1 EEJ 5 (2) (2015) English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej TYPES OF CLASSROOM INTERACTIONS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MINI DRAMA SCRIPT PROJECT Daud Jiwandono1 , Dwi Rukmini2 1Sultan Agung Islamic University of Semarang, Indonesia 2Postgraduate Program, Semarang State University, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted October 2015 Approved October 2015 Published November 2015 ________________ Keywords: Classroom Interaction, Mini Drama Script Project ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ The study was aimed at investigating types of classroom interaction that occurred during the implementation of mini drama script project.The data were gathered through observations and audio and video recording during three cycles. The collected data were further analyzed through four steps of analyzing talks: (1) providing a general characterization in which I listened to the conversation to get a general sense of the kind of interactions, (2) identifying grossly apparent features in which I looked more closely to language features found during the conversation, (3) focusing in on structural elements in which I examined how the interactions were structured and described the most noticeable features, and (4) developing a description in which I described the findings based on the data. The results indicated the implementation of a mini drama script project allowed various types of interaction to occur during the project including the teacher speaking to the whole class, the teacher speaking to a group of members, the student speaking to teacher, the student speaking to student, and the student speaking to group members.In conclusion, the implementation of mini drama script project allows various types of classroom interaction. © 2015 Semarang State University  Correspondence Address : Unnes Bendan Ngisor Campus, Semarang, 50233 E-mail: jiwandonodaud@gmail.com ISSN 2087-0108 Daud Jiwandono dan Dwi Rukmini/ English Education Journal 5 (2) (2015) 2 INTRODUCTION English has become the most commonly used language for international communication throughout the world for there are many people using English either as their first language or their second language (Brumfit, 1982). As the second language, there have been many researchers investigating students’ second language development that some decades ago, cognitive approach became the primary focus of the research which regards second language acquisition as the mental process occurs in individual. The cognitive approach emphasizes more on individual’s aspect of cognitive and the interaction with the physical environment (Lightbown & Spada, 2013; Razfar, Khisty & Chval, 2011). However, another theory called Sociocultural Theory (SCT) arises a notion that students learn not only from their interaction with the physical environment but also through social and cultural interaction. Based on this theory, human beings develop their learning through their interactions both theirinteractions with artifacts and society. SCT is a theory about human cognitive and mental function development which argues that the development comes from human interactions (Aimin, 2013; Eun, 2010). Sociocultural theory highlights the notion of interaction to the students in their learning process gives benefits to them in their learning development. Whereas, in Second Language Acquisition (SLA), students’ interaction has been a central issue as it becomes an influential aspect for second language development. Derived from Vygotsky’s theory, social contexts play important role in human development since the very beginning of life. Since then, many studies focus on SLA as the process of students’ interaction with the physical, social, and cultural environment (Adair-Hauck & Donato, 1994; Razfar, Khisty & Chval, 2011). With more emphasis on the aspect of social and cultural interaction among students and others or with the environments, SCT sheds light to the second language researchers on how they conduct studies investigating SLA more comprehensively based on sociocultural theory. In brief, there was a paradigm shift in studies related to SLA from cognitive perspective to sociocultural theory. In the language learning process, SCT believes that students can acquire language by allowing them to socialize and interact either with other learners or with the native speakers. Thus, SCT argues that the most appropriate way in learning a language is through social interaction in the context of language being learned because the learning situation which at least in part interlocutors modify their dialogue to make it more understandable to students (Aimin, 2013). Moreover, Thorne (2004, 2005) and Hymes (1980) as cited in Ajayi (2008) emphasize that because English as a second language requires practices in social context, there must be a highlight on the “dialogical interconnection” between students, society, and the learning context. Thus, Aimin (2013) proposes that SCT can be practiced through students’ interaction in the classroom context which is built as simulations of the cultural context of the language. Moreover, by having interactions, students can also scaffold the learning of their friends. SCT gives a new perspective to see how classroom interactions affect students’ language development. There are a number of studies have found that classroom interactions improve students’ speaking and writing skills. Some research indicated that students’ oral development was enhanced through their interactions with peers and with the teacher (Foster & Ohta, 2005; Razfar, Khisty & Chval, 2011). Moreover, students’ writing skills also developed during the students’ interaction (Lei, 2008; Razfar, Khisty & Chval, 2011). The findings of these studies are very useful in giving the information on the implementation of sociocultural approach which resulted in the improvement of students’ second language development in oral or written