20 Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature, Volume XX, Number X, Month Year, pp. XXX – XXX Putri, S. P., Explanatory Study of Student-Teacher Interactions, Students’ Academic Motivation, and Teacher’s Motivation in English Classes Explanatory Study of Student-Teacher Interactions, Students’ Academic Motivation, and Teacher’s Motivation in English Classes 1Stephanie Priyanto Putri, 2Hendi Pratama, and 3Sri Wuli Fitriati 1esphe88@yahoo.com, 2hendipratama@mail.unnes.ac.id, 2SriWuli.Fitriati@mail.unnes.ac.id 1,2,3 Post-graduate, Faculty of English Language Education, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia Abstract: No Study Underlines The Correlation Between Student-Teacher Interactions, Students’ Academic Motivation, And Teacher’s Motivation In English Classes. Student-Teacher Interactions Are Said To Be One Of The Factors That Affects Students’ Academic Motivation In Learning English. Having Positive Student-Teacher Interactions Enables The Students To Increase Their Self-Confidence And Improve Their Academic Performance. Besides, It Affects Teacher’s Motivation In Teaching. This Study Aimed To Explain The Correlation Between Student-Teacher Interaction And Students’ Academic Motivation, To What Extent Teacher Utilizes Student-Teacher Interaction, And The Teacher’s Perception Of The Utilization Of These Interactions In English Classes. The Researcher Used Mixed-Method As The Design Of The Study. The Subjects Of This Study Were The 137 Eighth-Grade Students In The Academic Year Of 2022/2023 At Karangturi Junior High School Semarang. This Study Employed Questionnaire, Class Observation, And In-Depth Interview. Furthermore, The Findings Showed That There Was A Significant Correlation Between Student-Teacher Interaction And Students’ Academic Motivation In Learning English. The Teacher Utilizes These Interactions By Asking Questions And Giving Directions. Besides, The Teacher Agreed That Student-Teacher Interactions Are Very Effective For The Students And The Teacher. Key words: Student-Teacher Interactions, Academic Motivation, Teacher’s Motivation Abstrak: Tidak ada penelitian yang menggarisbawahi hubungan antara interaksi antara guru dan siswa, motivasi akademis siswa, dan juga motivasi guru dalam mengajar di kelas Bahasa Inggris. Interaksi antara guru dan siswa disebut sebagai salah satu faktor yang mempengaruhi motivasi siswa dalam belajar Bahasa Inggris. Adanya interaksi ini memampukan siswa untuk meningkatkan kepercayaan diri dan hasil akademis mereka. Selain itu, interaksi ini juga bisa meningkatkan motivasi guru dalam mengajar. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan hubungan antara interaksi guru dan siswa terhadap motivasi akademis mereka, sejauh mana guru menggunakan interaksi ini di kelas, dan persepsi guru mengenai penggunaan interaksi ini di kelas Bahasa Inggris. Peneliti menggunakan metode gabungan dalam penelitian ini. Subyek untuk studi ini adalah 137 siswa kelas 8 tahun akademik 2022/2023 di SMP Karangturi Semarang. Studi ini menggunakan kuisioner, observasi di kelas, dan interview. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ada hubungan signifikan antara interaksi antara guru dan siswa dan motivasi akademis siswa dalam belajar Bahasa Inggris. Guru menggunakan interaksi ini dengan memberikan pertanyaan dan memberikan pengarahan. Di samping itu, guru juga setuju bahwa interaksi antara guru dan siswa sangat efektif untuk guru dan siswa. Kata kunci: Interaksi guru dan siswa, motivasi akademis, dan motivasi guru. INTRODUCTION No student’s success can be achieved without the help provided by the teachers. Students might think that they can be successful academically when they solely depend on themselves. Three elements in determining a student's academic success and effective English language teaching are teachers, students or learners’ participation, and learning environments. Bhattarai (2021) mentions that teachers have an important element in achieving effective English teaching and learning. Being a teacher requires content knowledge, communication skills, affective skills, and personality traits. In the past, teachers might only have their roles as teachers and instructors. They did not pay attention enough to how their students dealt with their difficulties and motivated the students when they were about to give up. They might deliver the lessons, give instructions to the whole class, and give scores on their tests or homework. Therefore, students are afraid to convey their difficulties and are reluctant to interact with their teachers. According to Dincer and Goksu (2013), some characteristics for English teachers to be effective teachers are pedagogical knowledge, subject knowledge, socio-affective skills, and personality traits. Thus, teachers who do not have socio-affective skills in establishing student-teacher interactions and delivering the materials without paying attention to how their students solve their problems, motivating them to keep up with the lessons, and believing their learning processes will create ineffective teaching and learning processes in the classroom. The presence of student-teacher interaction is vital in the classroom. Having ineffective student-teacher interactions hinders the students to ask some questions and convey their difficulties to the teachers. It further leads them to have low motivation in learning, low academic performance, and low confidence when learning English. Creating an effective student-teacher interaction affects both students’ academic motivation in learning and teachers’ motivation in teaching. Aultman et al. (2009) mentioned that these student-teacher interactions bring impacts for teachers by providing effective teaching and learning and elevating their expertise in teaching. Therefore, although student-teacher interaction is dominated in focusing on the impacts on students, it is also vital to figure out the importance of student-teacher interaction for teachers. Research that emphasizes and focuses on the correlation between student-teacher interactions is nearly found. Thus, it is essential to dig this topic up to gain new insight about the