell, 2009). This article analyzed the
conversation happened in two classes of different size that consist of two teachers of
each class and different amounts of their students. Teachers’ interactions with
students in the classroom – instruction, questioning or consulting – are analyzed in
terms of involvement in the interactions. The pattern that emerges from this study is
the quest of this article.
Selection of sample in this study is by certain evaluation towards the purpose
of this study. This kind of sample refers to sample purposive in which not only
human as respondent is taken into consideration but also its setting and process
(Alwasilah, 2009: 145-146). There are two classes of different sizes. The first class
consisted of one teacher and twelve students of Kabar Baik Elementary School. The
second one consisted of one teacher and two students of Balai Bahasa Universitas
Pendidikan Indonesia Bandung.
In collecting data, this study used video and audio recording. The lessons
from audio and video recordings gives advantages in that it is possible to examine
the teaching process many times as required (Richard and Lockhart, 2007). Therefore
![Page 9: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
focus on what to investigate is easy to examine. Moreover, the conversation analysis
requires careful study of utterances in the teaching process. In order to capture such
conversation this data collection instruments is necessary.
After data (recordings) were collected, examination and reflection of the
recordings is necessary to do in many times so that the data can be displayed.
Displaying as a way to analyze data will be used to depict the research question
(Alwasilah, 2009: 164). Later on categorization is necessary to sort the data into
certain categories using constant comparison (Alwasilah, 2009: 162).
Participant can affect the process of the study because of his/her unique
motives, attitudes, behaviors (Marczyk et. al., 2005: 77). Bias can be reduced by
good control of this participant of research. Because qualitative research take the
setting in the natural one, the recordings of teaching process was taken in a careful
technique so that the teaching process went undisturbed and naturally.
C. Findings and Discussion
1. The Larger Class
Topic
In the larger class, there were some topics presented. The topics were still
general, such as movement and feelings. Those topics were presented to the students
repeatedly in different activities, for example, topics about movement, first were
presented in TPR:
Teacher : Stand up!
(Students moved as the teacher ordered)
The use of this TPR, in terms of topics related to high involvement of
communication in Tannen’s (2007) perspective, doesn’t indicate high involvement
because the topics doesn’t refer to personal topics that address individual experience
and generate further ideas for interaction.
Another example of activities conducted in the larger class is as the following
teachers’ instruction indicates:
Teacher: Do exercise page 95! 5 minutes!
(Students begun to do the exercise, matching the vocabulary list and its
picture)
![Page 10: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
The instruction above was addressed to all students in the class to do what is
instructed in the textbook. By such instruction, students were expected to do an
activity. To this end, students did not reply teacher’s talk by students’ verbal action,
but by students’ action to do the exercise.
Beside this class used impersonal topics, this class did not show mutual
revelation in teachers talk all along the lesson. Mutual revelation, in which speakers
and interlocutors present their new ideas and showed their experiences along the
interaction, shows involvement in an interaction (conversation) (Tannen, 2007). In
the larger class, the highest involvement of students was in the question or request of
students’ for support in dong the exercise.
A Student : Bu, ini dibagaimanakan?
Teacher : dijodohkan, semuanya pakai bahasa Inggris.
Pacing
In term of speed rate of speech, teacher of the larger class talks in a slow
speed rate of speech. This slow speed rate of speech was very common happening in
young learners’ classroom, in the sense that most of young learners are in need of
clarity of speech so that repetition and slow teacher’s talk is common. The teacher
talk didn’t demand turn-taking of conversation.
Narrative Strategies
There were no narrative strategies in the larger class. It makes sense because
students of the class still have lack of communicative competence in the target
language. In addition, the topics and activities chosen in the class were not
communicative enough.
Expressive Paralinguistic
Expressive phonology was found in this class not in terms of teacher-students
talk but in interaction with other students out of topics of the class. Students’
expressive paralinguistics was not found in terms of English language lesson.
![Page 11: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
2. Smaller Classes
Topic
The topics in the smaller class size are various because the interaction
between teacher and students is communicative enough. The teacher didn’t only
instruct the students to do some action, but the teacher, also and most of the time,
talked to make interaction with her students. The topics were always changing in this
class. Activity called “guessing words” took some topics about everything that is
interesting for the students themselves.
Teacher : I have five words, here. Do you know what should we do we
do?
Male Student : Nyambungin kata?
Teacher : No. guess.
Male student : ohh.
Teacher : Do you know, “guess”?
Conversation above shows high-involvement interaction between teacher and learner
because students made critical response to what the teacher asked. The conversation
is communicative in terms of the consistency to the topics.
Personal topics were found in this class. Personal topics that engaged students
emotionally with their personal experience shows that the conversation happened in
the classroom was high-involvement interaction (Tannen, 2007). Firstly, the words
that students wrote on the whiteboard are, all of them, connected to their personal
experience. Later on, they also gave the clues to the words chosen and made reason
why they wanted to pick those words.
Teacher : Lion. (The teacher choose one word on the whiteboard to
guess)
Student: Yes.
Teacher : Is it your favorite animal?
Student: yes.
Teacher : oh, so do you like lion?
Student: yes.
This conversation shows the personal preferences of the student. Interactive
conversation happened although it is still simple. The student understood the
questions that the teacher asked, although they (the students) could not make clear
questions as such.