language. In SCT, students are asked to work collaboratively with their peers and teachers or usually called collaborative learning. There are a number of teaching techniques under Daud Jiwandono dan Dwi Rukmini/ English Education Journal 5 (2) (2015) 3 collaborative learning approach; one of them is project based learning. Project based learning means teachers use instructional strategies to empower learners to pursue content knowledge and demonstrate their understanding through a variety of projects (Klein, 2009). Thus, it is important to teachers for applying project based learning to encourage the students’ interaction to help them develop their language skills. Researchers have investigated the second language acquisition from three major scientific theories such as behaviorism, cognitive constructivism, and sociocultural theory. Behaviorists refer to language learning is a form of process of habit whereas cognitivists refer to language learning is related to human mental processes that used in the process of learning a language (Aimin, 2013; Cross, 2010). However, sociocultural approach sees language learning not only related to cognitive aspects but also the social aspects in which learners interact with the surrounding to shape their mental process that they are encouraged to think as well as speak in target language (Aimin 2013; Foster & Ohta 2005; Lightbown & Spada, 2013). Originated from Vygotsky’s (1978) work that he observed the children interaction with adults and also interaction between children with other children in schools in the 1920s and 1930s in the Soviet Union and concluded that primarily, the development of a language is from social interactions. He argues that in the environment which is interactive and supportive, children can enhance their knowledge and performance to the higher level (Lightbown & Spada, 2013). Language is a form of cultural artifacts in the society which is person use language to communicate and shape their mental development (Aimin, 2013). In summary, based on the sociocultural theory, second language acquisition is a process of acquiring second language with help of interaction in both between social and cultural artifacts. Students acquire their second language through interaction with expert or teacher and more advanced peers which give assistance to them then it becomes internalized in their mind. In the language learning process, SCT believes that students can acquire language by allowing them to socialize and interact either with other learners or with the natives thus, SCT argues that the most appropriate ways in learning a language is through social interaction in the context of language being learned because it is the learning situation which at least in part interlocutors modify their dialogue to make it more understandable to students (Aimin, 2013). Moreover, Thorne (2004, 2005) and Hymes (1980) as cited in Ajayi (2008) emphasize that since English as a second language requires practice in social context, there must be a highlight on the “dialogical interconnection” between students, society, and the learning context. Thus, Aimin (2013) proposes that SCT can be practiced through students’ interaction in the classroom context which is built as simulation of the cultural context of the language and by having interactions, students can also scaffold the learning of their friends. One of the learning techniques under collaborative learning approach to make students be able to actively involve in the class is project based learning. According to Klein (2009), "Project-based learning is the instructional strategy of empowering learners to pursue content knowledge on their own and demonstrate their new understandings through a variety of presentation modes." Students are encouraged to be active so that they are able to understand the content knowledge of the lessons. Instead doing the project by themselves, they are guided by the teacher so that they are not off the track. Relating to the English class, project based learning also gives benefit to the students as “Project-based instruction allows instructors to teach the four core English skills (along with related cultural elements) while giving both instructors and students freedom in what project they choose and how they carry it out,” (Foss, Carney, McDonald & Rooks, 2006). The teacher role in this approach is as the students’ facilitator and students’ guide in the teaching learning process. Prior research about using project based learning in the class shows that this approach Daud Jiwandono dan Dwi Rukmini/ English Education Journal 5 (2) (2015) 4 appears to be good for students. Foss, et al. (2006) conducted a research about using this approach to teach in a short-term intensive English program in the EFL class for Japanese university students. They made this research at Kwansei Gakuin University School of Science and Technology, Japan. Spending for about seven days (2 days in the university, and the rest were in the camp) with 65 students involved, they were received approximately fifty hours of English instruction over the total seven-day period. The researchers use four projects in their teaching learning process; they are the Wikipedia Project, the Newspaper Project, the Small-Groups Video Project, and the last is the Whole-Group Video Project. On the Wikipedia project, students were asked to create some Wikipedia entries related to the campus condition and also make professional power-point presentation about the project. On the newspaper project students supposed to learn about the various production aspects behind a newspaper, and they also asked to make such Retreat Newsletter from the process of researching the content, designing the content, and the last is the writing process. After they were done, they publish the Retreat Newsletter. On the last two projects, students were asked to make such video drama project. At the end of the research, Foss, et al., (2006) came to conclusion