importance of these interactions towards teacher’s motivation. The research about student-teacher interactions which affect students’ academic motivation has been previously conducted by a lot of researchers. Opdenakker et al., (2012), Chouinard et al., (2017), and Henry and Thorsen (2018) had already investigated on how student-teacher interaction in the classroom affects students’ academic motivation in learning English. They believed that student-teacher interaction in the classroom can either motivate or demotivate the students in learning English. Further, Pianta (2005) as cited by Shefi and Chis (2016) stated that student-teacher interaction is vital to develop students’ academic motivation. Besides, students who have the connection with the teacher have more ability to maintain their motivation. Other researchers had also conducted some studies that emphasize the implementation of student-teacher interaction in English classes. Oreshkina and Greenberg (2010) and Makarova (2021) underlined the importance of student-teacher interactions that can influence classroom participation and behavior. This finding is in line with the theory proposed by Camp (2011) who mentioned that students who do not have positive and supportive interaction with the teacher usually have to struggle to get satisfying academic results. Furthermore, there is also a possibility that student-teacher interaction affects students’ academic motivation and their academic achievement. Be (2017), Buah (2017), and Jafari and Asgari (2020) evaluated the correlation between student-teacher interactions, motivation, and also students’ academic achievement. They figured out that having interacted with the teacher in the classroom, the students are possible to elevate their motivation which can further affect their academic achievement. In other words, when the students want to have better motivation in learning that can facilitate them to increase their academic results, they should have more student-teacher interactions in the classroom. Lastly, few people pay attention on the impacts of teacher’s motivation to students’ academic success. Teacher’s motivation is defined as some factors that drive teachers to do their professional job in their workplace. Kotherja and Kotherja (2012) stated that when teachers are motivated, they feel happy and positive in teaching their students in the classroom. Further, it brings positive influence for students too. This finding goes the same with studies conducted by Hung (2020), Taştan et al. (2018), and Azubuike and Oko (2016). These studies believed that how well a teacher is motivated or demotivated in conducting the class affects the students’ academic performance. There has not been many researches that focus on the correlation between student-teacher interaction, students’ academic motivation, and teacher’s motivation. Most of the researches concern on the correlation between student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation or students’ academic achievement. In fact, this topic needs more exploration from other researchers so that more people will be aware of the importance of establishing these interactions for both students and teacher. Based on this aforementioned explanation, the researcher feels curious to conduct a study on the correlation between student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation, to what extent teacher utilizes student-teacher interaction to improve students’ and teacher’s motivation, and teacher’s perception of the utilization of these interactions to improve students’ academic motivation and teacher’s motivation in English classes. The researcher believes that this research will be valuable for further research. LITERATURE REVIEW This part puts the spotlight on the literature review in relation to the student-teacher interaction, Flander’s interaction analysis, academic motivation, and teacher’s motivation. This literature review is classified into the followings. A. Student-Teacher Interaction Student-teacher or learner-instructor interaction is one of the interactions occurs between students and teacher in the classroom. Swan (2003) mentions that learner-instructor or student-teacher interaction usually exists when teacher who works as the instructor tries to stimulate the students to feel motivated and to facilitate them in the process of learning. Moreover, Be (2017) states that student-teacher interaction needs reciprocal relation between the teacher and the students. In other words, when the only party who dominates the interaction and there is no feedback or response from another party, it can be said that the student-teacher interaction does not occur as it requires reciprocal relation or action. In the past, the role of teacher in the classroom might dominate the interaction as teacher delivered the materials whereas the students passively listened to the content delivered by the teacher. For the past few years, the teacher’s dominance in student-teacher interaction in the classroom has changed to focus more on student talk. Kostadinovska-Stojchevska and Popovikj (2019) mention that in order to establish effective student-teacher interactions in the classroom, there should only be 30% of the teacher talk while the remaining should be focused on student talk. In addition, Nilon (2005) as cited by Kostadinovska-Stojchevska and Popovikj (2019) also believes that the percentage of teacher talk should be around 70% while the remaining 30% is for student talk. Further he explains that this percentage might vary from time to time due to the objectives of the syllabus chosen by the school and teacher’s pedagogical perceptions and principles. By putting more highlight on student talk, students can actively participate during classroom discussion and practice their skills in the target language, especially English. Students might find it challenging to establish student-teacher interactions in the classroom. Some factors underline why they find it hard to create these interactions in the classroom, which are classified into general and cultural factors. According to Congmin (2016), the general factors consist of