![Page 12: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
Another characteristic of high-involvement interaction is topics shifting
abruptly.
Teacher : Bandung
Male Student : Is it your hometown?
Female Student: No.
Teacher : Is it your house?
F student : No.
Teacher : So what?
F Student : Aku ngasih tahu ke miss tapi miss jangan ngasih tahu ke
arum? (I’ll tell you but you don’t tell Arum)
Teacher : Why not?
F student : Kan rahasia. (It’s a secret)
Teacher : Can you give a clue?
F student : ‘clue’ tuh naon? (‘Clue’, what is the meaning of it?)
Teacher : Clue itu ya semacam ‘ciri-ciri’. (‘Clue’ is something kind of
‘signs’)
This conversation shows how the conversation topics change abruptly. First they
talked about ‘Bandung’ meant by the female student, and then, the topics changed to
the meaning of ‘clue’. The teacher followed the interaction flow in guiding direction.
Hesitation in changing the topics was not apparent, the student asked without asking
for permission or apologizing.
Pacing
Different from the larger class size, this smaller class showed some turn-
taking, inter-turn pause and participatory listenership. As exemplified from the
conversation above, the turn, although still simple, flowed smoothly. Overlap was
not found there, although silences between turns were sometimes found, soon the
teacher took care of it and led the conversation. Participatory listenership was
apparent in the interaction as when someone presented the words, others guessed the
words.
Narrative Strategies
Narrative strategies in this smaller class size were found. One of those
strategies found in this smaller class size is tell more stories. In this, occasion the
female students told the teacher the secret behind the word she presented.
![Page 13: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
(The female student whispered to her teacher)
Teacher: Why?
Student : Aku teh kan ceritanya, pertamaya pengen punya mobil. Terus...
: (I’ve got stories that at first I would like to have a car. And then…)
This conversation shows ‘tell more stories’ characteristics as the topics needed
clarifying and involved the student’s emotional experience about her expectation.
Expressive Paralinguistic
Expressive phonology was found in the smaller class size.
Female Student: Is it your favorite food?
Male student: No.
Female student: Ayam goreng kan? Is it your… makanan kan?
Male student: Ayoo…
Female student: Is it you father’s favorite food?
Male student: No.
Female student: Is it your brother’s favorite food?
Male student: Yeah.
Female student: Yeeeeee…
It’s notable ‘ayoo’ and ‘yeee’ is recognized to be expressive phonology in which
involvement of expression is dominant more than its semantic meaning is. By such
expression, it can be assumed that in terms of expressive paralinguistic, this smaller
class size shows a high-involvement interaction.
D. Implication
1. From above discussion, it implies that different teachers’ talk initiates
different involvement of interaction. The patterns of interaction between
students and teacher depend on what the content of talk itself is. In this
preliminary study, the teacher of the larger class size tended to talk in order to
make the students act because the talk or the instruction is addressed to many
individuals. Meanwhile, the teacher of smaller class size tended to talk in
order to generate students’ communicative competence because the teacher
addressed individual.
2. From conversational analysis view, because of the pattern of interaction in
the context of this study site, the smaller class size has high-involvement
interaction whether between teacher and students or student and student. The
high involvement interaction is apparent in the topics, pacing, narrative
![Page 14: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
strategies, and expressive phonology, as pragmatic aspects of high-
involvement interaction.
![Page 15: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
REFERENCES
Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2008. Pokoknya Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Blatchford, Peter. 2003. The Class Size Debate: Is Small Better? Philadelphia: Open
University Press.
Brown, K. & Kennedy, H. 2011. Learning through Conversation: Exploring and
Extending teacher and Children’s Involvement in Classroom Talk.
http://spi.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/06/17/0143034311406813.
accessed in June, 2011.
Bruner, Jerome. 1983. Child’s Talk: Learning to Use Language. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Christie, Frances. 2005. Language Education in the Primary Years. Australia:
University of New South Wales.
Coultas, Valerie. 2007. Constructive Talk in Challenging Classrooms: Strategies for
Behaviour Management and Talk-Based tasks. London: Routledge
Taylor and Francis Group.
Creswell, J.W. 2005. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among
Five Approaches. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
Krashen, S.D. 1982. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.
California: Pergamon Press.
Marczyk, Geofrey, et. al. 2005. Essential of Research Design and Methodology.
Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
McLeod, Alison. 2008. Listening to Children: a Practitioner’s Guide. London:
Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Richard, J.C. & Lockhart, C. 2007. Reflective Teaching in Second Language
Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R. 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and
Applied Linguistics. Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited
![Page 16: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLASS SIZE AND YOUNG …](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022012412/616c385bd41c7726c447e0b9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA (UPI) perpustakaan.upi.edu | repository.upi.edu | upi.edu
Sidnell, Jack. 2009. Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspective. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Swain, M. & Suzuki, W. ‘Interaction, Output, and Communicative language
Learning’. In Spolsky, B. & Hult, F.M. 2008. The Handbook of
Educational Linguistics. Australia: Blackwell Publishing.
Tannen, Deborah. 2005.Conversational Analysis: Analyzing Talk among Friends.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Walsh, Steve. 2002. Construction or Obstruction: teacher Talk and Learner
Involvement in the EFL Classrooms. http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/6/1/3.
accessed in June, 2011.