that, “By combining English learning with the development of other skills, project-based learning enables EFL students to connect the English of the classroom to their own real-life interests. Another benefit of this approach is the final product. In addition to finishing the program with a grade and academic credits, students also all left with a tangible product of their work, (p. 15). It is indicating that project based learning provides great impact to the students in their learning activities. On the project based learning approach, teacher gives instructions on how the project should be done. He also gives guidance to the students about the project being conducted and whenever the teacher see something not related to the project, he gives advice to them. And the teacher also has to be able to answer the students’ questions in order they have the sufficient resource for their project working. Interaction according to the Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2008) is when there are two or more persons or things “communicate with or react to each other.” In relate to communication, adding the definition, Brown (2001:165) says about the interaction that it is a communication vital point since interaction occurs when people communicate to each other in anytime and anywhere including in the classroom setting. Adding the explanation, interaction in the classroom setting or classroom interaction refers to the interaction that happens involving two parts which are the teacher and the students and it could happen between teacher and students or between students and they influence to each other (Dagarin, 2004:128). Since this type of interaction happens in the teaching learning process, the classroom interaction is called as pedagogical interaction. In the classroom interaction, there are several benefits can be get such as, (1) increasing students’ language store (Rivers, 1987:4-5), (2) developing communication skill (Thapa and Lin, 2003; Naimat, 2001:672), (3) building confidence (Thapa and Lin, 2003), (4) strenghten social relationship (Naimat, 2011:672). Thus, classroom interaction plays important roles in developing students’ language skills as well as their social relationship. There are seven types of classroom interaction based on Mingzhi (2005) including (1) teacher speaking to whole class means the teacher as the crontrolloer of the class who gives students information or materials, reading aloud, etc.; (2) teacher speaking to individual students with the rest of students as the hearers; (3) teacher speaking to a group of members means the teacher participates in the students’ group works in which he gives suggestions for the group work; (4) student speaking to teacher means the students initiate to speak when they do not understand about the information; (5) student speaking to student means interactions in pair work activities; (6) student speaking to group members means interactions in group Daud Jiwandono dan Dwi Rukmini/ English Education Journal 5 (2) (2015) 5 work; and (7) student speaking to the whole class means activities that are students-fronted class. In brief, classroom interactions play important role in teaching and learning to develop their language skills. By interacting with their peers and teacher, the students get input to develop their language skill. However, in my class, classroom interactions was still limited in form of teacher talks to whole class and limited students speaking to teacher. Thus, in this study, I applied mini drama script project learning to enhance classroom interaction especially students’ interaction with their peers as well as the teacher. Students were asked to make mini drama script as their project. Working together in groups of five encouraged them to have interaction within the group. Further, this study is meant to address what types of interaction that occurred when the students were doing the project. METHOD This study employed an action research design employing a convergent parallel mixed method consisting of three cycles. The data were gathered through observations and audio and video transcription during three cycles. The collected data were further analyzed through four steps of analyzing talks: (1) providing a general characterization in which I listened to the conversation to get a general sense of the kind of interactions, (2) identifying grossly apparent features in which I looked more closely to language features found during the conversation, (3) focusing in on structural elements in which I examined how the interactions were structured and described the most noticeable features, and (4) developing a description in which I described the findings based on the data (Richard, 2003, cited in Burns, 2010). RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS During the implementation of mini drama script project there were various types of interactions occurred in the class. In pre cycle, the classroom interaction was limited only in the 3 forms including (1) teacher speaking to the whole class, (2) teacher speaking to an individual student with the rest of the students of the class as hearers, and (3) student speaking to teacher. In pre-cycle the classroom interaction was dominated by teacher speaking to the whole class because in pre-cycle the teacher applied lecturing method so the students did not give many chances to interact with their peers and the teachers. Sample 1 However, in cycle 1, other types of interactions occurred during the lesson. There were six types of classroom interaction including teacher speaking to the whole class, teacher speaking to an individual student with the rest of the class as hearers, teacher speaking to a group of members, student speaking to teacher, student speaking to student, and student speaking to group members. The followings are samples of types of classroom interaction happened during cycle 1. Sample 1 Teacher : “Well, who can mention what folklores that Indonesia