students’ proficiency level, students’ age, students’ character, students’ interests, and motivation. Students’ proficiency level is the dominant factor that affects how students interact with their teacher in the classroom. When the students do not have a high proficiency level in the target language, it is impossible for them with limited linguistics or vocabulary resources to respond fluently to what the teacher has previously uttered. Further, he mentions that students of different ages usually show different outcomes in the student-teacher interaction that occurs in the classroom. Children usually make irrelevant interactions, and they will depend on the teacher’s guidance or assistance in the classroom. In contrast, adult learners can do their tasks independently without depending too much on the teacher and produce more relevant responses to the teacher’s utterances. Besides, cultural factors also become obstacles for students in establishing these interactions in the classroom. Based on an observation between Western and Chinese students, Congmin (2016) found that Chinese students depend significantly on teacher talk. Thus, they become receptive to listening to the teachers rather than being responsive to them. Therefore, it can be concluded that cultural factors also shape how students establish student-teacher interactions in the classroom. B. Flander’s Interaction Analysis To observe and make analysis about student-teacher interactions verbally in the classroom, this study employs Flander’s interaction analysis categories (FIACS). Flanders (1970) as cited by Sharma and Tiwari (2021) highlights that FIAC can be a suitable tool for observing verbal interactions between students and teacher which take place in the classroom. Thus, non-verbal gestures will not be considered as interactions. FIACS has some indicators in student-teacher interactions, namely teacher talk, pupil talk or student talk, and silence. As the scope of this research does not include silence, thus, silence will not be put into consideration. Furthermore, Flanders (1970) as cited by Amatari (2015) specifically elaborates the teacher talk and student talk, as follows. 1. Teacher talk – Indirect influence Four indicators in teacher talk indirect influence will be elaborated as follows. a) Accepts feeling Accept feeling refers to the acceptance of students’ feeling or attitude in a non-threatening way. It is not always positive but it can also be negative. Reminiscing past moments also belong to this subtype of teacher talk. Some examples of this subtype are “How are you today?”, “How do you feel?”, and “What have you been feeling lately?”. b) Praises or encourages The term praises or encourages refers to the action where the teacher provides encouragement and gives praises to the students for their excellent and positive behavior and other achievements they get. Sometimes it does not have to be a verbal affirmation for the students to hear. However, it is also possible to show behavior such as nodding head, smiling, or clapping. Some common examples of verbal praises or encouragement are “Good job,” “Great!”, “Very good!”, “Nice!” and many more. c) Accepts students’ ideas Accepting students’ ideas means that the teacher sometimes agrees with what the students have stated or mentioned. The teacher usually clarifies and develops students' ideas to make a better statement or sentence. An example of this subtype is “I got your point.” d) Asks questions This term refers to the action where the teacher asks questions to the students to get responses from the students. The questions asked by the teacher are usually related to the content of the lessons taught before. 2. Teacher talk – Direct influence Three subtypes of teacher talk direct influence consist of lecturing, giving direction, and justifying authority or criticizing. a) Lecturing Providing facts, knowledge, content, lessons, and also procedure belongs to this subtype. Hence, teacher gives explanation from sources of knowledge for students during the teaching and learning processes. b) Giving direction Different from lecturing, giving directions occurs when the teacher gives commands or directions for the students in doing something like a task, test procedure, and many more. c) Justifying authority This term refers to the action where teacher criticizes students for their unacceptable behavior. By showing this action, teacher facilitates students to have better behavior or attitude in the classroom. 3. Student talk – Response Student talk consists of response and initiation. Student talk response occurs when students provide responses to what the teacher has initiated before during the student-teacher interaction. 4. Student talk – Initiation On the other hand, student talk initiation exists when students initiate the interactions with the teacher in the classroom. It could be another topic they feel interested in, something to give opinion, or even questions they need answer from the teacher. All of these indicators need to occur in order to establish student-teacher interaction in the classroom. Wagner (1994) as cited by Shackelford and Maxwell (2012) emphasizes that student-teacher interaction must be reciprocal and mutual as it needs two objects and actions. Thus, when the only party dominates another and gets no reply, this interaction cannot occur. C. Academic Motivation Establishing positive student-teacher interactions in the classroom affects students to have their motivation in learning academically. Academic motivation is an internal drive that keeps people learning or working to fulfill their desire in the academic life. Based on Vallerand et al. (1992), academic motivation is one of the most essential psychological concept in education which is linked to learning, persistence, curiosity, and performance. When students do not have academic motivation, they will not have curiosity and persistence in learning which may lead to their academic performance. Furthermore, academic motivation has three vital elements especially in language learning, namely desire, effort, and also effect (Gardner and Gliksman, 1982). Desire makes someone wants to achieve something in their life specifically in acquiring a language. Effort shows how far students want to do everything to achieve their desire whereas the effect shows the learners’ reaction emotionally to the language learning. Desire leads everything and how much effort you have may affect the effect or results you gain in the future. In fact, both students and teacher gain the benefits from having motivation. D. Teacher’s Motivation Not only students but also teachers increase their motivation by having student-teacher interaction in the classroom. Teacher’s motivation is a powerful drive that pushes and stimulates teacher to keep doing the professional job they have so that they could show significant improvements Hung (2020). Asemah (2010) as cited by Azubuike and Oko (2016) further adds that teacher’s motivation refers to a group of desires, needs, and other forces owned by the teacher to do the desired things academically in a productive manner. Shortly, teacher’s motivation is what pushes teachers to remain to their professional job. Sometimes it is possible to have different motivation in teaching, for example, someone taught English because he enjoys teaching. However, later on they might teach because they need salary although they do not do it wholeheartedly. METHOD The data for this research were numeric and nominal. To make this research viable, both quantitative and qualitative research methods were employed. Numeric data especially discrete data was utilized as this research deals with numbers whereas nominal data was suitably chosen as it shows named categories. The numeric data showed the result of data obtained from students’ point of view while the nominal data in qualitative checked the data from teacher’s point of view and supported the data from the students. Moreover, the study refers to the theory of FIACS to analyze the interaction between students and the English teacher in the classroom. A. Type of Research This research combines quantitative and qualitative type of research, specifically explanatory sequential mixed-method design. Creswell (2014) mentions that explanatory sequential mixed-method is a research design that is initiated from quantitative followed by qualitative research. In answering the first research question about the correlation between student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation in learning English, quantitative research design specifically questionnaire was utilized. This is vital because Dawadi et al. (2021) claim that in collecting data from a large number of participants, quantitative research increases the possibility to generalize findings from a wider population. In addition, in answering the second research question about to what extent the teacher employs student-teacher interaction to improve students’ and teacher’s motivation in English classes and the third research question about teacher’s perception on the utilization of student-teacher interaction in improving both students and teacher motivation in English classes, qualitative research design through observation and in-depth interview were employed. Following the theory proposed by Dawadi et al. (2021), in showing deeper understanding of the topic investigated and honoring the participant as the source of the research, qualitative research design is suitable to use as it provides depth to the study whereas quantitative research design brings breadth to the study. Thus, mixed-method design is suitable to be employed in this study. B. Research Subjects All the 8th-grade students divided into six classes in the academic year of 2022/2023 at Karangturi Junior High School and their English teacher were chosen as the research subjects of this study. In sum, there were 137 students consisting of 64 boys and 73 girls and an English teacher. The reason underlining why choosing 8th-grade students is because they have been quite familiar with the teacher whereas the 7th-grade students might still feel awkward with the teacher and the 9th-grade students might create bias during the research. Thus, all the 8th-grade students were suitable to be the research subjects. Furthermore, there were three variables employed in this study specifically two dependent variables and an independent variable. Student-teacher interaction occurred in the classroom was the independent variable while students’ and teacher’s motivations in English classes were the dependent variables utilized in this study. The reason for having student-teacher interaction and the other two dependent variables was because I wanted to present the significant correlation among all variables for the research subjects at English classes. C. Research Procedures In achieving the research objectives of this research, three instruments, namely a questionnaire, classroom observation, and in-depth interview, were utilized. First, two types of questionnaires were utilized to find the correlation between student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation in learning English. Moreover, the researcher employed classroom observation to explain to what extent the teacher employs the student-teacher interaction to improve students’ academic motivation and teacher’s motivation. Lastly, an in-depth interview was used to answer the last research question about the teacher’s perception of the utilization of student-teacher interaction for improving students' and teacher’s motivation. 1. Questionnaire First, I constructed nine statements based on the indicators on FIACS (Flander’s Interaction Analysis Categories) for the first questionnaire. For the second questionnaire, the author adopted the questionnaire from Vallerand et al. (1992) to measure students’ academic motivation. These two types of questionnaires were available to access by the students through Google Form. This research procedure was essential so that I could show the correlation between student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation in learning English. 