has? Anyone?” E : “Malin Kundang.” Teacher : “Right. Any other?” J : “Danau Toba.” Teacher : “Yes, that’s right. Well, today we are going to learn to make drama script based on Indonesian folklore.” B : “Peform dramaPak?” Teacher : “No, we just make the script.” In sample 1 we can see that in number 1, 2, and 3, the teacher spoke to the whole class whereas in number 7 the teacher spoke to an individual student with the rest of the class as hearers. Daud Jiwandono dan Dwi Rukmini/ English Education Journal 5 (2) (2015) 6 In this case, student B asked a question whether they had to perform the drama or not, and the teacher gave information that they did not perform the drama but they made the mini drama script. Sample 3 B : “Sir, sir, I want to asks a question. Could we modify the story, sir?” Teacher : “Yes, you could as far as you don’ change the major points of the story.” Sample 2 is the example of student speaking to teacher interaction. The student A interacted with the teacher to get information about the task. Then, the teacher asked the student’s question. This sample showed an example of how the students tried to get information for doing their tasks so they could meet the teacher expectation in the task. Sample 3 K : Iki meh piye nggawene cah? (How do we make it?) M : Digawe bareng-bareng wae ben cepet. (Let’s do it together so we can finish it quickly) K : Agree agree M : Eh si L, ojo dolanan hape wae, nggarap ayo. (You, L, don’t play with your phone, let’s do the work) Sample 3 was taken from one of groupd during making the drama script, this sample represents an example of types of classroom interaction in which student speaking to a student (see number 4) and student speaking to group members (see number 1). Student K spoke to his group members to discuss how they were going to make the script, and the student M responded to his question that they had to make the script together so they could finish the task quickly. However, in their group, the student L did not pay attention to the task so student M spoke to him for not playing with his phone and helping their friends in making the script. Thus, besides teacher speaking to the whole class and to individual students, there were other types interactions including students speaking to students and group members. Similarly, the types of classroom interaction occurred in cycle 1 were also found in cycle 2. However, the type of teacher speaking to an individual student with the rest of the class as hearers was not found in cycle 2 because there were no students asked for any information at the beginning of the teaching because they had already understood what they had to do based on cycle 1 and the teacher’s explanation in the beginning of the lesson. In cycle 3, the types of classroom interaction occurred were same with cycle 2 including teacher speaking to the whole class, teacher speaking to a group of members, student speaking to teacher, student speaking to student, and student speaking to group members. In short, the implementation of mini drama script project allowed various types of interaction occurred during the project. CONCLUSION Based on the research findings, it was concluded that the implementation of mini drama script project allowed various types of classroom interactions because the students interacted with their peers as well as their teacher. Thus, the classroom discourse is not limited in the form of teacher speaking to the whole class as found in lecturing technique. REFERENCES Adair-Hauck, B. & Donato, R. 1994. Foreign language eksplanatio s within the zone of proximal development. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50(3), 532-557. Aimin, L. 2013. The study of second language acquisition under sociocultural theory. American Journal of Educational Research, 1(5), 162-167. Ajayi, L. 2008. ESL theory-practice dynamics: The difficulty of integrating sociocultural perspectives into pedagogical practices. Foreign Language Annals, 41(4), 639-659. Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Daud Jiwandono dan Dwi Rukmini/ English Education Journal 5 (2) (2015) 7 Brumfit, C. (ed.). 1982. English for international communication. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Cross, R. 2010. Language teaching as sociocultural activity: Rethinking language teacher practice. The Modern Language Journal, 94(iii), 434-452. Dagarin, M. 2004. Classroom Interaction and Communication Strategies in Learning English as a Foreign. Ljubljana: ELOPE. Eun, B. 2010. From learning to development: A sociocultural approach to instruction. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(4), 401-418. Foss, P., Carney, N., McDonald, K. & Rooks, M. 2006. Project-Based Learning Activities for Short-Term Intensive English Programs. Asian EFL Journal, 1-19. Foster, P. & Ohta, A.S. 2005. Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 402-430. Klein, J. L. 2009. Project-Based Learning: Inspiring Middle School Students to Engage in Deep and Active Learning. New York: NYC Department of Education. Lei, X. 2008. Exploring a sociocultural approach to writing strategy research: Mediated actions in writing activities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 217-236. Lightbown, P.M. & Spada, N. 2013. How languages are learned, 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Naimat, G. Kh. 2001. Influence of teacher-students interaction on EFL reading comprehension. European Journal of Social Sciences 23(4), 672- 687. Razfar, A., Khisty, L. L., & Chval, K. 2011. Re- mediating second language acquisition: A sociocultural perspective for language development. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 18, 195–215. Thapa, C. B. & Lin, A. M. Y. 2013. Interaction in English language classroom to enhance students’ language learning. ELT Choutari. Retrieved from http://eltchoutari.com/2013/08/interaction- in-english-language-classrooms-to-enhance- nepalese-students-language-learning/, June 28, 2015.