2. Classroom observation Then I modified an observation sheet from Ottevanger (2001). During the classroom observation, the researcher recorded the student-teacher interactions that occurred in the classroom. Whenever the statement on the observation sheet existed in the classroom, the researcher ticked the observation box on the left side of each sentence. Besides, the author also took notes for any other vital information concerning the explanation or additional information about each statement. Conducting the classroom observation facilitates the researcher to support the data gained from the questionnaire, provide the situation in the classroom, and answer the second research question. 3. Interview Lastly, interview was modified based on the theory proposed by Nugent (2009). I did the in-depth interview with the English teacher of 8th-grade students in the academic year of 2022/2023 in Karangturi Junior High School Semarang. This interview was recorded so that there would not be any missing information during the interview. The aim of having this interview is to show the teacher’s perception about the student-teacher interaction to improve students’ and teacher’s motivation in English classes. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The results of this study provide insights of the importance of student-teacher interactions in the classroom. Specifically, the results were elaborated into the followings. Correlation between Student-Teacher Interaction and Students’ Academic Motivation in Learning English The researcher used SPSS especially Pearson correlation coefficient in answering the first research question. To conduct Pearson correlation coefficient, there were a few assumptions to fulfill. They were test of normality and test of linearity. Having conducted these two tests, the researcher found that the research data were in a normal distribution and there was a linearity between the variable of student-teacher interaction as the X variable and students’ academic motivation as the Y variable. Having conducted the correlation analysis, the researcher referred the result of the data with the scale of correlation coefficient scoring table as follows. Figure 1 Correlation Coefficient Scoring Table The following table shows the correlation analysis between the variable of student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation. Table 1: Pearson Correlation Analysis Correlations Interaction Motivation Interaction Pearson Correlation 1 ,174* Sig. (2-tailed) ,042 N 137 137 Motivation Pearson Correlation ,174* 1 Sig. (2-tailed) ,042 N 137 137 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Referring to Figure 1 concerning the correlation coefficient scoring table, the result showed that there is a significant correlation between the variable of student-teacher interaction as X variable and students’ academic motivation as Y variable. The result of correlation coefficient scoring table showed 0.174 meaning that there is a significant correlation, however, it has very low degree of correlation. In the following table 2, linear regression was conducted to find out the influence between the independent and dependent variable. Table 2: Model Summary in Simple Linear Regression Output Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 ,174a ,030 ,023 5,309 a. Predictors: (Constant), Interaction From the output of the simple linear regression analysis, the R score is 0.174 meaning that both variable have a very low correlation. Moreover, the R square showed 0.030 which means that the student-teacher interactions as the independent variable has the contribution of 3% towards the dependent variable. In other words, the remaining 97% is assumed to be affected or influenced by other factors other than the independent variable. Table 3: Anova Table in Simple Linear Regression Analysis ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 119,360 1 119,360 4,235 ,042b Residual 3804,844 135 28,184 Total 3924,204 136 a. Dependent Variable: Motivation b. Predictors: (Constant), Interaction In describing the relationship between two variables whether it is positive or negative and linear or nonlinear, the researcher employed simple linear regression. By referring at the significance score (Sig.), the relationship can be found. When the significance score is less than 0.05, it means that the regression model is linear and vice versa. As the significance level is 0.042 which is less than 0.05 meaning that the regression is linear and the linearity criterion is fulfilled. Table 4: Coefficient Table in Simple Linear Regression Analysis Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients T Sig. B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 29,453 3,463 8,506 ,000 Interaction ,253 ,123 ,174 2,058 ,042 a. Dependent Variable: Motivation Lastly, coefficient table shows the regression equation from variables utilized in this study. From the table, the regression equation is Motivation = 29.453 + 0.253 Interaction. The constant element of 29.45 shows that this variable is not affected by any kinds of student-teacher interaction existed in the classroom. In other words, when there is zero (0) interaction between students and the teacher, the motivation found is 29.453. In addition, the regression coefficient 0.253 points out that in every student-teacher interaction occurred, student’s motivation in learning English increases 0.253 point. In contrast, when there is no student-teacher interaction occurred, it affects the reduction of motivation for about 0.253. Thus, the student-teacher interaction has the positive relationship with the motivation. Furthermore, in ensuring whether the regression coefficient is significant where X variable affects Y variable, the researcher did the hypothesis by making a comparison of the significance level (Sig.) with the 0.05 probability. From table 4, it shows that the significance level is 0.042 which is less than 0.05 meaning that the student-teacher interaction (variable X) is significant enough to affect students’ academic motivation in learning English (variable Y). To What Extent Teacher Utilizes Student-Teacher Interaction In every teaching and learning process in the classroom, teacher and students make interactions in the classroom. In answering to what extent the teacher utilizes student-teacher interaction to improve students’ academic motivation and teacher’s motivation, the researcher employed observation in this study. This observation was undertaken in a class that was considered as the class with the most active students in classroom discussion. (1) Teacher Talk – Indirect Influence Having conducted the classroom observation, the result showed that the teacher dominantly gave indirect influence by asking questions. In sum, there were 20 times where the teacher asked questions including open and closed questions. Some examples of this teacher talk indirect influence were: “Is it a party?” (Data O8) “You should ask for help in class, correct?” (Data O18) “Must or should?” (Data O19) Another dominant teacher talk indirect influence is praising or giving encouragement to students. By praising or giving encouragement, the teacher believes that it can help students to show more active participation in English classes. A few examples of praising students were: “Okay, nice try!” (Data O2) “Alright, it is correct!” (Data O11) “So, all answers are correct.” (Data O11) Giving feedbacks to students facilitates the students to show more willingness to take part, answer, or give responses during the classroom discussion. However, showing exaggerating praises is not a good idea either. Thus, the teacher knew exactly when to show encouragement or give praises to students. By doing this, students would learn and do their best to answer correctly during student-teacher interaction. Lastly, the teacher also indirectly influenced the students by accepting their feeling. She would greet all her students in the beginning of English class and ask how their feeling was to light the mood up, such as: “Good morning, how are you today?” “So you just had Mathematics test?” (Datum O1) By accepting students’ feeling, students might feel less tense before having the lesson. It helped the students to feel relaxed yet serious at the same time during the teaching and learning processes. (2) Teacher Talk – Direct Influence In teacher talk direct influence, the teacher dominantly gives direction, lecturing, and criticizing students’ attitudes. During the classroom observation, the teacher gave directions for eleven times by saying: “I am going to mention three rules and you need to guess.” (Data O3) “Make a sentence, the verb I will give you is wear.” (Data O8) “Take your handout page 16. Open your handout page 16 part 1 until 5” (Data O14) “Part 1 number 2 should be must and should. Please ignore the ‘not.’ Must and should.” (Data O14) The teacher mostly gave directions for students when they need more guidance and help. Secondly, the teacher four times did the lecturing during English class. She did not make lecturing as the dominant element in teacher talk direct influence as she only delivered the lessons by providing examples through games or quiz. A few examples of lecturing were as follows. "Yeah… so must is like you have to do it and if should it is for a suggestion or an advice” (Data O7) “Should is like 80%. As I previously mentioned. It is like a suggestion yeah… you give advice to someone, so this someone is going to do that. When it is must, you need to do, you have to do it” (Data O17) Shortly, the teacher did not take much time for lecturing because the rest of the time could be used for students’ practicing time, classroom discussion, and others. In addition, the teacher rarely criticized students’ behavior or attitude during English classes. During the observation, the teacher warned two students who forget bringing their handout and two other students who fooled around in the class. Having shown this action to the students enables students to change their unacceptable behavior to be better or acceptable. (3) Student Talk Lastly, the students made more responses during the student-teacher interaction than initiation. As the teacher had initiated the interactions, students responded her by giving various responses. A few examples of students’ responses were as follows. “Wear?” “Wear? What do you mean?” (Datum O8) On the other hand, there was only a student who initiated the interaction with the teacher in the classroom by asking their English test result. Teacher’s Perception on the Utilization of Student-Teacher Interaction Furthermore, the teacher agrees that the presence of student-teacher interaction is essential to occur in the classroom. In applying these interactions, she uses presentation and discussion so that students are able to give responses and teacher can ask for comments from the students other than the presenters. When students are baffling about something to ask or to give comments, teacher can guide them so that they can understand the topic discussed well. Once the students can answer the questions well, the teacher would praise them to motivate them. When the students find it difficult to solve something, both students and teacher work together to let the students know that their idea is important too. In addition, there is no exact percentage on who takes the lead in the class whether it is the teacher or the student. When explaining new lessons, the teacher will dominate the interactions. However, when it comes to group discussion or presentation, students will be the ones taking the lead. During the observation, there were 145 interactions divided into 73 teacher talk and 72 student talk. Generally, the teacher chooses an interesting topic for the discussion to manage turn-taking to exist. The students sometimes find it difficult to participate in the discussion due to their lack of knowledge and confidence or they might feel scared to be laughed when making mistakes. In order to prevent it, the teacher helps them by choosing another student to give additional information, change the topic, give the answer, or close the discussion. It helps the students to believe in the teacher where they can convey their difficulties in learning English. Based on the data gained from the interview, the English teacher considered the effectiveness of student-teacher interaction for students in the classroom. Having given a specific topic, students can try to explore the critical thinking, practice speaking in the class, and increase their motivation to learn vocabularies they are not familiar with. Similarly, these interactions are also impactful for teacher’s motivation. By establishing student-teacher interactions, the teacher can learn to participate more during the discussion, especially about new topics she has not been familiar yet. During the classroom discussion, the teacher usually chooses a topic that makes students feel interested to take part, give opinion, and add information. These interactions will work smoothly when students are interested in the related topic whereas the teacher knows a lot about the topic as well. Thus, the teacher can navigate the interactions well. Besides, the teacher can also learn something new from students’ points of view. The results of this study showed that student-teacher interactions are impactful not only for students but also for teacher. It is essential to dig more on the impact of student-teacher interaction towards teacher’s motivation as nearly no study pays attention on teacher’s side. By emphasizing and exploring more on the correlation of student-teacher interaction, students’ academic motivation, and teacher’s motivation, the teaching and learning processes in the classroom can be improved academically. CONCLUSION From the findings, I concluded that there is statistically significant correlation between student-teacher interaction and students’ academic motivation. This finding is in line with a few previous studies conducted by Nugent (2009), Liu and Chiang (2019), and Jafari and Asgari (2020) who emphasize the positive and significant correlation between these two variables. Second, teacher employs student-teacher interaction in improving both students’ and teacher’s motivation by asking question as the indirect influence. In triggering students to give more responses and be more active during classroom discussion, teacher usually asks questions in a friendly way. This finding is identical with what have been proposed by Yan (2006) and Sakka et al. (2022) who state that asking questions usually dominated the teacher talk in the classroom. Thus, it underlines that the teacher still dominates the student-teacher interaction in the classroom discussion by asking questions. Lastly, the teacher also sees the same way when it comes to the effectiveness of student-teacher interaction to improve students’ academic and teacher’s motivation in English classes. By establishing these interactions in the classroom, students can practice their speaking skills including their pronunciation and vocabularies, sharpen their self-confidence to deliver their opinion in the class, and learn something they have not been familiar with. On the other hand, teacher also learns something new from the students through these interactions. When giving specific topic to discuss in the classroom, teacher needs to understand some information about this topic, so that once the students give responses or ask questions, the teacher is able to answer and give additional information about the topic discussed. Besides, she can learn new things from students’ points of view. The same result has been mentioned by Sun and Wu (2016) who agree that the effectiveness of student-teacher interaction is impactful for both students and teacher. Based on the previous findings, there were some suggestions concerning the student-teacher interaction for teachers, students, policymakers, and future researchers. Having understood the importance of these interactions, teachers should facilitate the students to initiate more interactions in the class to make their learning more effective. For students, they should show more responses during classroom interaction so that their academic motivation can be improved, too. The policymakers can raise awareness to set rules about how many teacher and student talk in percentages to make the learning process work effectively in the classroom. Lastly, future researchers can explore teacher’s motivation more and improve the instruments to make greater research diversity. REFERENCES Amatari, V. O. (2015). The instructional process: A review of Flanders’ interaction analysis in a classroom setting. International Journal of Secondary Education, 3(5), 43. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsedu.20150305.11 Aultman, L. P., Williams-Johnson, M. R., & Schutz, P. A. (2009). Boundary dilemmas in teacher-student relationships: Struggling with “the line.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5), 636–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.10.002 Azubuike, K. A., & Oko, O. F. (2016). Impact of teachers’ motivation on the academic performance of students: Implications for school administration. National Journal of Educational Leadership, 3, 91–99. Be, B. (2017). The student-teacher relationship factor affecting students’ motivation. Beijing Normal University, China. Bhattarai, P. (2021). What makes English language teaching effective? ELT Choutari, (May). Retrieved from http://www.cnaa.md/en/thesis/50705/ Buah, L. E. (2017). Relationship among teacher-student interaction, students’ motivation and academic performance in the Bibiani-Anhwiaso-Bekwai District. University of Cape Coast. Camp, M. D. (2011). The power of teacher-student relationships in determining student success. University of Missouri - Kansas City. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/11715904.pdf Chouinard, R., Roy, N., Archambault, I., & Smith, J. (2017). Relationships with teachers and achievement motivation in the context of the transition to secondary school. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.31532/interdiscipeducpsychol.2.1.001 Congmin, Z. (2016). Factors influencing student participation in classroom interaction. Higher Education of Social Science, 11(3), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.3968/8804 Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed approaches (4th edition). (V. Knight, Ed.), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th editio). United States of America: SAGE Publications Inc. Dawadi, S., Shrestha, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). Mixed-methods research: A discussion on its types, challenges, and criticisms. Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 2(2), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.46809/jpse.v2i2.20 Dincer, A., & Goksu, A. (2013). Common characteristics of an effective English language teacher. Educational Research Association, (January 2013). Gardner, R. C., & Gliksman, L. (1982). Exchange on “Gardner on affect”: a discussion of validity as it relates to the attitude/motivation test battery: A response from Gardner. Language Learning, 32(1), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1982.tb00527.x Henry, A., & Thorsen, C. (2018). Teacher–student relationships and L2 motivation. Modern Language Journal, 102(1), 218–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12446 Hung, L. N. Q. (2020). Teachers’ motivation and its influence on quality education: A study at a center for foreign languages in Vietnam. Can Tho University Journal of Science, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.22144/ctu.jen.2020.020 Jafari, S., & Asgari, A. (2020). Predicting students’ academic achievement based on the classroom climate, mediating role of teacher-student interaction and academic motivation. Integration of Education, 24(1), 62–74. https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.098.024.202001.062-074 Kostadinovska-Stojchevska, B., & Popovikj, I. (2019). Teacher talking time vs. student talking time: Moving from teacher-centered classroom to learner-centered classroom. The International Journal of Applied Language Studies and Culture, 2(2), 25–31. https://doi.org/10.34301/alsc.v2i2.22 Kotherja, O., & Kotherja, M. (2012). Teacher motivation: A factor for classroom effectiveness and school improvement. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 2(5), 163–169. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/236508376?accountid=10673%5Cnhttp://openurl.ac.uk/athens:_edu?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Aeducation&atitle=TEACHER+MOTIVATION%3A+A+FACTOR+FOR+CLASSROOM+EFFEC Liu, R., & Chiang, Y. L. (2019). Who is more motivated to learn? The roles of family background and teacher-student interaction in motivating student learning. Journal of Chinese Sociology, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40711-019-0095-z Makarova, E. (2021). Teacher-student interaction in the context of higher education. SHS Web of Conferences, 99, 1041. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20219901041 Nugent, T. T. (2009). The impact of teacher-student interaction on student motivation and achievement. STARS, Showcase of Text, Archives, Research & Scholarship. University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida. Opdenakker, M. C., Maulana, R., & den Brok, P. (2012). Teacher-student interpersonal relationships and academic motivation within one school year: developmental changes and linkage. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(1), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2011.619198 Oreshkina, M., & Greenberg, K. H. (2010). Teacher-student relationships: The meaning of teachers’ experience working with underachieving students. Journal of Pedagogy, 1(2), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10159-010-0009-2 Ottevanger, W. (2001). Teacher support materials as a catalyst for science curriculum implementation in Namibia. PrintPartners Ipskamp Enschede. Sakka, W., Nasmilah, N., Khan, A., Mumu, S., & Hamidi, B. (2022). Interplay of teacher talk and learners’ motivation in learning English: A psycholinguistic study. Education Research International, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9099268 Shackelford, J. L., & Maxwell, M. (2012). Sense of community in graduate online education: Contribution of learner to learner interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(4), 228–249. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i4.1339 Sharma, M., & Tiwari, N. (2021). A study of class interaction analysis using Flanders’s FIAC. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 4099, 171–179. https://doi.org/10.32628/ijsrset218432 Shefi, J., & Chis, V. (2016). Teacher-students relationship: The significance to decreasing dropout rates and motivation for change, 266–279. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.12.35 Sun, J. C. Y., & Wu, Y. T. (2016). Analysis of learning achievement and teacher-student interactions in flipped and conventional classrooms. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 17(1), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i1.2116 Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us. Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction, (January 2003), 13–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00519.x Taştan, S. B., Davoudi, S. M. M., Masalimova, A. R., Bersanov, A. S., Kurbanov, R. A., Boiarchuk, A. V., & Pavlushin, A. A. (2018). The impacts of teacher’s efficacy and motivation on student’s academic achievement in science education among secondary and high school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6), 2353–2366. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/89579 Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F. (1992). The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003–1017. Yan, X. (2006). Teacher talk and EFL in university classroom. Chongqing Normal University & Yangtze Normal University, China. ___________________________________________________ IN SUBMITTING YOUR MANUSCRIPT, PLEASE ALSO WRITE 15-20 WORDS FOR CELT JOURNAL TO USE AS SUBJECT INDEX. interaction classroom interaction student-teacher interaction motivation students’ motivation academic motivation teacher’s motivation education English education English EFL learner FIACS teacher talk student talk https://doi.org/10.24167/celt.vXXiX; ISSN: 1412-3320 (print); ISSN: 2502-4914 (online); Accredited; DOAJ https://doi.org/10.24167/celt.vXXiX; ISSN: 1412-3320 (print); ISSN: 2502-4914 (online); Accredited; DOAJ https://doi.org/10.24167/celt.vXXiX; ISSN: 1412-3320 (print); ISSN: 2502-4914 (online); Accredited; DOAJ